0854 Back to Original Coupe

Sorry, I thought we were discussing our perceptions of the individual appearing to engage in smear campaign against the topic vehicle and it’s current owner, but perhaps I just don’t know how to simply pay attention.

 

Steve hasn't done himself any favors in terms of presentation (in my opinion), but he does do his research. It's probably more constructive to keep the thread discussion about the car/facts rather than presumptions of motivation.

 

Is it smearing to take reasonable issue with the potential lack of accuracy of any car’s restoration?

Doubt it affects this car’s value in any material way because these are race cars that often have been campaigned under a variety of forms/iterations. Original motor, chassis, and the other major components are where the value is. So I don’t see a problem with someone commenting about hoping any car gets returned to an accurate representation of any of those iterations.

Besides, anyone with the coin and interest to bid on this car will surely undertake SIGNIFICANT due diligence and hire the requisite experts to lend an opinion.

 

If you don't like the restoration (despite the majority having never been near the car IRL) keep your hands in your pockets when its comes time to bid, but those complaining about the suitability of certain tyres for road use in a P car having never spent a single second in a P car on any street, anywhere, are embarrassing.

 

It's not just the unsuitability of the tyres in this car though is it, which Mr Glickenhaus also uses on his fake P4, ( see discussion we had in the link here ) and they certainly are unsuitable.

Bonhams states this car is the subject of a painstaking exacting 9 year restoration. The very low standard reached should have taken no more than a few days.

Other inaccuracies in the car are:

• The cooling radiators which are completely wrong.
• Aluminium work around the tubing.
• Seats are completely wrong.
• The body is stated to be the original and yet there is no mention that the main centre section is completely new, made in the USA.
• The chassis needs to be examined by Ferrari for brittleness after burning in South Africa in 1969 and may need wholly replacing. Ferrari scrapped the 0846 chassis after it burned at Le Mans, 1967.

The restoration of 0854 does not compare in the slightest to the standard reached on P3/412 P 0844 and 412 P 0850.

The question mark over the integrity of the chassis aside, to its credit, 0854 does have a continuous history and all the above can be remedied with a few million spent at Ferrari, which will be a small percentage of what the car is estimated to sell for.

I really hope somebody will buy 412 P 0854 and correctly restores it to the high standard it deserves.

 

Like the subject individual I thought we were supposed to be sharing our perceptions of, it seems I shouldn’t be expecting a straight answer from Mr. JSinNOLA either.

And regardless of potential shortcomings of the topic vehicle, if the continued and ongoing public disparaging of it and its current owner/seller (by someone with known/recorded history of personal dislike of and “vendetta” tendencies toward its owner) can’t be clearly recognized as a smear campaign I don’t know what does ?

 

I hereby retract all of my statements and acquiesce to the notion that it’s inappropriate to ever question the accuracy of any car’s restoration.

 

Its a beautiful car which has been driven a bit and shared by its current owner, not to mention having its restoration documented here which is actually very very nice.

I do find this particular forum far more readable by using the ignore function.

 

There are two very easy solutions to your issues with this car, one, keep your hands in your pockets during the bidding, two, put whatever tyres you think are suitable on your P car. Oh, wait...

 

It would get pretty quiet around here - especially in the vintage section - if posters were only allowed to comment on cars they a) could afford, or b) had an intention of purchasing... Heck, even Mr. Massini's posts may be more limited if that were the qualification.

 

0854 slightly customised at the 23 November 1968 Cape Town 3 hours in Killarney, South Africa.

Marcel Massini

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Where it finished just behind 0858 if I recall correctly.

 

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

If it gets restored at Ferrari to the highest standard it will not be a driver. Just stowed away and seen at shows. Not a fitting end for the car. Best if left as a driver and still the real deal. You won't lose a dime driving this car.

 

The car is not correct as is, but can be made correct. Who would want to pay very many millions for a historic car that's incorrect just to keep it as a driver? The chassis certainly needs examining, and while Vaccari still exists, to make a new one, or sections of it, if needed. There are a number of historic Ferraris that I know of that are restored to the highest standard and still driven.

 

Wa wa wa wa wa.

Perry

 

Maybe I haven't been following the whole 'saga' closely enough, but I don't understand the flack MiuraSV is receiving over his criticism of 0854.

Bonhams has stated that the "exacting restoration" was carried out "with a perfectionist's eye for the details"; MiuraSV has pointed out some less than exacting details - what's wrong with that?

FChat usually revels in calling out the auction companies and sellers for their inaccurate, grandiose descriptions and - regardless of any history here - I don't see an issue or any counter arguments to what MiuraSV is stating in regards to the state of 0854.

Rather than shoot the messenger, does anyone have anything to say in support of Bonham's description?

 

Looking much better than after the battle damage of 1967 in South Africa.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

WTF racing against a 122 Amazon with a halo, what do you expect?

 

Was it ever driven in the rain ...?

 

It certainly rained at Spa Francorchamps where 0854 finished 3rd in 1967, its first race.

 

It also rained at the 1967 Paris 1000 Km when 0854 finished 5th OA.

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Your observations are not wrong. It turns out that there are a few posters here who claim to have strong principles when it comes to “correctness.“ Those principles turn out to be situationally dependent and in direct conflict with their espoused stance when certain personalities are involved.

As a hobby sociologist, it’s fascinating to watch. I have no skin in the game. Some of them, however, do. Your Daytona will always have obvious, but correctable issues…but we should just appreciate anything Glickenhaus presents, regardless.

The people who scream impartiality are extremely partial.

 

I wouldn’t say it's the criticism itself as much the delivery style by someone with long, recorded history of disdain/-respect of and petty attacks directed at the owner of the subject vehicle, mainly based on when latter, years ago, walked away from a debate of sorts, leaving former and his merry band of cheerleaders stomping their feet on the empty ballroom floor, seemingly angry, frustrated, "demanding" his return and acknowledgement of full capitulation in regards to debate subject.
And when that didn’t materialize, they periodically continue to take cheap shots at their debate opponent when-/wherever they feel/felt empowered by some opportunity.

As for auction description, most of us know auction companies have always been known to take liberties, some loftier than others, with most of their listing descriptions and can make one wonder why the messenger/messiah hasn’t been raising similar smear campaigns against more of them. Just anything J.G.

As for accuracies, authenticities, correctness or lack of any in the topic subject is not something I care to concern myself with since I have no intentions or prospects of owning or working on it or any other similar vehicles, but should an opportunity arise, I certainly wouldn’t concern myself with an opinion of anyone without firsthand experience on them.