The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

Excellent summary. I'm sure some other folks from 'round these parts will be at Targa Floria to witness a phoenix rising.

 

M my friend
Unlike you who have studied this matter in great detail other's who haven't are convinced that "It could not be true."

Some have stated: "I don't care what some old mechanic says about bent chassis tubes." (An old Mechanic who BTW, as confirmed by GR, unequivocally stated in front of several witnesses that he made the post Targa Floria repair to the chassis tubes in MY CAR upon viewing those repairs)

The answer to your question is DS/OG told JB not to allow my car at Cavallino. That is a direct quote from JB to JC. JB was quick to point out that this was not his doing or was he taking a position on my car.

The information that you have studied in detail has been public record for years and no one, as Dr. Stu has pointed out, has ever refuted it with hard fact that can explain the unique chassis details (0846 Build Sheets) on my car or the obvious chassis repair that corresponds to 0846's known accident history.

Against all odds, unbeknownst to me when I bought it, my car contains the substantial chassis remains of 0846. This fact makes many people very unhappy. Some of them could have bought this car for far less then I did.
Some are convinced that this is some elaborate scam by me to increase my net worth.

Hey you're a renown expert. You've seen the evidence. You've studied the car. Do you think I'm wrong?

I find it interesting that the only "expert" who has spoken on the record Doug Nye, someone who knows Piper very well and has studied my evidence, stated the following on Atlas.

" Most of me has just emerged from the big silver bird returning from Monterey. I have just read this - TNF being a back-home-at-last Priority these days, of course ....

"I met Mr G. - didn't get to see his car (due purely to my misunderstanding of where it was located) -we had an interesting conversation - and by the way the car pictured above at Pebble Beach was indeed Laurence Stroll's ex-Bernie E., ex-Albert Obrist, ex-David Clark macchina - not the Glickenhaus-Piper Spl.

Regarding the latter entity I remain personally intensely suspicious about the owner's current claims for it, perhaps 5% from simple prejudice (because anybody who parades as a badge his preference for running such cars on the public road - like a wild bird in a cage - twangs my personal "what a tosser" chord, as I made clear) - but I spare a couple of per cent for the possibility (and I put it no stronger than that) that Jim Glickenhaus's declared beliefs and conclusions are based upon sustainable evidence....unless he, or someone working on the car, has indulged in some pretty serious wilful falsification (which I also made clear).

Some protestations - such as "it will never be sold" - are familiar old songs, which I have heard sung time after time by many such people and which seldom survive the honeymoon period before cupidity takes over and the dollar speaks.

But this affair was really number 396B in the subject-matter list last week, and from the few discussions I had - or overheard - with a number of prominenten involving this matter, it seemed that most were coming from the "ha ha pull the other leg, it's got bells on" end of the spectrum.

From listening to Mr G., I am not so totally dismissive.

But what he has - regardless - remains a deeply flawed motor car and is NOT to be regarded as '0846'. It might - just MIGHT - be the closest we can now get to it...but I still truly doubt it.

For what that's worth..."

DCN

 

Boy, will their faces be red.

 

Tom
This has never really been about that. This has been, and remains about, what is true.
Some have come to understand that. Other's haven't.
Best

 

Oh, I know that. I also know you possess what money can't buy. Class. You have the class to not seek to destroy or rub in one's face a "victory." That is why the red faces, though not the end-all, be-all will nevertheless be appropriate - because it was not your desire to make them red, rather, to recognize, represent and present the truth of the matter which composes 0846, all the while remaining composed.

My name doesn't mean "seeker of truth" fer nuttin'.

 

If I was in Naplois' shoes, I'd probably organize the first P3/4 midnight 'TP raid' on DCN's house after reading those two paragraphs. I don't know how you do it.

-Chris

 

By ignoring the bulls hit and concentrating on what's important.

" Jim Glickenhaus's declared beliefs and conclusions are based upon sustainable evidence...

From listening to Mr G., I am not so totally dismissive. "

DCN

 

I was wondering that myself. I was also wondering how mr Nye would explain the evidence that mr G's P4 is in fact a P3 chassis modified to a P4 and shows traces of damage suffered by 0846, if the particular chassis is not 0846. How do you call it in the US? Beyond reasonable doubt? Well I believe due to those facts, it is way beyond reasonable doubt that this actually is 0846.

 

"serious wilful falsification" was Nye's words........

THAT's real scientific, coming up with the most complex explanation for observed phenominon......LOL!

Instead of ACTUALLY being a P3/4, damaged and repaired in racing action, it's really one of Piper's NOS, #0900a, b, or c modified skillfully by forgers to LOOK like a modified, damaged and repaired frame...

With all the snickers and pot shots taken at Piper and Mr. G., I think this one is a new low.

Your patience is amazing Mr G.,.............drive on!

 

NOW I remember why I don't miss showing cars, and don't go to meets anymore. I had even recently inquired into becoming a Tellaio member, getting back into things.
Jim, drive it, enjoy it, and sod'em all. Guess you're not a big enough tipper, if DS and OG have a dog in this fight.
Remember, you have one, and they don't!
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

While it would be unique to the automotive world, a forgery of this nature can be commonplace in the art world.

Considering the dollar amounts we're talking about, the candlestine deals made by Ferrari in those days and the "myth" factor, I don't think anyone is completely out of reason to question the origins of 0846. I just think the underhanded personal attacks on someone who has spent untold amounts of money and time restoring this automobile out of love (and not financial benefit) is uncalled for. Questioning his desire to drive it on the street boggles my mind.

-Chris

 

I think that the reasonable or unreasonable doubt is not the question at hand. The question is: Do we now accept "forensic evidence" as an acceptable standard for automotive chassis documention? If the serial number tags are gone, the chassis number stampings are gone, the original body is gone, the original engine and transmission are unproven: Do we ignore all this and substitute "forensic evidence" as a "now acceptable" replacement for all the above?

If we start doing this, then we've opened up a heretofore well sealed can of worms. Do we get to apply this new standard to other questionable cars that are also lacking the "standard" type of documention? Or is only to be allowed on "rare" cars, and not a '68 Chevy or a '72 Plymouth? Exactly how "rare" does a car have to be in order for the absence of standard documention to be allowed in favor of "forensic evidence"?

 

Less than three ......I'd think.....

We should have hacksawed a piece of Stroll's for some scutiny under electron microscopes........there has to be a piece of Jim's frame that would match to the original batch of frames....

So he was BLACK BALLED????????

Cancel my subscription! LOL!

Oh wait, like my FCA card, it's already expired!

 

"These lab reports clearly indicate a match in molecular analysis with the third smelting pot on the second shift of Luigi's Steel Products on August 3rd, 1965...........lunch that day consisted of.............."

That sort of thing.......

 

Chris
That's quite true BUT if it was forged it would have had to been forged in 1972 and in 1972 it wouldn't have been worth forging. In addition if Piper forged it, which I don't believe he did, why didn't he ever try to capitalize on that forgery?

As for me forging it I didn't and MANY witnesses and forensic investagation can testify/ prove that way beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt.
Best

 

I hope I am not alone in thinking that instead of focussing on "carbon dating" the car to prove authenticity, it would better to celebrate the car as it stands today - one of the most achingly beautiful Ferraris ever built and with an awesome motor behind. In my view more the merrier....

Mr. G do you have sound clips of it BTW?

 

Jim, over the last year I have done my best to keep up with your posts and follow-ups regarding #0846. I applaud you for what you've done for this rare thoroughbred racer, the most beautiful design in motoring history in my opinion. I can't wait to see you and the car here in Europe. I hope that despite the vicious attacks that you have endured (and successfully countered), you can still be amused on the other hand by how pathetic and envious some "experts" can be. Many on this site have said this before: thanks for sharing

 

Jim-

Obviously I'm coming into this a little late in the game, but I wasn't trying to suggest that you or Piper had forged it- I was simply trying to work out how someone could question 0846's origins. How many times have you seen a complete car reconstructed from a headlight bezel or some other inconsequential parts?

You're right though, forging the frame in 1972 would be like copying a Van Gogh in 1895.

-Chris

 

The argument that a car is ONLY a chassis tag is rediculous and offers far more chance at fraud than the other way around. If we take that the chassis tag is the only right and proper identity of a motor vehicle then I could steal a chassis tag of a genuine 250GTO and thus make the rest of the vehicle worthless. Crazy concept.

I thought we already were ... take cars with questionable chassis tags (Lotus race car and Ferraris, etc.) Much forensic work goes into working out the cars identity and what races it actually competed in, etc.

I think it should but the reason it doesn't happen is that the '68 Chevy is not worth enough to justify or warant the expensive and time consuming process. Now if somebody bought an old Chevy that they thought was an ex-Movie star car or something important and heritege adding to the vehicle ... I bet they would work real hard trying to prove that ... if for no other reason than to make their property more interesting and exciting.

I personally would love to find my Alfa Romeo 1750GTV had been used by an Autodelta team as course practise car (or even just used to get to the hotel and back) for the GTAm drivers at the Targa Floria or something ...

Pete

 

I don't think a car without the chassis documentation is without identity. Problem is which identity. In this case, talking about a very very specific car with a very very specific history, the forensic evidence is sufficient to grant the car a certain identity, in this case the identity of 0846 or the remains of 0846 if you please. Chassis documentation is only a way to prove a cars identity.

 

Pete, I didn't mention that ONLY a chassis tag was in question. I mentioned serial number tags, chassis STAMPINGS, original engines and transmissions, ORIGINAL bodies. If we start saying that ALL of those can be missing and we STILL have the original car?......Well, sorry,....but I'm not climbing aboard that train.

 

Arh, sorry missed your point. Numbers do help, but lack of numbers does not mean that an item is not genuine. Numbers were simply added to make it easier to do the legal stuff to monitor the car.

Many, many things do not have item numbers ... take your house for example. No where on your house is it stamped as House #0846 () ... but we all refer to it as house at address so and so. Now if you sold the house to somebody and he came and lifted it and relocated it somewhere else ... well it is still the same house and the house that the famous Horsefly onced owned and raced ...

Pete

 

Based on with Arlie's and Pete's first comments, this thread looked like it was about to blow up like all of the others on this topic. With their last set of comments I have hope! (EDIT: never mind, Pete just edited his post!)

Jim G., Beautiful car! I had to leave the LI concouse before you fired it up so I still haven't heard it run, though I have now seen it twice!

Regards,

Art S.

 

Pete & Arlie,

Read your posts in the old threads, we've been here before!

Best Wishes,

Art S.

 

The foregoing is all very well. We are all entitled to express our opinions and it pleasing to see all the encouragement, praise and support for his workmanship that Jim is receiving ….
But if nobody else dare raise the subject, then I guess it remains for me to do so.
Jim’s claims to the provenance of #0846 were apparently the subject of some discussions on the esteemed Telaio forum, back in July of last year. What was the outcome of these discussions ? Did the Telaio committee, whose decision in almost all similar cases, is taken as final, ever come to a conclusion ? Dare any of the membership speak out, and state their verdict ? Or is the ‘Jury still out’ on this one, waiting for Ferrari S.p.A. to make the first call ?