125 and 159

Yawn.

Your post is absurd. Why would I care if 002 was once 03C? Your statement:

"Sure, when you don’t want to find something, obviously you can watch hours the “002” stamp without findind something."

shows a reckless disregard for the truth. This chassis has been totally stripped and all stampings have been carefully noted and as an aside shown to Ferrari as this work is being done in Modena.

Make our day. Post your documents and proof. Your whining and total failure to post any proof what so ever doesn't impress me.

 

Yes sure, I'm a liar and furthermore, all my posts are absurd, like all the guys which don't agree with you...

 

Unlike your ranting my statements are verifiable fact.

Your statement:

"Sure, when you don’t want to find something, obviously you can watch hours the “002” stamp without findind something."

is once again totally, not true. This is not opinion, it is fact backed up by verifiable photo's, witnesses, and fully documented public record.

Once again why whould I care if 002 was once 03C? Why would Michael or MPC for that matter?

Once again instead of Ranting, make our day, and post the proof and documents you claim to have, that prove your totally publically unproved, undocumented statements.

 

Its a bit irresponsible to make such claims without offering proof.

 

I would also encourage you to post such proof or at a minimum discuss the nature of what constitutes the proof. Is it circumstantial evidence or irrefutable? Is it that there was an 03C built or is it that 03C did directly become 002I?

I do believe that the earliest years of Ferrari remain generally murky because of things the factory may have done to survive, actions to make them appear more prolific than they actually could produce and that they were in extended prototyping mode.

If 03C really did become 002I then instead of upsetting the historical significance of Jim's car I would think it would add further to its provenance.

Jeff

 

I am with the doubters on this....................

Why would anyone hide 002's identity ?.......

And I have proof that Aardy is an alien..............

 

Jeff

You have to keep the "I" separate from "002". "002" is the chassis stamping and "I" is the Typo, listed on the Bill of Sale and the COA.

Cheers

 

@ Cyril

Well, well....

First, 010I v/s 006I.
I had individual correspondence with other people who claim the same. Nobody up to now was able or willing to explain why, and any serious discussion was refused. I'm open...

018I
I agree, some years ago I clearly said this is nonsens. I now have reached the point where I believe in it, although some details are still very misty.

03C
Let's face the facts. You popped up here with the statement "there was also a Ferrari 03C". That's it. Not even a direction was given - so what to think about? A mysterious unknown Ferrari which will pop up in near future totally restored? It seems that we are now slightly further than yesterday, as your postings go into the direction "03C --> 002(C)". Jim wrote it already, if that is really the case, there is absolutely no reason for Jim, or myself, to deny it.
I may accept that there are some reasons not to publish the documents as such, but if you are making such statements I expect at least that you describe the documents and their content.

Your behaviour, sorry to say, is polemic. Only because people are asking for more details, you accuse them calling you a liar. And, as you say, I have my knowledge only from books and websites, frank question - how did you know that?
"Is it a problem of ego for you to know there are documents you don’t own??"
What's that, back to kindergarden?

 

Thank you for the correction.

Jeff

 

Aliens are not those that are believed...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9NJ1ojCl7g&feature=related
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Hi Jim
As we discussed previously we should really call your car 002 I (IIRC), hence no car stamped 002 C.
And, of course, the 002 documents were created when the car was sold. They have no bearing on what it was called before it was sold - whether it was 03C or 002.
I have no axe to grind here - just looking for historical accuracy. As I said before, 002 C is what it is, and what it was.
Nathan

 

What were the documents you saw at Ferrari?

Did they state that 002 was once called or stamped 03C?

Cheers

 

Jim
As I said in an earlier post; I have an email from Ferrari stating that 01C, 02C and 03C were the chassis nos. of the first three cars.
Then Cyril comes along and says he has evidence of 03C. That seems to confirm my email from Ferrari.
From that I presume that 03C became 002 as we know what happened to 01C and 02C.
Nathan

 

We know what some people think happened to 01C and 02C and we also know what some people don't think happened to 01C and 02C.

Waiting on Cyril to post his document so it can be examined in the clear light of Day.

Cheers

 

Didn't know that historical research is that easy...

 

Nor did I...

 

I'm afraid it is not that easy. I would prefer a world where all documents were open to everybody to examine, but as long as we have closed archives (like the one at the factory) where only limited people have access to, it is unfair to demand people who don't have access to show what they have.

The saddest thing in all this is that many valuable documents are in hands of people who don't really understand what these documents hold answers to. I call this a "monkey with a golden key" -paradox.

Best wishes, Kare

 

It isn't, as you well know!
But, any sensible historian has to have an open mind, knowing that new information can come along at any time, and should be considered.
As this is the third time that I have come across this 01C,02C,03C idea, and from 3 different sources, then it is worth considering, not just ridiculing.
Nathan

 

What I am ridiculing is people who claim to have evidence that they then refuse to publish/make public.

Evey scrap of information that I have about any of my cars I've made public.

I've also invited anyone with a serious interest in them to physically inspect them for themselves.

Cyril's statement: "Sure, when you don’t want to find something, obviously you can watch hours the “002” stamp without findind something."

is totally deserving of ridicule in light of the truth of what I've done which has proved beyond the shadow of any doubt that there is NO 03C stamping anywhere on this chassis something MM has also physically inspected and come to the same conclusion before I even owned this car.

Cyril has no answer as to why I would care about whether 002 had once been 03C which makes his statement further deserving of ridicule.

He claims to have a document that proves 002 was once 03C but he refuses to publish it and when challenged to whines like a little girl.

Cheers

 

For good order's sake - there should be a smiley behind the sentence...

 

I don't know the origin of the official informations from Ferrari, but if you have asked the same of Nowak, maybe they replied the same...a changing in the official informations could destroy the credibility of the source, and if the source is Ferrari factory...
MPC

 

No commets to add...
MPC

 

I see these reasons: there are people who spend a lot of time searching for truth...and people who hide them this truth...

I don't ask you to post these documents, maybe they are "secret" or something similar...I ask you only to describe them and their contents.
MPC

 

I hope you are not a liar, because if you haven't these proof, we are doing a ridicoulos discussion...
MPC