Here are pix of the 125 reconstructed 1987 by Michelotto for the factory. S/N is 90125 and engine #1. COPYRIGHT MARCEL MASSINI Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
She's a great driver. My Daughter and I just finished driving her on the Giro di Sicilia 1100 km in the sun and rain up Mt Etna and down to the Sea. What a trip. She'll be at Quail on Friday the 18th during the day. Best Image Unavailable, Please Login
What an experience!!!!!! To drive a classic Ferrari with your daughter with such beautiful scenery!!! *Priceless*
WOW 002C was also in Canada? Sorry to hijack this thread. But this is a perfect time to ask a question I have always wanted to ask. Marcel, what currect and past SIGNIFICANT Ferrari's have passed through Canada. We have such a small market and it would be nice to know. Sorry once again for the hijack. Vasco
Thanks. Are these Stroll's cars? Aside from his GREAT collection which is very well known. I was wondering if there is more? Vasco
No, they aren't Strolls. More info can be found here.. http://www.barchetta.cc/english/all.ferraris/Detail/0704TR.250TR.htm http://www.barchetta.cc/english/all.ferraris/detail/0584M.857Sport.htm
Marcel, Stu, and Michael M I dug out some original source material and compared the chassis drawings and dimensions of the 125s as drawn by Colombo and the 166I chassis as shown in the official Ferrari 166I chassis cutaway Drawings. They are not even close. Their structure, especially at the rear is totally different. In light of the fact that their wheelbases are 198mm different this is not surprising. Their track dimensions are also totally different. The structure at the rear bulkhead is not only different but on the 125s the Chassis Cutaway drawings clearly shows the anti-roll bar WITHIN the rear cross member! Is there any credible evidence to support the statement that 01C and 02C were really used and re stamped by Ferrari at a later date to build 166I's?
I haven't seen any. It's certainly possible components were taken from the 125s, but I agree that they are totally different cars. There are drawings of 125 and 166 chassis on Gilco's website (for those who are not aware, Gilco built all Ferrari chassis up to 1958 as a subcontractor): http://www.gilcodesign.com/doc/GILCOdesignAUTO.htm
I've got my popcorn out! I'm looking forward to Nathan's response! The **** war has opened a second front! Regards, Art S.
Well, in a way....but if the 125 chassis were "modified" into 159s or 166s, than the modifications are 10 times more extensive than with ****...
Dr Stu has confirmed what I suspected after looking at my original source materials. Go to the the site he referrence. Check out the chassis of the two. Compare the 125 chassis to the 166 spyder corsa chassis. I have always had my doubts about this but now my doubts are MUCH stronger.
Jim, I'm primarily reffering to the tone of the post shot across your bow and the return volley, not the substance of the issue . Ferrari was practical, he reused what he could, got rid of the rest (we do the same thing in our development lab). Look at the car coming up for sale with the de Portago engine as an example. It's now up to the historians to figure out the details - paraphrasing Clinton - to figure out the meaning of 'is'. Regards, Art S.
EXACTEMENTE! I've been saying this for many years however you must admit looking at the site Stu posted that in this case the modifications if they were in fact made would have to have been VERY extensive and while it is possible that a portion of 01C's chassis was used and re stamped by Ferrari I would like to see a bit more proof something along the 120+ pages I prepared on another chassis Ferrari scrapped but admits that they did not destroy...
Yes - they are totally different cars, and no one has ever said that 01C was used to make a 166I, BUT it was used to make 010I as Stu himself has said - even writing to magazines about it. The perceived wisdom is that 01C (the first Ferrari built) became 010I - which makes it the oldest surviving Ferrari. This has been accepted for many years. Nathan
Nathan Is there some part of the fact that their chassis are totally different that you have problem understanding after looking at the co. that made both chassis web site that includes clear photo's of both a 125 chassis and a 166 chassis and the fact that their wheelbases are different by almost 8 inches? Is there any part of 010I is a 166 that you don't understand and that your statement: "and no one has ever said that 01C was used to make a 166I" is both wrong and absurd? http://www.barchetta.cc/english/all.ferraris/Detail/010I.166.Spyder.Corsa.htm I realize that you have proven beyond the shadow of any doubt that you are unable to understand that both you and David are 180 degrees wrong about the difference between a P3 and a P4 chassis and this may be part of the problem, but I would think that any reasonable person looking at a 125 and a 166 chassis on that web site would instantly understand that you can not make a 166 from a 125 chassis without MASSIVE re manufacturing. While I do think it's possible that parts of 01C were recycled and used in a car manufactured at a later date the 125 chassis and the 166 chassis speak for themselves. There are a lot of things written in a lot of books that are simply not true and I'm sure this thread will start people down a road that will investigate this matter further especially as it's now been proven that very little if any of the chassis of 01C could have been used to make a 166 without massive re manufacturing. Upon viewing the 125 and 166 chassis photos I wonder if Dr. Stu feels that there's a bit more to this than he and other's had previously thought.
