The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

As you were nitpicking but this actually isn't. Though the letter dated 14th March, 2016 is signed, we have not seen that the Italian/English "binding" document dated 23rd February, 2016 is. What MF actually said in this document was that it was his opinion that original parts of that chassis (as modified by some outfit and referred to as 0846 in the previous point) are mounted on the P4 vehicle JG owns.

 

Which is exactly what Jim has been saying all along, ie. to save time #0003's chassis was made from the remains of #0846's chassis. The % reused is an unanswered question ...
Pete

 

Sorry Steve, but I fail to see the point here?
Does this mean that you agree with M.F statement that parts of that chassis, (referred to as 0846 in a previous point) are mounted on the P4 JG owns? If so, what are we discussing here?

I do wholefully agree that a signed document would have a superior strength from a legal point of view to a non-signed one, but even if the said document is non-signed by hand by M.F, whenever he says "is binding", means that he states his opinion in some way.

To me, but I am French and used to our legal system more than to common law, any document should be retracted or canceled by a similar document, in the same exact form, stating that there are new elements justifying a revision if the first one is now considered as non accurate and that this one is now "void and null" ("principle of parrallelism of forms" that rules here in France). I do not doubt that you have correspondence with M.F, but this has not the same value to my eyes as his statements; if these are not accurate, they must be retracted by a document in the exact same form.

The fact that said document is signed or not is indeed important from a legal point of view. We could then argue if the question here is if legally JG car could be considered as a re-incarnation of 0846; it could probably not be considered as being 0846 without Ferrari's consent, as Ferrari has crossed that number from its list.

But we could also argue from a "common sense" point of view, that even if legally the car cannot / could not be called 0846, it is 0846 nevertheless.
Or is built on the remains of 0846; or incorporating "some parts" of 0846? And if so, with how many percentage of original parts does the car becomes "enough of0846 again" to be considered as being 0846, etc...(there is no established rule here). Etc...

But if you consider that MF document stating that JG car is incorporating "pieces of 0846" does not need to be retracted by a similar document in the same form, then - to me - (as a perhaps rather stubborn frenchman seing it from the common rules here) this is admitting that JG's car indeed incorporates pieces of 0846.

Rgds

 

I probably was nitpicking but I think it important that details do not get misreported and then they are taken as fact further down the line. Please note that I only said that we have not seen that the letter was not signed. MF may have signed the copy to Mr Glickenhaus.

Perhaps MF has already retracted his statements. Can we rely on Mr Glickenhaus to let us know if he has????

 

MF had only glanced at JG's chassis as a tourist at Amelia Island when he thought he recognised the front end, in particular the positioning of the oil cooler, as the car he took to Daytona for testing and in his words therefore the "famous" P3 that won Daytona. He did not think the rear of the chassis was from 0846, which he thought was from another P3, only the front part. He also said that he couldn't say what percentage of the front was from 0846. He has said separately that perhaps the only usable parts of the chassis of 0846 were in front of the dash board.

However, I have since sent him pictures of the front end including the bare chassis and on looking at these pictures he has said that it is not the car he took to Daytona for testing. Therefore it is not the 1967 winner of the 24 Hours of Daytona and does not contain parts of the original chassis from 0846, so is not 0846. He had thought the chassis was from the P3, P4 series but he said he could not say which one.

Further to the above I sent him additional pictures which were of the differences I had noticed between JG's chassis and the genuine chassis and he replied that the rear on the false P4 of Mr Glickenhaus has been made new with particulars that would have not been made by the chassis builders of the original P4s. He added that the front part was furthest from real.

 

Engine is P4, not F1 - Piper allegedly said it was F1 but he was mistaken. (Someone else once tried to imply that the cylinder heads might have had horizontal distributors which might have been re-engineered with vertical ones quite recently.....even though HE KNEW from his own photo collection that was false and the heads had always had vertical distributors and were therefore P4.)

Gearbox that came with the car is P3, not F1. (Please show me exactly where it says the gearbox in it now is not an original casting.) ;-)

Rear body clip is from P4 0858 or 0860 or 0856 that raced at Brands Hatch in 1967.

Many other components have to be genuine P4 from Piper's stock of parts acquired from Ferrari direct...........because JG only had new uprights made (by Ferrari). Continuity doesn't matter with racing-car parts; they were always swapped around. For your mate to ask for a c/n for the dashboard is the daftest thing he's probably ever written.

FYI I've read every post on every P4 thread since 2002; I've visited Piper's workshop and studied the green car 0900 and the incomplete car hanging in the roof (the b/w photo is my copyright BTW), and talked to him several times about them.

Some time ago you requested, nay DEMANDED, that Marcel Massini publish just for you a dossier on the JG car. I repeat what I said then - MM posted a photo he had taken of the JG car at an event and labelled it 0846; and MM was pictured sitting happily in the JG car. As MM is the greatest exposer of replicas and fakes, and knows far more about each and every type of Ferrari than anyone else here, I rest my case.

Oh, and kindly stop using the word 'lied' about JG - it stinks.

Now I've raised my head above the parapet I can expect the usual selective quoting etc. - ho hum.

Paul M

 

Well, how would I know? And how would I dare a guess? I don't know him at all.
Remember I have no horse in this race, and that my mind has been made a long time ago: we will never know for sure, with enough certainty.

Even if the car is indeed incorporating some parts of the original "0846", as there is no rule on what percentage of weight or volume would make it "0846" again, there always would be someone dissatisfied with the outcome.

Some of those who would have been able to clear the mystery are not there, some would rather not speak, pieces of the history are missing...so it will never be black or white, but will remain grey. Whether it is "dark grey" or "light grey" can be discussed for life (or "ad nauseam")

(Even if I must confess that there are certain legal aspects that are intriguing to me, such as the chassis number "0846" having been crossed from the Ferrari lists, could there be a "0846" somewhere without Ferrari deciding that it can? And many others...)

Rgds

 

There is no Ferrari car with serial-/chassis-number 0846 in existence, as Ferrari confirmed in writing. There is no Ferrari VIN before or after 1970 based on a serial-/chassis number 0846. But there is a beautiful David Piper 0003 made in the Seventies with many unidentified and disputed Ferrari parts. The rest is just legend, fantasy and wonderful entertainment. Let's continue!

 

Read my post properly and you won't make such stupid comments.
I didn't ask for a chassis no. for the dashboard. I asked for the chassis no. of the car it came from. This was in order to show that the statement by Vangool about continuity was incorrect. I'm not saying that the dashboard didn't come from a P3 or P4 just that there is no proven continuity. Surely even you can't deny that?
Nathan

 

Been following the Ferrari history for enough time to know that "never say never" with Ferrari. Should Ferrari decide to do so, there could be a "0846" again: a move with a pen is all that is needed. But of course it is entirely depending on them. Note that I have not said that I think that there are any reason for that move to be done...

Ferrari is not the Almighty, they have made mistakes or errors in good faith in their life. There are also known examples of road cars with the same VIN. Of limited series of 100, of which 145 were actually produced...
Of the famous GTOs identical copies to which they didn't object at first, then unleashed the lawyers, etc...

Rgds

 

Yes, it is crystal clear that MF and Ferrari's position is that the number 0846 does not exist. Although he has since said the Glickenhaus car is not the car he took to Daytona, at the time of writing MF thought that the front part of the chassis, percentage unknown, was from the "famous" P3 but despite this he stated he still considered the car to be a replica as it has no number or the number 0003. He said anybody can build a P4 but nobody can chose a number that "mother" Ferrari has cancelled.

MF's emails that I have already posted also make this clear.

 

Not factual at all. It may not be recognized by Ferrari but if it made it through time it is a genuine Ferrari part whether they recognize it or not. A frame built by Ferrari does not cease to exist because someone wrote in a book, maybe it is not recognized by Ferrari, but it is still a Ferrari part that exists. Fact.

I don't think it is too far of a stretch that the If J.G. brought these parts to Classiche for a certification that this car would have "the blessing."

Same thing with 0858 P4. It does not exist either. But I think we can all agree that parts of it do whether Ferrari recognizes this or not. So by your definition is p4 0858 a replica P4 or an original Can Am?

 

Err, Ferrari have not cancelled the chassis number 0858. However, it is true that they will not certify it as a P4.

 

You obviously do not understand the Classiche system at all. There is absolutely no way that this car could obtain "the blessing", and even JG himself has admitted that earlier in this thread.
Nathan

 

I follow you perfectly when remarking “never say never” with Ferrari, especially when pension funds in Italy remain weak and car values rising (s. 6045 and 5899). And I will certainly stay amused, even if Enzo’s testimony should appear on fb confirming Tom’s death bed statement after ‘0846’ got classiched and the Pope blessed it during urbi et orbi while the car was parked on St. Peter’s driven from Luca di Montezemolo.

 

Legally, 0846 does not exist anymore, this from its manufacturer point of view; and it has been crossed from its register. Therefore anyone claiming officially that this car is still in existence could face charges from said manufacturer. But should he wish to do so, the manufacturer remains perfectly free to say that it had reasons to believe it destroyed whereas it appears now, with new evidence, that it was not; or even saying that “crossing a car from the list” does not mean that the car has been “destroyed” in the physical sense of the word, only “obsolete and discarded”, or “out of commission”. That possibility exists, even if I don’t believe it will be done; but it cannot be excluded.

I nowadays think that there is not enough evidence to believe the car to be 0846; I would like to believe it, but I can't. It does not mean however that if someone from the manufacturer should decide that there is enough percentage of original parts, it could not be given its number back: why not? This is not for me to decide, nor is it for me to say that “Ferrari will never do this, or that”. They do as they see fit and justified. I am sometimes surprised as what “Classiche” accepts for some cars, but they set their rules; and as we know, rules can change (but usuallya car without its original engine and gearbox, etc...will not pass; rules maybe different as for racing cars)

As said, I don’t believe the car to be 0846, but I try to do my best to keep an open mind, I have been wrong often in my life. Not enough evidence for me, but I shall not excommunicate anyone for been of a different mind that I am.

And, to my regret, LdM is not here anymore...

Rgds

 

Err, Never said they cancelled it as a chassis number.

But they recognize it as a Can Am.

So it the P4 that sits in front of us a replica?

I am more concerned with what is left from a great period of racing than I am with certification to be frank, but more has been made with less.

To me what matters is not if the car is on the records, on the lawn, or even if it has impeccable continuity, what matters is does the metal that was part of this great period of motor racing, does that metal actually exist. If someone wants to argue continuity I am not concerned with that. This car is built up from actual parts cast and raced in that period specifically in that small group of cars. Even if the frame turns out not to be 0846, the parts in this car are historic in and of themselves.

 

Mother Ferrari clearly think what Piper has is a replica as well because 0900 belongs to a 312PB. MF would therefore think the same?

Weird how that works...

 

Do you have his consent to post his own words yet and not just your interpretation of them?

 

question?

who was the first registered owner?

 

Enzo Ferrari sold 0846 chassis to Tom Meade.

After returning to Italy and finding his dire straits were now of the financial sort, Tom Meade sold 0846 to David Piper, to be 900-Piperised by same chassis constructors of "900" Series.

Piper sold aforementioned "900" to James Glickenhaus.

James Glickenhaus's and his team trusted that it was a "900" but over the years on a continual, ongoing basis, have verified that this particular "900" is in fact, 0846.


via Tapatalk

 

Comprehensive and agreed. But not sure if the works could legally re-establish retroactively more than four decades later an eliminated and written off chassis number without abuse of rights.

 

There isn't one scrap of evidence to support this theory.

Basically but not completely correct. Piper did, of course, sell 0900 to JG.

Very debatable - hence the title of this thread.
Nathan

 

I do not have the Hilary Raab Jr book on the even numbers, does anyone? and what does Hilary have under 0846?

 

Hil lists it as it was built - 330/P3
Nathan