001S | Page 5 | FerrariChat

001S

Discussion in 'Vintage (thru 365 GTC4)' started by stratos, Aug 24, 2006.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

  1. tongascrew

    tongascrew F1 Rookie

    Jan 3, 2006
    2,989
    tewksbury
    Full Name:
    george burgess
     
  2. tongascrew

    tongascrew F1 Rookie

    Jan 3, 2006
    2,989
    tewksbury
    Full Name:
    george burgess
    Sorry, typo. this should be 001S. tongascrew
     
  3. dretceterini

    dretceterini F1 Veteran

    Apr 28, 2004
    7,289
    Etceterini Land
    Full Name:
    Dr.Stuart Schaller
    I have looked at the 3 photos of what is supposed to be 001S, and there are a LOT of detail differences. It could be that this is what it is at 3 different dates, but it is also possible that they could be 3 different cars!
     
  4. tongascrew

    tongascrew F1 Rookie

    Jan 3, 2006
    2,989
    tewksbury
    Full Name:
    george burgess
    #58 is not 001S. 001S had disc wheels and the body of #58 particularly at the front is very different. Of course we don't have much to go on after 1951. If #58 can be shown to be 001S this would be most interesting. just one man's opinion tongascrew
     
  5. 246tasman

    246tasman Formula 3

    Jun 21, 2007
    1,441
    UK
    Full Name:
    Will Tomkins
    Sorry, but it doesn't make sense to make the first statement and then make the second
     
  6. dretceterini

    dretceterini F1 Veteran

    Apr 28, 2004
    7,289
    Etceterini Land
    Full Name:
    Dr.Stuart Schaller
    I tend to agree with you, but am wondering what do you think the car with #58 is?
     
  7. tongascrew

    tongascrew F1 Rookie

    Jan 3, 2006
    2,989
    tewksbury
    Full Name:
    george burgess
    I don't always make a lot of sense but if you want to find out something,just one man's opinion tongascrew asking questions is a good place to start.
     
  8. tongascrew

    tongascrew F1 Rookie

    Jan 3, 2006
    2,989
    tewksbury
    Full Name:
    george burgess
    I have no idea. Maybe it's 1C/10S. Wouldn't that be something!! just one man's opinion tongascrew
     
  9. ArtS

    ArtS F1 Veteran
    Owner Silver Subscribed

    Nov 11, 2003
    8,889
    Central NJ
    If we discount Bill Noon's observations (Bill, not meant as an insult, but I am having difficulty alligning your comments with the pictures shown), the pitcures of 10S tend to indicate the chassis is early enough and of the correct style. Thus, to me the chassis should be 01C, 02C or 001S.

    As there are no '2's on the chassis stampings and assuming at least one of the stampings is original, 02C seems unlikely.

    If it is assumed that original Ferrari factory documents exist that indicate that 01C became 010I (note, this is unconfirmed hearsay as far as I can tell) this leaves 001S.

    As stated in the other thread, to me, the easiest explanation is if the chassis is 001S. By the way, as 002C turned out to be 002, or 002I, might 001S be 01S? If 001S was originally 01S, a simple reversal of the order in which the die stamps were used explains the 10S vs. 01S.

    Just my two cents.

    Regards,

    Art S.
     
  10. Napolis

    Napolis Three Time F1 World Champ
    Honorary Owner

    Oct 23, 2002
    32,118
    Full Name:
    Jim Glickenhaus
    #110 Napolis, Dec 1, 2009
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2009
    Art

    This is not 001S. It's 1/10S which aren't Ferrari numbers period.

    If 001S's chassis still exists, and there is NO evidence that it still does, it would have evidence of massive accident damage repair which 1/10S clearly does not.
     
  11. ArtS

    ArtS F1 Veteran
    Owner Silver Subscribed

    Nov 11, 2003
    8,889
    Central NJ
    Jim,

    To me this is a fun puzzle to distract me from my work. I understand that the stamped numbers don't work. I'm trying to work with what is presented; the chassis is very similar to yours. In my opinion, it is too similar to be simply brushed aside.

    regarding the accident in '51, I must have forgotten, I though it flipped. Can you or anyone else post a post-accident picture so that we can deduce the damage the accident inflicted on the chassis.

    Finally, as you may be familiar, scrapped does not always mean destroyed ;) :D . Especially in post war Italy!

    Warm Regards,

    Art S.
     
  12. PSk

    PSk F1 World Champ

    Nov 20, 2002
    17,673
    Tauranga, NZ
    Full Name:
    Pete
    It would also depend on who and how the chassis (if fixing was required) was fixed ... maybe it was fixed so well that you could not tell?? Unlikely yes, but not impossible.

    Pete
     
  13. 246tasman

    246tasman Formula 3

    Jun 21, 2007
    1,441
    UK
    Full Name:
    Will Tomkins
    Imagine for a moment (if it's not too painful) that 1/1C/10S is the first chassis.

    Why not stamp the first chassis that you build up as number '1'? Saying that '1' isn't a Ferrari chassis number makes sense when the series is already underway, but I can imagine the idea of using the 'C' & 'S' could have started with the second car. Who would bother to get access to the front crossmember to go back and restamp the first car, and who would remember that the first one wasn't restamped?
     
  14. f308jack

    f308jack F1 Rookie

    Jun 7, 2007
    4,300
    Cape Town, South Afr
    Full Name:
    Jack Verschuur


    That theory could hold water if the first 2 chassis ( the 2 identical chassis that were deemed too heavy or am I confusing the matters?) were not delivered at the same time by Gilco. I'd imagine that the other chassis would have simply be stamped '2' if they were delivered simultaneously.
     
  15. 246tasman

    246tasman Formula 3

    Jun 21, 2007
    1,441
    UK
    Full Name:
    Will Tomkins
    Lots of if's & maybe's I agree...
     
  16. Napolis

    Napolis Three Time F1 World Champ
    Honorary Owner

    Oct 23, 2002
    32,118
    Full Name:
    Jim Glickenhaus
    Anyone have crash photo's of 001S or any information about Post crash at all?

    Art

    Race records and Ferrari CO's recorded chassis numbers and as far as I know none recorded 1 or 10S.

    Best
     
  17. CollectorMorry

    CollectorMorry Formula 3

    Nov 5, 2003
    2,015
    Toronto, ON, Canada
    Full Name:
    Morry Barmak
  18. tongascrew

    tongascrew F1 Rookie

    Jan 3, 2006
    2,989
    tewksbury
    Full Name:
    george burgess
    Off subject but that is my theory of where 1C/10S came from. just one man's opinion
     
  19. tongascrew

    tongascrew F1 Rookie

    Jan 3, 2006
    2,989
    tewksbury
    Full Name:
    george burgess
    Off subject but that is my theory of where 1C/10S came from. just one man's opinion tongascrew
     
  20. Napolis

    Napolis Three Time F1 World Champ
    Honorary Owner

    Oct 23, 2002
    32,118
    Full Name:
    Jim Glickenhaus
    Very unlikely as in the exact spot where the chassis should be stamped 001S it's clearly not.

    Aren't the WB's wrong as well?
     
  21. richardowen

    richardowen Formula Junior

    Apr 2, 2004
    841
    Montreal, Canada
  22. 246tasman

    246tasman Formula 3

    Jun 21, 2007
    1,441
    UK
    Full Name:
    Will Tomkins
  23. willy.henderickx

    willy.henderickx Formula Junior

    Mar 3, 2005
    269
    If after the accident a replacement chassis was used instead of being repaired. As I quoted in the other thread, replacement chassis are not always stamped when sold.Salvaged parts such as steering box, engine, transaxle, gear box and maybe suspension parts are fitted to the new chassis.

    To the best of my knowledge, under Italian law, we have now a new car which, theoretically, should not reuse the original number.

    I just checked in my most recent books (Das grosse Ferrari Handbuch and Handbuch der Ferrarie Seriennumern) but to no avail. There are a lot of strange numbers outside the well known range quoted (For cars subcontracted and specials), but nothing for 1 or 10S.

    Let's try harder.

    Period newsprint and magazines might help.

    Willy
     
  24. ArtS

    ArtS F1 Veteran
    Owner Silver Subscribed

    Nov 11, 2003
    8,889
    Central NJ
    #124 ArtS, Dec 8, 2009
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2009
    Willy,

    We are talking about the first few cars. There was no 'factory' per se; there was a shop and a foundry. The chassis were purchased as needed and were continuously improved upon. There were no replacement chassis available (assuming the first two 'heavy' chassis were accepted and used). If something was bent, it was straightened and sold as new.

    Once Ferrari got going, a 'replacement chassis' might make sense, but not the very early stuff.


    Jim,

    10S/1C/1 has incorrect WB according to Bill Noon and correct WB according to the owner's son.

    I understand that 10S is not a number, nor is 1. However, if someone accidently reversed the order of the stamps, 01S could have been stamped 10S whereas 1 would be the working number during the build (this only works if 001S may have been referred to as 01S).

    I guess the reason this makes sense to me is that some of our developmental igniter prototypes get 'recycled', including the sections with the identification stamps (internal use). Until we became very firm on the numbering, there was consistency in the numbering system and numbering errors occurred. I would not be surprised if similar things occurred with the first few prototype cars (all of these initial cars, including 002 were prototypes!).

    Thus, for me, if the wheelbase and style of the chassis of 1C/10S/1 matches your car, there is a reasonable chance that the car is 001S. If the WB is off, all bets are off.

    Regards,

    Art S.
     
  25. PSk

    PSk F1 World Champ

    Nov 20, 2002
    17,673
    Tauranga, NZ
    Full Name:
    Pete
    Can't agree with this. A new chassis could very easily just been made. We cannot assume the old was fixed just because we have this image of the Scuderia Ferrari workshop being small and crude.

    We have to remember that Enzo used to race and prepare Alfa Romeo works cars (including enlarging engines and probably making their own to Jano designs to attempt to remain competitive. Also the Alfa Romeo 158 was designed by Columbo in Enzo's facilities I believe), he also made a fortune during the war manufacturing machine tools, etc., thus I believe (and this is also why Ferrari became a strong manufacturer, unlike Maserati) his factory was well setup with the necessary tooling. All accounts over the years by people that have visited the factory have confirmed this in the books I've read.
    Pete
     

Share This Page