002 back to #78

Jim,

Are you going to make a CAD model of the new body first?

 

Guess it depends on how many sections were in the original drawings and how complete the drawing package was. I'm sure that the original drawings left a lot to the imagination of the panel beaters. Since these were all essentially "one offs" nobody really cared if the bodies were the same or how close it came to the prints. It just had to look good and basically fit the intent. I'm sure nobody was out there with templates making sure it was right. If it looked good, it was done. In that sense, you cars original body was a unique piece. While you have the drawings and can make new templates, if you modeled it you would be able to look at the model and compare it with the period photos and see where the body deviated from the original drawings.

Were it me doing this I'd want to try to recreate the original body and not make it like it was designed, but try to be faithful to how it actually turned out. From my experience, it is sometimes hard to "see" what is happening until it is all put together. I would think that a CAD model might make it a lot easier to see where your body differed from the drawings. If you had a good number of sections, the modeling is really going to be easy anyway.

 

Instead of CAD I believe what you are leading to is a digital body scan after the panel beaters are done. I suspect that at best there may only be a couple of cross sections from the original data and everything past that was by eye. So the panel beaters do the new work will be working much the same way and hopefully using all the reference photos to ensure the shape faithfulness - CAD won't solve that.

Jeff

 

CAD could be very helpful if you then made a stereo lithographic representation of the car in a smaller scale before a body is created. I would think the original car varied to some degree from the blueprints but hopefully not much. A real 3D model can save some time and give good insight and perspective to the body makers. From my own experience I find it easier, or more precisely helpful, to make a model more accurate when I have a real 3D reference to work off of along with pictures and blueprints. Hopefully Jim has many period photo's of the car but sometimes photo's can trick the eye as to shape due to the two dimensional nature of a photograph. But then again the CAD image will only be as good as the information entered into the program and could possibly create an inaccurate shape as well. It should just be considered another tool.

Did Ferrari ever use small scale models first before they created the real cars? I know some of the American car companies did.

I am looking forward to seeing this car done correctly. I'm sure it will come out really nice given all the experience Jim has with Ferraris, restorations and cars in general. Good research will pay off as it has with his other cars.

Its a very interesting car. Good luck Jim.

 

+1

I don't think that there was any doubt that it will be done right. More the question was as to the how rather than the end result.

 

Sorry, don't have the equipment to post. Probably just as well as I am sure I have pics that shouldn't be posted. If you wish you can e-mail me at [email protected] with an address and I can send you copies. tongascrew

 

Why Jim are we doing this? .

I thought you believed in continuous history and thus this car is now what "it is". I thus have to assume the changes you need to make a very minor otherwise we are getting rid of parts that make up that continous history for a brand new part that means nothing ... or are we getting rid of modern mistakes?

Best
Pete

 

Looking good! Are you going to keep that great MM nose (at least I think it was) that you made earlier? I guess it doesn't matter, but I thought it was more visually appealing than the slats.

 

Jim,

I can't even tell you how much I enjoy reading threads about some of your wonderful cars. It is just fantastic what you have done, and continue to do with these amazing cars, and I just wanted to say thank you for sharing with us.

 

I like both types myself, but considering your car's order in the Grand Scheme, the earliest nose is more appropriate.

Now then, about this Museum, is it in NY, and will it be open to the "public" (me) during "business hours" (you)? I had hoped to get a better look at Meadowbrook, but that didn't work out, besides, 002C wasn't there.

 

...been working on this one for some time now Jim.

I suspect you've finished with the transimission some time ago?



_J

 

Where did this car race as °20? Can we see more pics from the °78 days?

 

Was not here for some weeks, heavily engaged by my business. Stan used #004C as model for #002's body, both had been very similar, and despite 004's body when found in the 60's was rather dented it was still the original one (except the nose cone).

Generally I appreciate Jim's effort, however, Stan's body recreation was made under similar conditions as the 1947 version - fast and cheap. The new body will be more correct concerning shape and dimensions, but I'm afraid it will be a perfect piece of craftmanship, much more perfect than the period work. The early Ferraris had been no perfect cars, they were crude and rough, built for racing, not for concours. I sincerely hope that 002 is not loosing her soul....

 

I've not seen any evidence of this problem with any of Jim's restorations ...

Pete

 

Jim,

Are you referring to type of paint chemistry, color or something else?

Jeff

 

Hand paint?

Pete