The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

Translate this:

" -330 P3/P4 - SCHEDA TECNICA" (TECHNICAL DATA SHEET) 330 P3/P4 (1967)
Telaio N 0846 Trasformazione di un modello P3 secondo le caratteristiche del modello P4. TELAIO Telaio Tipo 593/603. Trasformazione della parte posteriore tubolare del
telaio per i nuovi puntoni del motore Tipo 237."

 

How do you explain the tipo 218 and tipo 242 which are 312 F1 tipos on Jim's 0003 block????? Oh, and Pete, yes 312 F1 engines are 3 litre and they have F1 cranks.

 

We have no idea what the term "transformed" means in this case. It simply means that modifications were made to allow the use of the P4 engine. Clearly modifications were made to the tubing in the bulkhead to clear the water outlet and to the right rear mount to accept rear engine mount. This fills the description of transformed as necessary to mount the new engine.

The object of the modifications to 0846 were to allow it to be used as a test mule for the testing to be conducted at Daytona in late 1966 in preparation for the 24 hrs in 67. The result of this successful testing and the production of two P4's for that event meant that they could use 0846 as a P3/4 and fill out the team.

There well could have been plans to sell 0846 as a 412 when the final P4 was finished and perhaps they didn't want to make changes that would preclude that option by making changes that wouldn't let them put the P3 engine back in. There was simply no logical reason to take the time and spend the money to tear up the rear half of the car and change it to P4 specification for virtually no improvement in performance. It was clearly more expedient to just do a set of quick and dirty mods and get the car on the track and get on with the testing.

Ferrari was not specific in what they meant by "transformed" and unless you talk to the person who wrote the technical description and find out exactly what the modifications were, you can't ascribe any meaning of what they did to "transform" the car.

You might have an idea as to what "transformed" means but unless you wrote the original technical specifications or have the modification orders that the factory used to carry out the modifications, you can't say one way or the other. It's all speculation and you simply have no proof as to what "transformed" meant.

 

How do you explain the block rib shape?

And yes a F1 crank will fit in a P4 block. The fact that the engine was 3 litres at point of sale does not solve the origin of the block and heads. I believe the heads have Le Mans stampings on them ... but that also does not mean they were never used in a F1 car, or as a paper weight, etc. but it does mean they went through Le Mans scrutineering at some stage or somebody has added these stampings later ... ?.
Pete
ps: Why would both tipo numbers be on Jim's block, surely it is either one of the other not both? We cannot explain the numbers on his block. I've already suggested some possibilities but we will never know, never ever. Not even possible to carbon date the time of the stampings .

I have a friend that has a couple of Mustang race motors ... they don't have numbers on them at all!

 

The above is Jim's very own description of the picture of his 0003 block I posted earlier. 218 is the tipo of the 66 312 F1 2 valve per cylinder engine. Tipo 242 is for the 3 valve design of late 66-67. Ferrari updated the 66 tipo 218 N1 engine to tipo 242 specification and stamped the engine. Notice that 218 N1 was how it was described by David Piper in the 1987 auction description. That block is the one in Jim's car. No tipo 237 P4 stamping anywhere.

 

Agree that there is no tipo 237 stamping anywhere.

The reason why some of us believe it is a P4 block is the casting rib not the stampings.
Pete

 

It was a frame and some loosely hung body panels.

Once again, you expect the World to deliver to you "as demanded" the info you seek.
The pictures have been posted here..

GO FIND THEM, for yourself!! ...or really.... seriously,...go home and STFU!

 

This whole post is your own imagination, and totally devoid of any facts that might actually advance this discussion.

Piper now has cars totally dedicated to "display purposes???

REALLY?????

You have destroyed a good thread.
Good luck, on your career search!

 

The BLOCKS of the engine were never numbered "0900".

You don't know a block stamping, from a frame VIN??

It's two very different things, actually.

 

There you go. 312 F1 engine with curved rib. "Res ipsa loquitur."
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

+1

 

Interesting. I remember reading once that Chris Amon (I think) said that Ferrari were lost in those years and even were running a heavy sportscar engine in their F1 car. I wonder if the only difference between a puka P4 engine and maybe the tipo 242 engine was actually just the cc size. Maybe the blocks were indeed the same, maybe? There must have been two block types though, one with straight ribs and one with the curve rib.

In the end even if the engine in Jim's car did start life as a F1 engine that does not change the investigation on the chassis side. I think we are all in agreement that the current engine is not an original one of #0846's. Although the Le Mans stampings are interesting ... but I've already said you cannot put much weight in any stampings
Pete

 

It's common knowledge that the F1 engines and the sports car engines were based on a very similar or even the same block. The F1 engine had different heads and a shorter throw crank. Showing a picture of a set of F1 heads on a sports car block simply says that these parts were interchangeable. They could have easily run the sports car block in an F1 car in practice or in a race since they bolt in. If money was tight (and it was) you do what you have to do to get on the grid.

It's a race car for crying out loud, these things were changed like you and I change underwear... Weather the block started out as an F1 block makes no difference. The car has a set of the correct sports car heads and the correct sports car crank in it now and that is all that matters.

As Pete said, the only thing Jim has said is that the engine is "period correct" in that it has the proper heads and crank in a block that had no Ferrari S/N on it and came from Piper's set of spares. Could well have been used in an F1 car or a P4. It doesn't matter.

Let's keep this on things that are germane to the subject, discussions like this are just wasting bandwidth.

 

You can when the stampings are specific versus generic.

 

Your first sentence make no sense Solo, if its common knowledge, then its a known fact, but you then go on to question your own statement. Either they were based on the exact same block or not? similar means different?

It obviously was not common knowledge otherwise why was the rib element thrown into the debate as being a key factor in identifying the block as a sportscar one, and not an F1 version as per Pipers sales document to Jim.

Muira was mocked for questioning the claim that it was really a unique to sportscars block, and he has now provided evidence that it is in fact also the type used in F1 engines.

A lot of back tracking going on and another red herring removed from the equation it would seem.

Now these Le Mans stamps? The ones I saw were not stamps but casting marks made when the items were first made, can anyone point me to actual "indented into the metal" stamps rather than raised cast metal?

Again would scrutineers really be allowed to physically mark cars and parts like this? not heard of that in any other race series, yes they can lock wire down parts and tag them to prevent tampering or until inspection, and they can add stickers, but physically marking someone elses property? any other example besides Jims that Lm officials did such things?

I agree yes these were race cars so parts were being swapped out all the time rebuilt and re allocated, a matching number race car is one that was hardly ever used! heads would have come off one engine, rebuilt and fitted to another then sat there waiting re assignment to any number of other chassis in the range.

The Cosworth DFV engine is one thats very well documented engine by engine, each has a tale to tell and often ended up in a wide variety of cars over its racing life, no doubt the ferrari in house rebuild process was similar back then.

 

Some good talking points, but I do want to add that the lowly SCCA here in the States will physically stamp a number into your vehicles roll cage when first inspected and granted a racing log book. Just sayin'...

 

Please forgive me for joining late, and I haven't read the entire thread (at least, not recently!) ...

Has a link (or other evidence) been posted about the P3 chassis built by Piper and later modified (by Piper) to P4-spec? Any links to the auction description mentioned above?

 

I thought we were on the same page, Paul...but you have actually lost me when you say that all future adjust-ability is lost. I don't see it that way at all...

If one looks at the photos in post# 7943, we can see how the rear suspension is mounted.

The wheel is mounted to (what I will call) a "hub." The hub is, in turn, secured to the chassis via upper and lower "arms." The lower arm is a fairly straightforward "A-arm"...the bottom of the "A" is attached to the bottom of the hub...the top of the "A" is attached to the frame at the rear of the "cradle" that passes under the transmission. <---THIS IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WILL DETERMINE THE WHEELBASE...

...the top of the hub is attached to the chassis with: 1) a short control arm that mounts just aft of the upper shock mount...and, 2) a much longer control arm mounted to the bulkhead. <---THIS IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT IS THE OTHER THING THAT WILL DETERMINE THE WHEELBASE.

The wheelbase could easily be changed by shimming the "top of the A" rearwards...and, lengthening the longer, upper control arm (which looks to be simply a straight tube with an adjustable heim joint at either end). Practically speaking, the shimming of the lower A-arm away from the frame cradle has its limits (i.e., one would not want to stack 100mm worth of shims there).

Any shimming of the lower A-arm mount could easily be done/un-done. The adjustabilty of the upper control arm similarly could be done/un-done.

Yes...there are other ways to adjust the wheelbase: A) the hub castings could be different (the how and where of the mounting points could be different between P3 and P4 castings). B) The lower A-arm could be made differently between a P3 and P4. OR... C) the cradle where the lower A-arm attaches could be moved.

A and/or B would be trivial to do. C is not the least bit trivial...there are way too many things going on between the bulkhead and the cradle. Again, the photo of Jim's car in post 7943 illustrates this well.

So...IF THE WHEELBASE REALLY WAS CHANGED from 2412mm to 2400mm...IT MATTERS HOW IT WAS DONE. The suspension does not mount onto the engine or gearbox, so moving the engine mount is NOT the answer. Were there differences between P3 and P4 hubs? P3 vs. P4 A-arms? Was the suspension on the P3 shimmed 12mm back from the cradle and not on the P4?

I suggest that the likelihood of the chassis being 0846 is improved if one can prove that the wheelbase did NOT change between P3 and P4...or, if it can at least be shown that the change was due to altered suspension components, track set-up, etc.

There are countless restoration photos of these cars where the engine is out of the car, but the wheels are all four firmly attached (again see post 7943). Suggesting that moving the engine will change the wheelbase on a car where the suspension is fully mounted to the frame is daft, IMO.

 

http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/143064931-post7918.html

 

No one is doubting Piper built or sold this as a replica. There is a doubt that the frame he sold the replica with is a replica.

So... there does need to be proof that he had the frame manufactured this specific way if you want anyone to believe that he did.

For now there is no proof or even logical speculation. The auction description in no way whatsoever describes the construction of the chassis or how it was modified to accept a P4 engine.

If you think it does please explain the build and modification process from the auction description.

The question here is how the frame came to be and an auction description vaugely describing the ASSEMBLY of the car does not do that.

 

Thank you!

 

That engine cannot be F1 because those old photos show heads with the inlets between the heads. F1 engines of that period had the inlets between the cams. I'm confused??

Where are those heads now?
Pete

 

What I am saying is that the blocks had common geometry for things such as bearing placement and diameters, cylinder spacing and deck height and bore diameters and head bolt patterns.

There well could have been differences in wall thickness or other things, but the key elements of the mechanical features of the block were the same. The picture shows a block that may well have indeed been a sports car block dressed with F1 heads and accessories.

What I'm saying is that if the blocks had common dimensions and features one could readily swap them back and forth and dress each engine as one or the other. The bottom line is that it doesn't make any difference if this car has an F1 block or a sports car block, the car is built up from pieces anyway.

And yes some of the markings on the heads were raised casting marks and are not scrutineering marks, but these heads are clearly sports car heads and they are P4 heads, the fittings for fuel injection and the layout of the distributors makes these P4 heads and nothing else. Whether they ran a Le Mans or not isn't important.

 

Piper in the description of the auction clearly built a replica, and called it 003 there were no claims it has a ferrari chassis, and never had been until Jim bought it. Why do you need proof when you admit it was a replica up until that point. It is well known Piper had numerous replica chassis built over the years, The onus is on Jim to prove otherwise if he wants the car to be recognised as being based on the chassis of 0846 instead. He has some good theories, and put together his findings in his pdf, but thats all they are so far, no concrete proof. Every one of them is circumstantial it seems still.

He thought he had spotted some potential clues such as the dual engine mounts but the auction description identifies who actually did this work, way before Jim spotted the option in this chassis, and assumed it was done by Ferrari. Why did he never just ask Piper why they were there after he bought 003 from him? one phone call would have clarified the matter? it was already previously identified in print as to who did the work and why.

The unique P4 engine block he thought he had turns out to be one that was also used in the F1 engines, as was listed all along in the sales details from Piper.

The frame is a hotchpotch of specs, as would be expected of a replica version, again is this tuned up at Pipers workshop purporting to be a brand new chassis to P4 spec built by the original constructor do you really think no one in his team would have noticed? they in fact had it built as a p3 type one by an un named vendor, and later had it converted to accept a P4 engine, the auction details confirm that. I doubt Kerry Adams would speak to just anyone about this but I imagine if Jim as the current owner of the car enquired then he would have more of a chance of finding out exactly how this was done back then.

Adams could well say the rear dual mount was in place in the frame and he just had to fabricate up the other bolt on parts, and Bobs your uncles there is potentially the smoking gun of that particular element being from 0846.

I dont want anyone to believe anything Vincent, just like you I read the information presented and formulate a belief based on realistic scenarios for myself and on occasion discuss them on this thread as an interested bystander only, I think it would be superb if it did pan out to be the chassis of the original 0846, I am still very much on the fence at the moment.

 

My assumption is thus.

With the initial wheelbase the a arm inner bushes top and bottom would be mounted equi distant within the bracket to which they are bolted onto (which in turn are welded to the chassis) on each side of the a arm bush would be an equal number of shims in it, centralising the bush.

On that basis there is some degree of adjustability by swapping shims from each side of the bush to move the suspension arms around a bit.

Given that the chassis mounts are fixed to the frame then the only way the wheel base could be changed via the suspension settings (if retaining existing hubs, a arms, driveshafts etc) would be to put probably most of the shims from the one side of the arm bush to the other within the bracket. I very much doubt that if removed completely the slack without the shims between the a arm bush and the u of the bracket is much greater than 12mm therefore all the shims would sit to one side of the bush in order to maintain the revised wheelbase, thus future adjustability is then lost.

Its a very simplistic way of achieving the aim, far better to take off the brackets which are welded to the frame and relocate them to the desired distance and reweld, that way you keep the adjustability you always had in the suspension.