The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

I understand there are no formal rules engraved in marble. So, I suppose that to some it would be "rather yes", to some it would be "rather no", to some absolutely "NO", etc...
You could open a thread on "Porschechat" or whatever, and then fifteen years and 9000 posts later...

Rgds

 

Spot on. Its all perspective.

 

I could have developped another analogy, but that would bring us to far from the thread...

In a few words: naval history, if you vist St Petersburg in Russia, you will probably been shown the cruiser "Aurora" that supposedly started the russian revolution.

BUT: she is not anymore "fully original"; the underwater part of the hull was corroded and leaking, so it was cut away at the waterline during the eighties and sunk.
A new underwater hull was manufactured, onto which were welded the upper parts of the hull, that had been cut in four "slices", with the superstructures, etc...
The "new" hull is missing all internals such as beams, scantling, most machinery, etc...
The original hull is still there, but slowly rotting at the bottom of the gulf of Finland.

What is the "Aurora" today? Certainly not the original one...to me, it is a "travesty" of her former self. But that can be discussed, of course.

Rgds

 

Now that the magnifying glass has moved to the front of the car from the pro 0846 brigade (who are trying to ignore all the inconvenient evidence regarding the rear).

What p3 elements have been identified fore of the bulkhead on Jims car?

All I can recall is MF saying he recognised something 0846 esque whilst looking at the car during a show in the states, which MF has now refuted via Steve.

 

I thought the heads had Le Mans stampings on them??

In regards to your post (8847) about the gearbox I cannot see the R or 5. Not saying they are not there, just that I can not make them out.
Pete

 

From what I understand Pete, those are simply casting marks for the material they were made from.

I said at the time that scrutineers would not be allowed to actually make permanent markings on anyones car, all they can do is apply relevant stickers or lead seals on wirelocked components.

Cars that had attended numerous races would be plastered in stampings overwise.

 

I would say these are "apples and oranges" comparisons. There is no way to recreate the chemical magic of a 70 year old Chateau Lafite. The Picasso example is closer, because someone can mimic the strokes, but I would still say it is still not comparable to vintage car recreation/restoration because there are always some original spare parts available and there are exact technical drawings for the original parts. If enough time, money, and care is applied throughout the process, it is entirely possible to recreate or restore a P4 that is technically and viscerally (nearly) identical to the original by sourcing whatever spares can be had, and by recreating parts to spec using the original techniques when parts are not available.

The question isn't really about whether a vintage car can be faithfully recreated/restored, but whether it should exist at all. In the unique case of the P4, where David Piper had some type of informal agreement to build P4 continuation car(s), there is no question that the car should exist. The only question is whether it should be recognized as 0846 or DP0003. If any meaningful portion of the frame proves to be from the original 0846, then I believe it should be recognized as 0846 because the chassis is so uniquely tied to the identity of the car. There is no question Jim restored it as faithfully as possible and with as much respect for the original processes as can be done today. Is it perfect as it sits with regard to every part? Of course not, but neither are many other "original" vintage race Ferraris from the period. The reality is that the availability of spares is very, very limited for race cars that were produced in extremely tiny quantities 50+ years ago, so many (if not most) vintage race Ferraris contain some recreated parts and/or some imperfectly matching spares.

 

Why would a 3 litre F1 engine have Le Mans stampings on the heads? Even if the heads did have LM stampings it doesn't prove they are from 0846. 4 P4s ran at LM 67.

I agree they are hard to see and you do have to look. Hmm, I may be wrong. What looks like the R could be an X. I can see what looks like another R as well. Unless you have a high resolution screen you may not be able to see them. The gear box being 603 or 603R isn't really relevant to whether this chassis is 0846 anyway. It's just something Mr Glickenhaus made a big thing of previously.

 

It has nothing to do with being pro 0846. It has everything to do with Piper claims the chassis to be built to P4 spec, if the front is indeed P3 construction then it is highly likely that the chassis was not built by Piper.

Simple logic really.

I can't fathom what argument you have to not analyze all of the evidence that lays before us?

 

So lay before us all then the evidence that fore of the bulkhead is P3 on Jims car which has convinced you that is the case!

I have seen none.

 

As we journey through this topic over the years, I find it interesting that we are left with Piper being the individual that has to answer for his crimes. There seems to be an exorbitant amount of weight being applied to Piper and his statements about the car, and very little weight being assigned to the optimistic 0846 claims of the car. After all, Piper has not claimed anything to increase the car's value, while I have heard every theory and possibility, regardless of if they invalidate themselves, thrown around to proving the car is 0846, and thereby increasing its value by about $35m

We might first start by looking at the testimony of the witnesses, and more importantly, what each one of the players stands to gain from their side being accepted by the Ferrari Community.

Piper has only stated what he sold in the auction description. He also made comments in the Talacrest video supporting his earlier claim. After seeing the recently published period photos of both the chassis and different engine mount designs, his testimony remains very accurate. The engine looks to be an F1 engine as described, and the chassis looks to have been built to P4 designs.

The PDF has stated many things that have been debunked over the years:
*Vestigal P3 Mounts - debunked - but now re-explained in the face of factual evidence
*Crash Damage - On wrong side of the chassis - hardly credible for semi-monocoque chassis
*Le Mans Tech Stamps - Debunked - Standard Casting Stamps
*Engine - Debunked - Looks to be F1 as described in auction description

In the face of contradicting evidence, the 0846 group seems to "evolve" its testimony to suit the narrative. Oddly, it seems that people accept whatever version of the 0846 movement says, and then force the burden of proof to Piper, and what chassis he built. Why have none of the followers started to question the credibility of the information contained in the PDF?

What I do not understand, is the correlation that has been suggested here:

If Piper was not aware of "XYZ" while his 0003 chassis was being constructed, then the chassis is definitively 0846.

Lets assume that maybe there was an anomaly in the 0003 chassis that deviated from 0900 or 0900a. Why would the answer not be one of the following: The chassis builder had the blueprints upside down. The chassis builder made a modification at the request of the customer for head / foot clearance. The chassis builder generally made a mistake. The chassis builder had not built this specific chassis before. These are by far, easier answers to accept than the car being the long, lost 0846; but they are answers that we do not want to hear.

We get so emotionally enveloped in wanting the car to be something more than a replica, that we start to accept any outrageous theory that will allow us to embrace our dreams of the car being 0846.

Another reason we are so emotionally enveloped into the car being 0846 is that we did not hear the entire case from the beginning; we only heard the opening argument.

If we were to sit in on a court case, and only hear the opening arguments, we would all certainly assume that the position of the plaintiff must be correct. In the case of this car and this case, we are all also a biased jury, since I am sure that most Ferrari lovers WANT this to be 0846, myself included. This would make any defense, or differing position from another party very difficult to prove.

Additionally, the real evidence posted by Steve finally came up after a decade, so that most of the jury had already made up their minds and moved on. Now, when presented with factual evidence, we are reluctant to give up the position that we have accepted for years. It is like changing your religion or political views in light of new information.

I believe if we were to re-read the PDF from the start, with all of the current rebuttals and cross referencing materials, this thread would have died on page 6. But unfortunately, most are too engrained to accept the facts in front of us, and will cling to any scrap of hope to keep the dream alive.

 

Bravo, that was a very eloquent and reasonable (a rarity in this thread) posting.

As I see it, the late 1970ies sighting of a supposed P car chassis by MM in Switzerland is an interesting lead and worth investigating.

Aside from that there is absolutely no reason to assume the car in question is anything else than it has been advertised by DP.

 

I agree. An excellent post that made me realize how wrong I've been about the importance of looking into the unanswered questions that still linger after all these years. I can't believe those silly Italians have spent months scrutinizing over the chassis for no reason whatsoever.

Thanks guys.

 

The car when being auctioned in 1987 had a 312F1 24 valve engine in it, I believe with protruding lugs, similar to a P3. Later than this the car was fitted with a 312F1 36 valve engine with different engine mounting coordinates to the 24 valve engine. This engine looks similar to a P4. It was when this 36 valve engine was installed that the bolt on brackets, tubes, a drilled weld and extra drill holes was used as the compromised solution to fit it. This is how Mr Glickenhaus bought the car.

 

Ah Vincent you have been holding back on us then, please tell us everything you know about such events?

 

+1
Nathan

 

Uhm? I already did? Those events are silly, silly I tell you. Wouldn't you agree?

 

Piloti what are the frontal differences between a P3 and a P4? You must know a lot about these cars seeing that you were going to write a book on them no? I mean you should know that if you are expert enough to literally write the book on P4's?

Or was your version going to be a little more of a coffee table book with pretty pictures and copy and pasted info one could find anywhere?

There's an old writers saying, write what you know. So... Do you know what you are writing about?

 

No, you have not given any detail at all from what I can see?

Who, what, where, when, and the outcome?

 

Lets assume he does not, why not fill him in on the details here and now? and take a leaf out of Steves book at the same time and annotate with photographs and arrows

 

Actually I did tell you what I know about these events in the last post and the one before it. These events are silly. That is what I know. We all know that this chassis is 0003 without a doubt! Why would those silly Italian guys waste months of their time? Silly little guys . So silly.

I don't know the differences between the two? And as I have said before I am not an expert, that is why I'm asking the guy that claims to be.

 

I personally believe the major part of the issue is WHO is presenting the story this car is 0846.

Jim G is a well known and well liked Ferrari owner by many and he has been an active participant on this site for as long as I can remember. I think people WANT his story to be true because they'd like it to work out for him. I suspect if it were someone else that owned this particular car and were making the claims that have been made over the years about it not being a replica (as purchased) - Beverly Hills Car Club or prior Fchat member Gentry for example; the tide would be drastically different. Different as in they'd be immediately dismissed as a charlatan and ran out of town and shunned by the entire Ferrari community.

 

Vincent I have pulled up the recent thread from Jim, no mention what so ever about Italians scrutinizing the chassis in detail? are you putting words into his mouth now?

Your statement implies that Jims car had undergone a thorough inspection in Italy by experts in the field, hence why I thought you had some insider knowledge.

Where as it looks like you just made it all up?

All Jim says is Ferrari investigated the matter, so far that seems to be that a clerk from the customer service website uploaded some details Jim had provided them again.

Until he provides the further detail he promised that is all that is publically known so far.

With regards your desire for Jims car to be p3 spec in front of the bulkhead, you have just confirmed you would not have a clue if it was, even if shown the photos then?

 

Would you? I didn't think so.

 

I have made no claims to, or requested such information, I am happy its the car as advertised and as sold' until I see anything concrete to prove otherwise, not that my opinion matters one iota

Clearly Jim is as well otherwise he would have taken David Piper to court for misrepresentation? surely that would have been the case if it had been sold as 0846 only to then find it was a replica?