C'One. I think you'll find that they are one and the same. Jim's in agreement, too: The only difference being that 'Pipes' has added some 25 years worth of racing patina to it. Note that since he sold #003 to Jim in 2000 (with this interior padding), #0900 has been run without any - just using a simple fibreglass / moulded foam seat. Image Unavailable, Please Login
thump......... am i the only one that fell out of my chair? this IS history folks! Mr. Massini, thank you for sharing that.
Oops ... okay I'm working really hard here, FChat is struggling for my full attention Still like to be able to read the MO number ... Pete
Agree. I've been waiting for something like this to find it's way out ... interested people DO take photos and all the answers are probably sitting in shoe boxes all over the world. Pete
So, it's #0858's rear bodywork in those photos then - By process of elimination: #0860 last raced with a spyder tail at Brands Hatch, with PROVA MO-31, and #0856 carried MO-36.
It looks like I may have wound up with several items that were riding on that truck... As an aside 0854's original alum door skins show the repair where the Le Mans number lights were removed. Upon reflection I'm thinking of going with 0854's #10 SPA livery. There's no way to save the original paint and she did finish higher, 3rd at SPA. Thoughts???
I still reckon you ought to go for two #23 cars, Jim. The only downside of doing the Le Mans #23 version of #0854 would be that you'd have to put those (unsightly IMO) red and green marker lights on the roof, for authenticity.
Paul It's funny I have the same reaction to those roof lights. I'd also have to put on those leather straps. I think Brands Hatch/SPA look the best. 9 or 10? What about the roof. Do you think 0854 had those indented roof vents as per 0848??? I can't tell. If you look at Staffs drawing he shows three vents cut into the roof. Do you think this is correct? Cheers!
I agree. Too bad about not being able to save/match the original paint, though. In my opinion, if the car had won at Spa or Brands Hatch or Montlhery, it would only make sense to return the car to that configuation/number. Being that it was only a third place finisher at Spa, I would personally go with the tribute to its run at Le Mans, arguably the most prestigious motorsports event ever.
My vote is for the Le Mans configuration, but then again, its your money and your car Jim. Do what makes you happy.
Only third place... Wayne my friend those that raced at SPA in the rain and lived, much less finished third, are people who, IMO Stood and Delivered...
SPA was it's best finish and in the points. (When those points counted towards the FIA Championship which Ferrari won that year.)
I agree, but aren't you the one that always makes the comments that you're trying to recreate Le Mans '67?
Certainly, and I take nothing away from them when I say that I would personally choose to honor the car's run at Le Mans in the same year (and with one of those same drivers), regardless of the outcome.
Fine Art is the result of nothing needing to be added or removed from the canvas. The artist simply knows when to add those finishing details... and when to stop. It's your brush.
The 4 photos I posted show underneath the P4 bodywork a chassis frame. This is NOT a P2, P3 or P4 chassis. It is a much earlier chassis of another P car which has NO connection at all to 0844, 0846, 0848, 0850, 0854 or 0856, 0858, 0860 case. Thank you for understanding. Marcel Massini
Your probably right Paul,the alterations are probably from natural evolution/repares over the years... Though I admit that I was allso thinking of DP's involvment in McQueens LeMans,it could have been a good source,especially from the trashed 512(Lola?),if this had been the case that fabric could write a book in itself!
The main apperature seems bigger(verticaly) too,note the "slightly" bigger gap under the brake ducts.. Hand made R&D? ..aah the grande meastros of the Poe valley
Hi Just curious as to which chassis it is if you can say. Do you agree that the body, based on the Prova number MO 53 is from 0858? (Which is now on 0854.) As an aside I received a nice letter from Winston Goodfellow. As you know Barchetta erroneously states that P5 is built on the chassis remains of 0846. I believe that this mistake is confusion over Winston's article in issue #28 of FORZA. After reading my 0846 document Winston pointed out that in that article he quoted Lorenzo Ramaciotti, of Pininfarina, who said when he discovered the remains of the P5 in the company's catacombs, that the mechanicals were of a 365 P2/3. (NOT A 330 P 3/4.) "The chassis is from a 365 P2/3" Lorenzo Ramaciotti My 0846 document, which I will revise and soon add additional information that recently has come to light, attributes this confusion to Winston's article. This is incorrect. Winston's article is not incorrect, Barchetta is incorrect and misread Winston's article seeing 330 P 3/4 instead of 365 P 2/3. Best