This will be my last post on any of this. If you want to cling to a claim that there is apparently no evidence of, and that you won't even lift a finger try to prove (even though it is your own allegation), then that is a much stronger statement than any I can make. I never said his posts were genteel, "Genteel" is your word. That whole quoted string in my prior post are your words. Again, I don't how you can remember the specific circumstances of his alleged flame but can't remember what it was about and can't find it in a search. Apologies to everyone for the divergence from the subject. .
Can everybody just stop? Maybe it is time to shut this thing down until new evidence is brought to light. Steve has (so far) shown Jim's car is not 0846 with evidence supporting that claim. Not much new evidence has come from Jim to refute Steve. This thread has turned into the complete opposite of what it was supposed to be. It's become a bashing. Not cool at all. Let's all shut up for a bit, or stick to the matter at hand.
Can somebody bring me up to speed on this - where are Miura's posts that the car is a fake/replica/etc.? I hope you guys find it in your heart to spoon feed me the post number(s) or page numbers so I don't go through 500 pages...
Search through his posts. http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/members/73695.html Image Unavailable, Please Login
Go back to post 9161 and go backwards in time for Miurasv's photo postings. I had to update myself after several years absence myself. Miura's postings seem to put the capper on it for me. "What we have here is failure to authenticate!"
Ah, very cool - so now that we more or less have a proven reconstruction of the P4, can we even speculate of where this reconstruction was done? Or is it well known to the group? Was it built under the radar and then tried to be passed on as the real thing? What about all this Ferrari authentication that we hear about?
Miurasv's post 8352 had a grainy photo of the original 0846 vin plate from Ludvingsen's book. I ran it through the "paint" program and tried to enhance it a little as "proof" that those photos were actually of the original 0846. I added my own yellow numbers right below to indicate how they seem to be stamped somewhat crooked in relation to each other on the original plate just above. My theory is the Piper simply had a couple of chassis made and used them for whatever he wanted for years. Then sold it off in a batch of parts to JG. Image Unavailable, Please Login
ElWayne posted a note that this thread was derived from the original thread that JG posted in on October 24, 2002. I was posting on that thread on October 16, 2002,...8 days before IT started. FerrariChat.com: What do people know about the "older" ferrari cars? Do we win a prize for lasting 15 years???
Well... Jim purchased the car from a guy who was known to build replicas. He purchased it as a replica without any representations of it being the real 0846. Since Jims ownership the case has been made that the car is the real 0846. Ferrari has NEVER authenticated it. The only representations that I am aware of is on Ferrari's website they will place "a car" in "your garage" So by the website "placing" 0846 in his garage if I rememember correctly he sort of used that as Ferraris blessing... when in reality... it was probably a customer service agent or web host not officially Ferrari who placed it. Ferrari's website is not exactly an authentication
Ill correct it. Somehow either my stupidity or an autocorrect occured. IS NOT an authenticator boy... that one word sure does change the meaning lol
I'm in the middle of a much-needed sabbatical, so I'll try to keep this brief. After skimming over posts going back a month or so, it's clear that most of you are posting in this thread for the sole purpose of swapping jabs with other users. It's difficult enough as it is for anyone to pick out the bits of relevant discussion peppered throughout a thread filled with thousands of garbarge posts. Unless you're intentionally trying to bury/hide something that's been posted in here, I don't see the point of piling on more crap. As I've requested before, if you have nothing new or relevant to add to the debate over the car's identity, please refrain from posting in this thread. Subtle put-downs, "baiting", and other antagonistic behavior constitutes trolling, a bannable offense on this site. Please stop trolling the other F-Chat users. This site is still Rob's baby and he appears to have no interest in shutting down one of F-Chat's longest running threads. As such, constant calls for its closure are only adding to the noise. I think it's probably better to just ignore the thread, as I have tried to do. Arlie, I have no prize for you, but thanks for the reminder. I've added a back-dated post to the beginning of this thread so there will be less confusion going forward.
Jim Glickenhaus, 66, a former movie director and the managing director of SCG Cars from Westchester County, N.Y., on the Ford-Ferrari racing rivalry. This year marks the 50th anniversary of the peak of the Ford vs. Ferrari wars. There have been many great motor racing rivalries, but I think most fans would say this was the greatest. In 1967, it riveted the sports world. The rivalry pit Henry Ford II, the grandson of Henry Ford, against Enzo Ferrari of Italy, in sports car races around the globe. It was a gigantic American industrial complex, Ford, against a tiny family-owned manufacturer, Ferrari, renowned for breathtaking automobiles and motor racing victories. In my collection, I have a car that competed on each side, 50 years ago, according to my documentation. In the early 1990s, I purchased the Ford Mk IV that placed fourth at the 24 Hours of Le Mans in 1967. Although it was built as a race car, I was able to register the vehicle as a road car. My favorite thing is to drive it on roads where I live. In 1967, the car was capable of traveling over 200 mph. I dont reach those speeds, needless to say. I have put about 40,000 miles on the car over the years. My Ferrari I obtained in the late 1990s. The story of this car is incredible. At the time I bought it, I did not understand the full provenance of the vehicle, but subsequent investigation led me to believe that the chassis was in fact that of Ferrari 330 P3/4 #0846the car that won the 24 Hours of Daytona in 1967. The provenance of this car has been the subject of a huge brouhaha online. Ferrari itself will not confirm that this car is #0846, but I have registered the car as such, and many agree with my findings. [A Ferrari spokeswoman declined to comment.] Ford eventually triumphed over Ferrari in the 1960s, but this rivalry is still being fought on the worlds racetracks. Which do I love morethe Ford or Ferrari? Theyre like children. I love them equally. Race cars live violent lives, and they become important pieces of history. When I look at these two cars in my garage now, its like theyre talking to each other, reminding one another how hard they fought. Contact A.J. Baime at Facebook.com/ajbaime.
So is that it then? After well over a decade of chasing them, Ferrari will still not go on record saying the car Jim purchased as a replica is actually 0846. Brouhaha over. DP003 is not 0846. Case closed.
Obviously, I'm an outsider with little or nothing to add to the substance of the debate ... other than, perhaps, perspective. Given these two statements, upon which everyone (i think) might agree : 1. The 'burden of proof' is upon the car in question (its owner and advocates) to PROVE that it is, indeed, 0846. 2. The preponderance of the evidence, now, indicates that it is NOT 0846 (there are different 'flavors' of evidence, of course, but i think we would all agree, for example, that in-period photographs carry much more weight as true 'evidence' than more-recently established legal estoppel). Why hasn't this thread been moved to the reproduction/replica section of F-chat, as others have suggested? Would a poll carry any weight?
The WSJ article reads as quite a step back from the previous very strong retoric in the pdf and especially with regards Jims last statement a few months ago on this thread, is he slowly retracting from the bold assertions made over the last few years that his car is unequivocally descended from the original 0846/ and that his belief has been acknowledged as such by the leading lights in the industry? There would be no shame in coming out and now saying that based on the recently published period photos it does appear the chassis is no longer believed to be the one that raced at Daytona and Le Mans. The car has genuine P4 era DNA in the vast majority of the genuine Ferrari parts used to build it, a closer homage to the original 0846 could not exist.
agreed especially with the later part of your message. Still a great car, a neat car regardless. the lame thing I think of is his car without provenance has been shown with provenance and Im not saying that in a mean spirited way. I just know in show circuits etc... that sometimes there is only one car or one spot available and this car not being the real deal (my opinion) has taken the place of another "more deserving" car. Imagine if you had another competition car and you wanted to show it or it was at a show and instead of your car getting the article written and the interview done etc... it was a replica car that was touted as real. I have been turned down for entrance to shows and it really burns when you go and you see something that isn't as spectacular as yours. There has been about a decade of coverage on this car in error in my opinion and I just think of all the old guys who didn't get the covereage or were denied entry because this car showed up. (I obviously have NO first hand knowledge of this happening, I just know things like this occur). Im just saying this car stole the spot light sometimes at the detriment of others and there cars. I don't pin the blame on Jim, more of its just unfortunate.
there might be a strong case against it now, but I'm not 100% certain it doesn't have some real 0846 chassis parts. I can say that is a little far fetched and it would still be a bitsa or a GREAT recreation, but I can't say it is a replica.
It's your rodeo Rob, but I think we all know if there was anyone way in the world this car had some 0846 chassis in it, Jim would have gotten Ferrari to call it 0846 by now. Look at the other cars Ferrari have certified over the years that were built from scraps - bitsas so to speak. It doesn't make sense that someone with as many resources (financial and contacts) as Jim has couldn't get the same from Ferrari after so many years. For that, it seems inappropriate to leave it in vintage over recreations... at least until the day comes someone can actually prove some of the assertions the other way.