The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

Jeff.
Although Jim Carpenter claimed, in the article you quote (and the subsequent article in the February, '93 issue of the UK 'Performance Car' magazine), that this car (then registered HLH-990) was a 'Cable' production, it was, in fact, nothing more than a stock (LHD) Noble P4 Spyder fitted with an ex-308GT4 V-8 and a ZF box.
Check out this photo of the engine compartment below, for instance. Note those screw-top fuel fillers with the catch-funnels - pure Noble P4. Other photos clearly show the Noble chassis frame, which Jim also claimed was a modified Ferrari 308 chassis .....

 

Just goes to show you can't believe everything you read, I guess. Thank you for your correction. So did Carpenter actually build any cars on his own?

 

Jim Carpenter did go on to build at least one other P4 replica, though, and this one is just a bit special. It has a Cable-built round-tube spaceframe, based on the shortened main chassis rails from 330GT S/N 6067GT, and uses the same car's V-12 engine, but fitted with a custom fuel-injection set-up. The bodywork is fibreglass, and mostly Noble-based, but it has Jim Carpenter's beautifully re-worked 'basket-handle' tail section. So I reckon Jim could rightfully call this one a 'Cable' production. Looking at the build photos, which I have all the scans of - you could also call it a 'labour of love'. An incredible amount of high quality workmanship went into this car.
Hey, Arlie - if you're still following - this one's for sale, too!

 

Paul, you mistake me for somebody with a large bag of money! I'd rather have something like NickM bought...a project to tinker with. But I would not be ashamed to be caught driving that replica....or any of the others for that matter.

 

I guess I'm the "Chap from Mesa (Arizona)" and the new owner of a P4 Project car? And "yes" a managed to get the chassis, the body parts, a brand new windshield, most of the suspension, a Porsche 915 tranny and a bunch of other "stuff" for considerably under 10K$USA.
I may be considered as a "low-buck" (I prefer "frugal") entry, but that doesn't mean that I'm going to be low quality - especially where it really counts.
I plan to use as many genuine Ferrari parts as possible off of a Ferrari donor car I hope to be receiving soon (Again for something considerably less than 10K$USA).
I may not be a "purest", because I believe: Just "who" do we ("replica" owners) think we are fooling (besides ourselves) when "trying" to replicate one of the 3 or 4 originals that were made for pure racing and not street driving? And who would "want" their replica to be that austere for creature comfort & drivability, etc.? Besides my replica is a LH drive for the USA. But it is my intention to keep the outward appearance as close to one of the originals as possible (without being a fanatic about it - ha, ha).
Of course, I do have a great deal of respect for those of you who "try" to copy every nut & bolt, etc., but we replica owners have to draw the line "somewhere", and that somewhere is a very wide gray line and just an opinion based on our own particular perspective and resources (E.g. Talents, skills, time & money).
But none of this should distract us from our mutual camaraderie and our love of the vehicle and its esthetics. I just want to be a part of our very small and select group and not get involved in splitting hairs over how close &/or correct every nut and bolt is. I think a "little" indiviualisim and a "few" personal touches should be "ok". If they had built a 1,000 of these cars over several years (instead of just a few), I'm sure there would have been lots of differences and variances from the factory and from the race teams, etc.
So, now it is up to us, as individuals to leave our mark as each of us sees fit.
Of course, that is just my opinion. No better or worse than anyone elses.

 

Paul, why don't you do the respectful thing and PM Jim those details. He has emailed me his theories (and also a lot of other people) and I am not going to discuss them here because that was a private conversation, but if I had information that could help Jim's research I would send it to him. Jim is just after the answers (even though you think he has other intentions ... ) and what he has told me makes sense and I can see why he thinks what he thinks.

Come on mate help out a fellow enthusiast

Pete

 

Pete.
I don’t need (or necessarily want) to ‘PM Jim those details’, at this stage. This, before everyone jumps on the ‘P4Replica-bashing bandwagon’ again, is not through any lack of ‘respect’ for Jim. Nor is it an attempt to draw even more attention to this thread and ‘my personal cause’, as many will suspect, and no doubt accuse me of. These details, as you refer to them, are in fact two emails. One of them (in a mere 60 words) totally debunks the #0846 originality/F1 engine and gearbox questions, at a stroke, and the other is tantamount to character assassination. They are the words of two other P4 enthusiasts that I have ‘spoken’ with over the last year, relating to their conversations with other persons. Apart from being ‘private conversations’, both could also have severe legal implications. So I am not about to post them to this or any other thread, except possibly under extreme provocation (and I think I have received more than my fair share of that). Nor am I about to forward them to Jim, and, not only probably get myself instantly barred from FerrariChat, but also find myself with a law suit on my hands! So, I will try, as I said earlier, to win ‘my argument’ (later this weekend), by presenting FACTS.

I should mention, there is one slight ‘gotcha’ regarding these two emails, and that is their age. As any other AOL users reading this post will know, the way AOL’s email archive system (PFC) works, (un)fortunately both these emails ‘are no longer available for forwarding’. That does of course not prevent me from printing off hard copies. Since my PC’s ‘mysterious’ crash last Friday, after a particularly nasty virus attack (which luckily caused no data losses or corruption), not only have I printed off copies of anything relevant, installed ALL the latest Norton and McAfee protection, but I have taken every conceivable precaution to protect my data. Call me paranoid, too, if you like, but I think I have just cause to be!

It is also interesting to note that Jim has been emailing you (and also a lot of other people) with his theories. Could it possibly be that he is trying to win over your opinion(s) by doing so ? (and hence my previous remarks about Jim’s ‘Tifosi’). You see, it’s funny – I think most people who have followed these threads, realize, that although I appear to ‘have an axe to grind’, ‘an inferiority complex’, and all the other accusations – that I AM actually a seriously dedicated Ferrari P4 enthusiast !
So why isn’t Jim emailing ME his theories ? You see Jim, like me, is also an AOL user. I know a couple of his AOL ‘screen-names’, and he knows a couple of mine. Yet we don’t ‘talk’. In fact, even easier than sending each other ‘PM’s’ through FerrariChat, we could both ‘IM’ (instant message) each other through AOL. But we don’t. In fact, we are both ‘blocking’ each other. I have had several very long and enjoyable AOL IM sessions with other P4 replica (including some Norwood P4) owners in the States, and will happily sit up all night ‘bashing the keyboard’ talking P4’s. But never with Jim.

Not, of course, that it’s practical, nor, for obvious reasons, am I ever likely to get an invitation to view Jim’s car. Again, you can call me sceptical, or accuse me of accusing Jim on having ulterior motives, but I know exactly the effect of seeing one of these cars in the flesh can have on people. It is an amazing and very influential experience, particularly if you’ve never seen a P4 (be it a genuine P4; a damned good reproduction, or even a high quality replica like a Norwood P4). Just read Carbon McCoy’s (NNO) little essay about his trip to see Jim’s car, and then you can see why possibly he has become one of my most vociferous opponents.

Over the years, I have been fortunate enough to see and photograph many of the ‘original’ P4’s (and also 412P’s and 350 Can-Am’s). I went to Le Mans (as a schoolboy in ’66 and ’67) and more recently at various Goodwood events I have seen #0850; #0854; #0858 and of course David Piper’s #0900. I also saw #0856 at a FOC meeting at Prescott HillClimb in the ‘80’s. So having bought my own Noble P4 replica back in ’99, and re-kindled my love for the car, when the build-up to the sale of P3/4 #0844, at Christie’s Pebble Beach auction, began in August 2000, I followed it with interest.

As most of you know, the car was sold to Harry Leventis for $5.6 million, and it was shipped to the U.K. a couple of months later. It was subsequently track tested by Tony Dron at Silverstone, in late December, 2000. Reading the article in ‘The Daily Telegraph’ motoring supplement, and various other magazine articles published in early 2001, it didn’t me take very long to figure out where the car was being prepared and stored – and it was less than 40 miles from where I lived. So, after trying unsuccessfully, on a couple of occasions, to make appointments to view #0844, one day I just grabbed my camera, jumped in my car, (the Alfa, not my P4 replica) and headed up there. I easily found the premises, athough they were very discreet and extremely secure. The workshop owner (Tim Samways) was away. From the other cars stored there, in this collection, I immediately understood why he had discouraged visitors. Luckily a helpful and understanding mechanic was on hand. I asked if I could see #0844, and take a ‘few’ photos. “Just hang on while I roll this car out of the way so you can get some better shots and angles”. (This other car just happened to be the 1959 Le Mans winning Aston Martin DBR1).

I was in heaven. My own private viewing with a real P3/4 ! Just to see it in the flesh, so close-up, and be able to mentally compare it to my own (Noble P4 replica) car. It is an experience I will always remember and treasure.
So, in summary, you see, I can easily understand how people like Carbon, who have never seen a real P4 in the flesh, given an opportunity to view Jim’s car would come away very heavily influenced by the experience, and I cannot blame them !

PS – Unfortunately the photos I took that day of (two rolls) were using a 35mm, rather than a digital camera. I do have a few of them scanned, but the resolutions are a little too high for posting. Another job I’ll get round to later!

And I would love to, Pete, if I thought it were the right thing to do. However, despite what everyone else on FerrariChat seems to think, I do also have integrity ....

 

Welcome aboard, Gene ! Great first post, too ....
Tell you what, why don't you try posting one of your 'First-Fit' body / chassis photos to this thread. That way, some of the readers who are interested in 'low-buck' replicas can get to see what a bargain we found between us. Just one slight problem though, Gene - the 800KB file sizes you have been emailing me won't work. FerrariChat has a maximum file size limit of 195KB (and 640x640 pixels). I could do it, except photo editing isn't one of my fortés - and, besides, it's your car ....

 

Actually, I have indisputable evidence that the car is not exactly what Jim purports it to be, but...

I'm afraid I can't let you know what it is because, um, well, hmmmm.... I might disturb the integrity of this thread.

If I did it would needlessly shorten this fabulous thread and put a stop once and for all to the endless, numbing discourse on is it or isn't it really a replica, a recreation, a special car, or just a jumble of parts that Jim wants to call #0846.

P4Replica, why not just give up your double secret stuff and let us all in on your special knowledge?

Is the real reason that you "evidence" doesn't exist? Or that it's not nearly as "conclusive" as you claim it to be? Or is it from other folks like you, that want to prove Jim's claim to be false for some personal agenda reason?

 

Dave.
The answers to your questions were all there, in that previous post. Unfortunately, it seems, once again, that you either didn't read or understand the post properly, or deliberately chose to ignore them.

 

So your mystery emails are conjecture, not FACTS? as previously stated?

So that even if you "Wanted" to provide this "evidence" you could not reproduce it?

With perhaps, still an axe to grind.

Can't speak for Jim but I don't think I'd try to convince you of anything.

I'm not arguing your integrity, just your motive and method. Can you publish the emails? No, can you product conclusive photos for us, not yet, can you.. oh, never mind. I have no personal interest in Jim's car, I've never met him or seen it. I just wondered, as I read through this thread, why you attack seemed so personal, and why you couldn't just produce your conclusive evidence.

Which your explanation above, still doesn't do.

Why not email the parties in question, who can debunk Jim's claim, get their "permission" to publish their email accounts, and be done with this? OR better yet, get them to post their postulations here themselves?

On the upside, I do appreciate your keeping this whole thing "civil" at least in tone, if not intent.

 

I won't be drawn into answering your other points, Dave, but thanks for noticing. Yes, I do try to keep it 'civil', even under extreme provocation - but I admit I almost 'lost it' back around posts #91 - #94 though !

 

Paul, you really are amazing. Jim has this car he has discussed his theories on this site with everybody. He has stopped doing this because of YOUR personal and NON-enthusiastic attitude. You now think you are some sort of P4 expert because you have seen in the flesh a few cars and spent your life researching them.

People with integrity would help out a fellow enthusiast with this knowledge, but instead you just like to play the 'hero' or whatever and you will not inform Jim of this knowledge you have.

Very strange.

BTW: All Jim has ever done is discussed theories. He naturally believes these theories because it is exciting. You cannot handle that ... why I cannot understand?

All Jim did by the way is explain his theories to me with a few photos. He naturally does not want to post them here because you will attact and play devils advocate (or whatever) and for some reason not just discuss and wait until it is confirmed or otherwise. Man if I was Jim I would not talk to you either, especially now that you have possibly the answers and yet showing complete non-enthusiast attitude will not discuss them.

This comment about legal implications is BS. If you have seen details on a car or taken photos, so fncken what. Just share YOUR knowledge with Jim ... he probably has the same photos ...

Jim just showed me some photos and asked for my opinion. And no you may be a P4 enthusiast but you like the throne you think you have built and thus do not want to share information. Instead you want all P4 replica wannabies to come to the great God of P4 knowledge in P4Replica and beg for information. I used to work with a guy like you ... he thought his knowledge made him indispensible. The thing he did not count on is that other people have brains to ... I believe in sharing knowledge so all can benifit.

NNO talks about every Ferrari site'ing like that. That is just his nature, and he has built up quite a friendship base via this site. The funny thing is now he is a genuine Ferrari researcher ... watch out P4Replica he now has access to a huge db of information.

As for you seeing all those real P3's or P3/4's or P4's, good on ya mate. Do you think that Jim would not be talking with those same P3, P3/4 and P4 owners? ... , obviously not.

You might know alot about P3's, P3/4's and P4's Paul but you are using Jim's car as some sort of ego boasting experience to some how make yourself look like the man. How unbecoming. That as far as I am concerned discredits everything you say because YOU (not Jim) have an ulterior motives.

Pete
ps: Jim I appologise if I have said too much ...

 

Pete.

I think you and I should give it up.

Obviously, Paul is going to continue this campaign, and nothing you or I can say will change his opinion, method, or agenda.

So, I hereby surrender this thread to Paul and his "interesting" approach to the pursuit of "his" truth about Jim's car.

Maybe, when Paul is ready to spill his guts, he can PM me and let me know he's posted his dynamite information.

 

Hey, Pete.
Hasn't it dawned on you yet, that most of my more 'provocative' postings, relating to Jim's P4, are usually posted in a direct response to one of yours ?

 

Agree and that is exactly what I will do.

Cheers
Pete

 

I'm starting to get bored with all this.

 

I'll go one better than that, Glassman! Just surprised nobody has thought of posting this before now.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

i must be a cavity or something, 'cause everytime i see you, i'm in your mouth...

It's not "just" the P4 that excited me so, but also the history driven therein; the countless nights i stayed up, running through a labirynth of archives, printing whole threads out, taking them home and reading them... The countless posts from Jim that i had to "endure"; torturous depictions of marvelous feats and happenings involving 0846 that, back when they happened, were nothing more than incidents... but now; as those events are emblazoned in history, the one physical thing left from it all - the one thing that made it all happen - was something i got to go see. Sort of the same premise that excites people when they see a celebrity. Sort of.

...and i am no opponent of yours. i'm about as vociferous as you are, veracious. i don't oppose you, i oppose the malignant, baseless drivel you continue to spew on this site, about a "car" whose sum of facts are beyond your current understanding of the situation. Petty as it may seem (as it IS), all this amounts from you inability to acquire things you want; need. All this from selfishness. Give it a rest, Paul.



Thank you, Peter... You're right, i go nuts over every Ferrari i see; i can't help it... but Paul needn't fret about my newfound "job" and the access i have to hordes and hordes of information; we don't usually keep records of replicas.

 

Unfortunate choice of words, there, Carbon - in view of the previous post !

When I wrote:
"So, in summary, you see, I can easily understand how people like Carbon, who have never seen a real P4 in the flesh, given an opportunity to view Jim’s car would come away very heavily influenced by the experience, and I cannot blame them !"
I was not making excuses for you, I was trying to explain your enthusiasm - but now I realize that I was just wasting my time ....

 

Therein lies the problem, Paul; mere words could never define my enthusiasm...


...but thanks for the "help"...

 

You want Dynamite? OK – I’ll give you Dynamite! - BOOM!

But before I blow a big hole in this debate, let me tell you what I think about P4 Replica.
I have taken the time to read ALL the way through ALL this bullsh-t, and some of the older threads too. P4 Replica has been called a lot of names on here – unfairly, in most cases, I’d say. But one name that nobody has called him yet is ’Schmuck’ – but IMO - Schmuck is what he is! He must have wasted HOURS posting on FChat, trying to convince you guys that Jim’s P4 is not the magic #0846 that you all so badly want it to be.
But most of you just didn’t want to listen to what he had to say, and shouted him down. And all the while (over a year – the date is European format) he has been sat on a valuable piece of evidence, and too scared to use it, just in case it might upset a few folks. So I say you are a Grade A Schmuck, P4 Replica, because you could have stopped all this bullsh-t a year ago!

And what exactly is this dynamite information? It’s an email sent by Max Wakefield (P4 Racer) to P4 Replica telling him about a conversation with David Piper. Not exactly a literary masterpiece, but it includes some interesting statements. How did I get a hold of it? Well that would be telling tales, wouldn’t it? But in short, P4 Replica must have forwarded it to a couple of his buddies (in confidence, I guess) and then one of them forwarded it to me. Major mistake! ‘Cos, basically, I don’t give a damn, and I ain’t too scared to post it either! And besides, I think you the FChat readership OUGHTA see it.

So to all you suckers who voted ‘Yes’, and specially to NNO and PSk – Read it and weep!
‘Cos Jim’s car ain’t #0846 – it IS just another David Piper ‘fake’ P3 (or P4) with a F1 motor and transmission. Why? ‘Cos David Piper says so, and he should know!

To the 13 (unlucky for some) who voted ‘No’ – give yourselves a big ‘Attaboy’ – you got it right!

If any more of you folks, who’ve been ‘sitting on the fence’ till now, were planning to vote, I suggest you do it soon, before this thread also gets mysteriously closed down by the administrator!

Oh Yeh, and for any of you suffering from ‘Dubya syndrome’, ‘He’ in the email = Jim. OK?

 

A pox on your house.

 

S. Stirrer.

Interesting name. You have guts enough to post it, but not the guts to identify yourself.

 

That's pretty funny. Lets see, in an email Max admits committing a crime. David admits committing a crime; and as my chassis was made in the same batch as 0900 and 0900a it's exactly the same as theirs. (Not)
As Sharon Stone once remarked: "Anyone who has seven bucks knows I don't wear underwear."
Anyone who has eyes as Macca has pointed out knows that neither my engine or gearbox are F1 and my chassis contains substantial parts of the remains of 0846.
I will be sure to show the various authors who are writing all of this up Max's email. I'm sure they'll want to include it in their articles. When the articles come out I'll make sure that they're brought to the attention of the proper UK authorities as Max's email, even if it's not true may be admission of the commission of a serious crime.
The other thing that I find very amusing, is, as there's no question as to what David Piper attested to in writing, it's almost as if Max, as a result of his email, wants me to wind up owning 0900's engine and gearbox as well in addition to collecting substantial sums of money from himself. Cool.