The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

Arlie, I have the right rear wheel knock-off from the original P4 car,
sitting next to the steering wheel of a Hemi Cuda.
As you know I am rebuilding both cars from the ground up starting from those parts.

 

Post #16 sliced and diced Post #13 to shreds.

Go play hacky-sack with Piper, will ya?

 

Nino is well. His passion is strong. He is of course still haunted by what happened to his son as all fathers would be. Many photo's and TV. Due to complications with his son he was unable to drive this year as he was called to the hospital on Sunday when we drove the Targa. Nanni drove her instead with a RIA 2 TV camerman in the passenger seat. He asked Sal to lean her out a bit which Sal did. Nanni told Clay the car was fantastic, the real deal. On the race course he was able to keep the GT 40 MK-I at bay without problem. Nino, said he was looking forward to driving her next year. Exactly? In good time. In the proper venue as I've been saying for years...

 

But nobody has sliced and diced my post #23 to shreds yet. Simple question. Where is the car that was offered at the 1987 Christie's auction??? Is it the same car that was eventually sold by Piper to JG??? If so, how does one explain the chassis descrepancies?

If not sold, where is the car today?

 

Arlie
This is the car, and no one can. That is the point.

 

Not meaning to be a horse's(fly) rear end, but isn't there a bit of a logic problem here? In the study of UFOs, one question that always pops up is this one: If aliens are REALLY visiting the earth, why don't they just land and show themselves? The UFO naysayers always use that question in an attempt to disprove their existance. But just because WE can not answer that question does not PROVE or DISPROVE the existance of alien beings.
In a similar strain of logic, just because no one can explain the discrepancies of a particular P4 chassis; the absence of an explanation does not PROVE or DISPROVE the validity of the chassis in question. Nor does it really PROVE that this is THE car, whichever car that might be.
In other words, absence of DISproof does not mean a presence of validity.

 

In regards to the UFO's... Beware the return of the Nephilim!

By the way Arlie, I'm producing a concert promo for Hot Tuna at Wildwood.

I'll drop a dub by on Friday.

 

Dave, for all of your Nephlim returning needs, check out
http://www.returnofthenephilim.com/ReturnOfTheNephilim.html

Only time will tell if 0846 returns.

 

"Ladies and gentlemen, this is Carl Phillips again, out of the Wilmuth farm, Grovers Mill, New Jersey. Professor Pierson and myself made the eleven miles from Princeton in ten minutes.
Well, I... hardly know where to begin, to paint for you a word picture of the strange scene before my eyes, like something out of a modern "Arabian Nights."
Well, I just got here. I haven't had a chance to look around yet. I guess that's it. Yes, I guess that's the thing, directly in front of me, half buried in a vast pit. Must have struck with terrific force. The ground is covered with splinters of a tree it must have struck on its way down.
What I can see of the object itself doesn't look very much like a meteor, at least not the meteors I've seen. It looks more like #0846. It has a diameter of... what would you say, Professor Pierson?

 

Carl, that is not 0846. It's merely the remains of that 50s vintage Testa Rossa that was buried after the accident years ago. I believe that Orson Welles drove that car for a while, but the suspension gave way under the tremendous weight. The car was campaigned with the name "Rosebud" for several seasons.

 

Dave
If you read both letters, Forghieri's response, and all of the Publisher's notes it's really quite interesting. It's also interesting that Mauro gets # 4 wrong by 12mm.

I will have a word with John re ** as opposed to * (note 2 vs note 1) Note 1 is correct. Note 2 is not according to the last letter I received from Ferrari S.p.A and the fact that P 3/4 0846 is still listed as being in My Garage" on the Owner's Website which is copyrighted by Ferrari S.p.A.

 

Paul,

Disappointed how you have approached your new evidence ... no need for the name calling and snide remarks.

That was very interesting stuff you found. Now lets analyse like adults .

Edit: Thus we have a lot description from an auction and Jim's evidence. Now my limited experience of auctions has given me the view that the people that write these so called descriptions should not be treated like God (or the Bible, etc.) as they are often wrong or simply misinformed ...

Thus again we have something new to discuss

Pete

 

Yes but now we need to find out where they got the information for the catalogue description from ... did Piper tell them this, and thus was Piper wrong or not?

Just because an expect was involved does not mean that it should be taken as gospel.

My father has an auction catalogue for Christies or somebody and they incorrectly describe a simple Alfa Romeo TZ1 ... errors so amazing that my father and I just laughed and made a note to ourselves never to trust these descriptions again.

Just like any form of evidence you need to give each a certain weight and then balance against the other evidence. I give this catalogue a reasonable degree of weight ... but as much as Piper has handled many of these cars it does appear possible that he may have become confused or simply been conned (again returning to the person who made #0003 ... supplying a repaired chassis instead of a new one ... and laughing all the way to the bank).

Now if the gearbox details and comments regarding P4 centre tunnel were correct then this would add even more weight to this catalogue description and so on ... but those 2 points have been shot down by undisputeable facts (ie. physical current evidence that we can touch and see).

Lets keep discussing it ... makes work far more interesting
Pete

 

But Jim's 100+ page 'evidence' document should be ? Right.

 

This is easy to explain. Piper didn't know what he had in 1987 and he still didn't know what he had when he sold it to Jim.

It still seems to me that Jim did his homework and Piper didn't.

 

Well this has to be given higher precedence because it is based on physical components sitting right in front of him (or a large % of it is) ... not just on memory or old photos, documents, articles, etc.

Refering to your comment post #13:

Yes exactly this is what Jim and Wayne are saying. Piper thought he was selling Jim a replica ... infact Jim thought he was buying a replica. So Piper sold Jim #003 that he believed was a replica. Piper, I believe was conned (edit: not by Jim! ) ... oops, and had #0846 all along and should have sold Jim #0900 and restored #0846!

Pete

 

Yep 100% what appears to have happened ... and Piper is not going to like accepting that is he, thus his story will never change because he never knew all along that he had #0846!

I think this is what can happen when you have too many cars and are too busy having too much fun racing all over the world
Pete

 

Your opinion, Erik.

He certainly did - but then he needed to, in order to validate his claims to telaio #0846. Didn't he ?

 

Physical components that were in his possession for a good 2 years before any of the alleged 'evidence' appeared on FerrariChat: http://www.ferrarichat.com/discus/messages/251280/155943.html
Plenty of time in which to examine the components for 'evidence', in fact.

 

*Sigh* what is it, that makes it soooo hard to beleive that Jim's beauty IS #0846????? What is it? Jalousy???
Is it so hard to just accept the facts?


Just my 2 cents !

 

You're right, it is my opinion. And it and 18 RMB will get me an esspresso at the local Starshmucks.

I'll let Jim chime in here if he wants, but the facts remain he would have been happy with a replica as he bought it as a replica. But when he started looking at it, he said "hmm, this doesn't look like a replica..." and here we are.

Again, nothing new.

 

From Post #470 of the 'My Latest...' thread:

Or not, if you happen to make a very comfortable living from dealing in second-hand racing cars, (and the odd 'replica') that just happens to fund your global racing efforts ...

 

The catalogue description that says 'replica bodywork, replica chassis, wrong engine' etc. i.e NOT 0846. Jim says he bought this replica. IF the chassis turns out to be 0846 still doesn't make the whole car 0846.
If I have a fake Rolex and put a genuine Rolex strap on it doesn't make it the whole watch a genuine Rolex. If it does I have one here that you can buy for $5K.
Also, I find it staggering that you (and others) are prepared to suggest that David Piper (who knows more about P4s than you, Jim and the rest added together) didn't know what he had - even back in 1987 when the description was written!!
Nathan

 

The 'facts' ? I assume you are possibly referring to the facts according to Jim Glickenhaus ?
Maybe it's because I'm not quite so gullible, Tina ....

 

gullible or not.... why should i doubt the facts that is comming from Jim?
Because he is the owner?
I have no reason to doubt him at all ! And after reading a lot and studying the facts, fotos etc.... i can't see why it's so hard to beleive