The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

This is a horribly offensive post. You should have left it at the first sentence. Please do us all a favor and stick to the topic rather than dragging the discussion down to this level.

 

+1. Totally undeserved.

 

Sure. As long as you ask ask Paul500, Francis, and Piloti to do the same. As well as others.

And I have spoken only of these things, and when I do I have been repeatedly insulted by those listed above, yet they have yet to be reprimanded as I have just been.

 

How so? Nowhere in that post do I insult Piloti. I am merely questioning his actual expertise on the subject.

Funny how you never once spoke up through Paul500's barrage of insults to both me and Ginge82.

 

Please Vince..just stop now. I am by far from an authority...heck I know very little about 0846 in comparison to all others in this thread and I can see (read) that you have some serious blinders on.

 

How so? 0846 was built as a P3. 0003 was built as a P4. Not one of the "others" knows if the front is P3 or P4. After 12 years, not one "expert" knows. The only blinders on are the unwillingness to figure out the one thing that defines the difference between the two possibilities.

If you don't recognize the importance of that distinction you have some serious bias on.

If that defines blinders, frankly I can't take your opinion or advice seriously.

 

Here's a clue, Vincent.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Steve,

Give it up trying to convince Vincent. He is not worthy of the effort. When given evidence he either lacks the comprehension of the subject matter or refuses to accept that anything might dissuade him from his dream that there is somehow some way that this could have some relationship (any relationship) to the long lost 0846.

Just figure him for the last top row in the peanut gallery.

Jeff

 

Acknowledged

 

That quote did intrigue me when first made by MF.

As the only known P4 example that originally started as a P3 was 0846 it would seem potentially that the bare chassis of the pure P4s had already been built, but to P3 spec and then also converted to P4 spec before the cars were assembled.

Or that there were bare P3 chassis sitting around at the time and that some of the P4s had chassis swaps in period, into what were originally P3 chassis modified to P4 spec.

Sort of opens up a whole other can of worms.

 

I don't answer questions from posters who;
1) hide their identity behind silly names
2) whose posts are often rude and aggressive
3) are nothing more than FChat trolls
4) pretend they are open-minded but are not in reality
5) who are only looking for an argument
6) can't accept obvious photographic evidence
You fit all 6 !
Nathan

 

+1.

 

Another +1.

Jeff

 

Agreed Nathan, but many more here use silly names to hide their identity and are rude or aggresive.
Real name should be obligatory imho.

 

Extremely well said. Couldn't agree more that people have been bad mouthing almost assinating Pipers character when in this case... he sold a replica as a replica. No good deed goes unpunished I suppose? Imagine him sitting back in a chair going... what the heck? what did I do wrong this time? LOL

So, we have a car sold as a replica as piper.

We have a car being represented by a charming nice wealthy successful cool car guy as 0846 which was purchased as a replica.

We have had the following representations "debunked"

*Vestigal P3 Mounts - debunked - but now re-explained in the face of factual evidence
*Crash Damage - On wrong side of the chassis - hardly credible for semi-monocoque chassis
*Le Mans Tech Stamps - Debunked - Standard Casting Stamps
*Engine - Debunked - Looks to be F1 as described in auction description
*Testimony of some experts Debunked or at best wishy washy

Then we have David Piper being the bad guy...

What?

 

Look at the pictures and compare the cylinder block area between the red lines on both engines and you will see they are not the same. The cylinder block area on the P4 type Can Am engine is larger to accommodate the longer by 17.5mm/0.7 inches stroke of the P4 engine. Mr Glickenhaus's engine is not P4 as he claims.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

So if a P4/Can Am engine were to be fitted to Jims chassis and it also used those head attachment points shown in the bulkhead then the crank centre line of a p4 engine would be lower by the distance shown between the red lines than the current engine, and as a result the gearbox would also have to be lowered by the same amount, there would be even more brackets all over the place to accommodate that! and the driveshafts would not be at the optimum angle then either.

So it looks like a P4 spec engine has never ever been fitted to that chassis then? as the current extra bracket arrangements would not marry up to one.

There is also a casting mount in the left hand head on both engines which does not have a suitable tube fitted to make use of them in Jims bulkhead. Do the known P4 chassis have that extra tube to make use of that hole? surely they do if the engine was designed for the chassis.

How about the head on a p3 engine, does that have the three way mount like the F1 and P4 engine?

 

Sounds about right.

 

The Classiche department often uses metallurgy to validate cars when there is any question of authenticity. Carbon dating doesn't work on inorganic materials, but it seems possible there might be a detectable difference in the metal composition from when 0846 was made versus the metal used when the replica frames were made later. If a difference can be detected, this seems like it would be a good way to determine what the chassis is made of (all one metal type, or a mixture) and to identify which portions of the chassis have been replaced.

 

Here's a pic of 0858's bulkhead.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Strange that the bulkhead of 0858 does not make use of that extra casting hole either on the p4 engine. It must have been used in the F1 car and carried over to the P4 engine design but not utilised.

You can see however see that the right hand head top bulkhead mount on 0858 bolts straight onto the engine, where as there is a drop bracket at the point where it touches the head on Jims car at the same point and that the thermostat/water pump? casting between the heads is very different between the F1 engine and the P4.

 

Yes, I commented on the angled bracket a few days ago. The chassis doesn't fit this engine very well does it.

I wonder if Nino noticed the drop in power due to 3 litres and the chassis flexing on its brackets at the recent TF 100?