The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

http://www.automobileyear.net/book/images/image_08.jpg

Is this 0846 ready to go? (Le Mans 1967)

here she is again, in al her dirty beauty (Targa Florio 1966)

http://www.cervia.com/ferrariclubforli/img/auto/ta66714.jpg

Don't know if these pics were posted already. I suppose they were. Sorry!

 

Yes I remember reading about the restoration of the (or one of the) Auto Unions and the material the heads were made of.

As others have posted carbon dating is not the way to go (but I do dispute the inaccuracy some have stated. I recall from University maths that it was extremely accurate ...), but the actual composition of the material may have changed (not the physical sizes) due to improved manufacturing techniques, etc.

BUT it is very obvious by looking at chassis welds whether they were done by Ferrari or not (or the chassis builder anyway) ... I would be hard pressed to reproduce such a poor looking weld, infact I could not do it , and obviously neither could the person who repair Jim's chassis, as he has already stated that he can tell where it was repaired.

One can usually spot an Italian made piece of body work by the way it was made (ie. hammered not rolled) surely we can be reasonably convinced by the method of construction used to make the chassis ... atleast this would confirm if it was made in England or Italy. As much as I deplore British crude methods in the automotive field, their welding is a squillion miles better than old Ferrari welds.

Any I am sure there are many non-destructive methods that could be used to atleast size the tubes exactly ... I really doubt if we could ever date it. Even the few parts that Jim's team had to repair (like the water pipe to hose connection) ... I believe he reused as much of the original pipe as possible ...

Pete

 

... are those scratches original scratches, or have they been reproduced, OR heavens forbid made by newer unworther owners that actually use this car ... oh the shame of it

http://ferrarichat.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=73732&stc=1

Now if we all took some of the views expressed lately on this thread, that car would be considered a replica if those scratches were not made when the car was still in active duty.

Come on guys keep it real ... if those scratches are old and original ... should we just let the car deterorate (sp?) until it falls to bits. Note I love the scratches, but if this relates to mechanical components wearing or components that need paint to stop rust, then it is just stupid. Eventually that part will break or otherwise disappear and be lost forever ... or in the case of a suspension joint cause the rest of the car (and maybe the driver) to be destroyed.

These old race cars or old cars in general absolutely should be used and maintained as absolute best we can ... involving replacing worn out parts where required (after the car did not race with fncked shocks and suspension joints way back then). If you drive a car that has had a famous past, it is not like deflowering a virgin ... the car won't suddenly die, or be otherwise devalued ... you cannot change history.

Pete
ps: Note: I am not at all against race cars looking like race cars ... and if that means scratches no problems here ... just trying to pull some posters down from their lofty weird views that a car is a painting, and that maintaining or repairing it is a God forbidden sin.

 

If you will re-read my post, that's what I said.

 

Erik:

I wasn't sepaking to anyone in particular. I think the idea of analyzing the tubs is silly. It would tell us nothing as to where the tube came from...

 

Is there any way you could possibly send the LeMans picture to me sized larger? That is a picture I do not have and would really want to get a good look at it.

I would really appreciate it.

Sincerely,
Ed
email: [email protected]

 

No, Im sorry. I just picked it up from the internet. I have no idea how to enlarge these pictures without ruining the quality.

 

Here a beautiful scaled model (1/43) of 0846 as she raced in Le Mans in 1967.

 

Well, I FINALLY spotted the magazine, and just for spite, bought them ALL!

Actually I left one at the Border's River Oaks, for SkizoAce and Dahr Jamail..but they'd better hurry!!

 

Post #409....

You remember that song Dr.?

"She's real fine, my 409"
The Beach Boys

Another story altogether, sorry............

 

Yes, and I actually had one many years ago. When I was a teenager, I was more into muscle cars and hot rods. My mistake.

Nothing to be sorry about, Speedy

As to the picture of the Feeling 43 model; their stuff is superb, but rather expensive. I think their factory built ups are something like $2000!

 

So.......

Given that the controversey rages worldwide at the moment, and only those in posession of the amazing, rare, definitive and just plain cool 104 page JG documentary "source" material booklet can speak on the subject with any clarity.... and EVERYONE wishes to do so.....


How much should I set the reserve price on ebay for my copy?




Terry

 

! I just recieved my copy that i humbly requested !

WOW! how the heck ANYONE can think this is NOT "THE" 0846 Ferrari , is beyond me. the chasis and photos speak volumes, the car is most definately the modern remains of 0846. therefore it IS 0846, with a really cool history.
Special thanks go out to Mr. G. for taking the time to prepare this and send it out to so many of us.

No car nut, of any marque, of any era , would not love to own, enjoy and share a stunning car such as this. all of the unique modifications are there, damage repairs, small sections to be sure, but they better serve to PROVE with battle scars, that this IS 0846 . all of the history is there.

thank you Mr. Glickenhaus! Michael

 

We keep getting these strange "new" terms creeping into this discussion. Terms like "modern remains" and "current reincarnation" of 0846. Am I to understand that the "MODERN" standards are somehow different from the "1972 standards" or the "1988 standards"??? I'm getting the feeling that for some strange reason, people are shifting and sliding their "standards". I thought that a "standard" was a fixed set of parameters that did not deviate?

 

You obviously have never studied standards ... the only thing standard about standards is that they will be many differing and confusing standards

Refer British Standard 0045, which is a modified version of British Standard 0023, which is close but different to American Standard 1000 ... for example, a good concept that is confused and ruined by the fact that we all cannot agree on something!

Pete

 

The shot of a P4 spyder leading a P4 belinetta through the Esses at Le Mans is indeed 0846 leading 0856 in the early stages of the 1967 race.

The shot of a Le Mans start is 1966, with P3 0846 being beaten away by Graham Hill in a Ford GT MkII. (I have a larger print which I will try to get scanned)

The b&w is 0846 again as a P3 in the 1966 Targo Florio, where it was taken off the road by a misunderstanding with a backmarker - who did at least have the decency to give Bandini a lift back to the pits, having helped him out of the upturned works Ferrari.



Paul M

 

Arlie
A chassis built in the early 70ies to "original 1967 P4 chassis blueprints" is quite different than a chassis built to P3 chassis blueprints in 1966 and modified as per 0846's P3/P4 Technical data sheets in 1967 to accept a P4 engine and change 0846's P3 wheelbase from 2412mm to 0846's P4 wheelbase of 2400mm.

 

Having just studied the documents, I think we can at least establish that the chassis of Mr G's car is in fact a P3 chassis, modified to accept a P4-engine (and I suppose that means that the chassis in its modified form differs from a P3-chassis and differs from a P4 chassis). The pictures don't lie.

So, when mr Piper states he sold a chassis from the (as i'll call them) 0900-series to Mr G, he is wrong, for the chassis mr G recieved is simply not a P4 chassis.

So, when we have a modified P3-chassis on our hands, which we do, we can only link this type of chassis to 0846, due it's history of actually being modified.

If mr G's chassis is not built upon the remains of 0846, than someone built a P3 chassis, modified it in the way 0846 was modified and did absolutly nothing with it. Didn't even try to sell it off as 0846 (and if you weren't gonna try that, whats the point in going through all this fuss?) and obviously forgot all about it. Eventually the chassis ended up with David Piper (again with no mention of the undisputable similarities with 0846) who apparently didn't even know this particular specimen began life as a P3.

That really doesn't add up, does it? The only thing that does add up is that the remains of 0846 somehow survived the scrapeyard (and it was very much Ferrari-like to simply toss out obsolete racingchassis' if they couldn't be sold) and ended up with Piper who believed there was actually a normal 0900-series P4-chassis in it, so he never investigated. Why would he? He had no reason to expect otherwise. Up untill this day Mr Piper remains remarkable silent over all this, or perhaps I'm something missing.

I still have to do some reading about engine and gearbox, but as far as chassis is concerned, mr G's claims about the chassis are, to my opinion after reading the document, correct.

 

It's good to read GTE post. Someone has common sense and understand what is going on.
We are just lucky to have a guy like Napolis to such a restoration for us to ENJOY!!!!
Can't wait to see the car in New Orleans and shake James hand.
Roland
F40LM

 

I received a copy of Jim's "brochure" yesterday, and I have spent about 10 hours over the last 2 days going through it and every piece of information I have on P3s and P4s in books and magazines, plus thinking about the comments I have seen here and in other places over the last year.

The only problem that remains, as far as I'm concerned, which components must still be part of the car to consider it that car. Some seem to think all that matters is the chassis plate...

My conclusions:

I am 100% certain that the P5 is NOT 846

I believe that a substantial part of the chassis that Jim has was on the car when it crashed.

I believe that the engine is NOT a f1 engine, it is a sportscar motor. As to if THIS particular motor was ever in 846 during circa 1966-1968, I find it impossible to answer. As to the gearbox, I have no documentation as to how many of the specific type that is in Jim's car now were built. I believe it is of the proper type.

The coachwork appears to be period to me, and everyone seems to agree....but it was never on the car circa 1966-1968

Is this enough to say Jim's car IS 846...I say YES...

As to the statement:
"So, when mr Piper states he sold a chassis from the (as i'll call them) 0900-series to Mr G, he is wrong, for the chassis mr G recieved is simply not a P4"

Is it simply a possibility that Piper considers the P3/4 chassis as a P4 chassis, because it was part of the group of chassis he planned to use in building "2nd series" P4s? This could simply be a semantics problem...

 

Hi
There's a very interesting article in November FORZA that touches on some of these issues regarding Ferrari racecars, wrecked Ferrari racecars and what happened to their parts, and chassis. (Specifically 312P's.)

As an aside there's a cute add for the "Fairfield County Concours d' Elegance"
on September 26 that features my MK-IV on page 71 of October Sports Car Market.

Paul M.
Once again you have made me realize something. In addition to the damage and repair caused by the Targa Florio crash of 1967 and the Le Mans fire of 1967 evident in my chassis the entire chassis is also slightly twisted. As you know the engine is hard mounted in this car and to fit it and square and level it in the chassis Sal had to use different sized shims at different mounting points to force the chassis back into square. When the engine and shims are removed the twist comes back and is visable. I now think I know when my chassis received that twist.

" The b&w is 0846 again as a P3 in the 1966 Targo Florio, where it was taken off the road by a misunderstanding with a backmarker - who did at least have the decency to give Bandini a lift back to the pits, having helped him out of the upturned works Ferrari."

 

Boy, I stopped reading this post for a few weeks and I end up spending 3 hours reading! How do I get one of these "brochures"? Sounds like a good read...

 

Just 3 hours?

 

I think that it is a possibility. Not only that, I think that is exactly what happened. Piper always believed he sold a "2nd series P4" to mr G, for the simple fact that that is what the contract stipulated. Piper obviously didn't built the chassis he delivered to mr G himself. Someone else did on mr Pipers order. Mr Piper had no reason to believe that anything he recieved by the builder was something other than a brandnew chassis built to P4 specs, so he never investigated. This made it possible for mr Piper to sell and deliver a chassis to mr G that he (mr Piper) believed was one of the 0900-series (and it was sold as such) but in fact turned out to be a chassis built from substantial remains of 0846.

Only later mr G found out he got more than what he bargained for. Confronting mr Piper with this new found information, mr Piper claims that mr G's conclusions can't be right, since 0846 is in a P5. Allthough this may seem a logical explanation for the claim that mr G's chassis can't be from 0846, it explains in no way why the chassis mr G got delivered from mr Piper, obviously isn't built from the P4 blueprints. In addition, we now know that the claim that 0846 is in P5 is false and in the meanwhile mr Piper has never given any explanation as to why the chassis mr G's has recieved, differs from the 0900-series chassis.

No semantics problem here. Mr Piper had 0846 on his hands without knowing. Worse still, he sold it without knowing. Of course mr Piper isn't going to make a big deal out of this. First off, he wouldn't stand a chance if this were to become anything legal, secondly, he has no interest whatsoever in committing to the world that he, mr Piper, -or should I say, mr P4- shot himself in the foot this way.

So, what exactly is mr G's P4?

Is it a replica? Well, no. Everything fundamental in it (chassis, gearbox, engine) seems to be a Ferrari-original, and seems to be built and designed for the Ferrari P-car. It is in no way comparable to slashing up a 250 GTE ( ) to built something that resembles a 250 GTO (but will never become a 250 GTO).

Is it a re-production? A re-production of what? If mr G had the intention to reproduce -let's say- the P4 from the 1967 Le Mans, he would've gone for the spyder-body to begin with. Mr G obviously has no interest in re-producing anything. Mr G wants a Ferrari P4 and wants to use it on the public road (imagine the site of that...). As it turns out, in order to do so, he gets the remains of one of the most beautiful and famous racingcars ever built. A re-production however, it is not.

So, what is it then? In fact, I'm still not sure...

 

It is a P4 coupe recreation with 0846 P3/P4 chassis.
Will mr. G get official documents from Ferrari? Otherwise somebody else could claim this chassisnumber like some 250LM's, SWB's and Testarossa's with the same S/N.