99999

I think people have understood what you mean, you repeated it four times...

Anyway, it will be impossible IMO to convince people believing in the existence of only one 99999 F50, they'll always find some reason to explain the pics are not taken the same day, at the same place, with "standard 99999 VIN plates..., and IMO there will never exist any movie showing on the same event side by side 2 F50 wearing the same 99999 VIN plate.

So yes, I am sure several of these 99999 VIN exist (how many ???) but I am also sure not to be ever able to convince someone who believes the contrary, as well nobody will be able to convince me the other way

Olivier

 

I think that you will all agree that the 2007 article which initially brought up the subject at hand caused the car to obtain a lower figure at auction than would be expected. That is to me of no consequence.

But let me put was is of consequence this way: If anyone can come up with another F50 in the US with the VIN...99999 and it is not the one I personally inspected and security marked I will not hesitate to request that it be seized and crushed.

Way back on p.8 or so I laid out the basics about the first three prototipi. That said, 99999 (in 200mph tape disguise) tub P1-3 is the 1994 clienti test ride car as MO2112; the pre-launch photography car as MO2112; the Geneva, Frankfurt, and Tokio show car; the Galleria car until 1998; Swaters until 2007; sold for Garage Francorchamps by BelgoExports to Walters (out of Burbank) on KYV175 at Supercar Sunday 2008 and Quail 2008; sold for the Walters estate by RM Arizona 2011 with Classiche Certificato; and exhibited for all to see at FCA Watkins 2011. Btw, Classic Coach is the hauler not the owner.

Now what about 99999 at Savannah or at Pocono? You guys missed it, eh. Try keeping up.
Just trying for levity.
Ciao
Mr John
p.s. I believe I can explain the '5-speed' issue but I'll let all you F50 owners handle telling what happens when you shift into 6 at say 100kph the first time. Hint: EPA FTP.

 

Ok, fair enough. I however don't think it is that hard to believe that mr Ferrari didn't make a habit out of handing out novelty VIN's. I also don't believe that Sean Connery, or any other celebrity is comparable to Jacques Swaters were the relationship with Ferrari is concerned. I assume Sean Connery would just be another costumer to mr Ferrari, where as Jacques Swaters was a long time personal friend, business associate and Ferrari racer.

That is where you are missing the point. There doesn't need to be a relationship between the costumer and the number. There is no relation between Jacques Swaters and 99999. The only reason 99999 is 'special' because it is the final five digit VIN.

That doesn't say anything about the car, nor does it mean anything even slightly significant. It is just a number. Same as s/n 17073 is 'just' another Daytona Spyder, but just that little bit more interesting than the other Spyders because it is the very last one built. And of course it is very subjective whether or not little facts like these are truly meaningfull. In the end, the market will decide. S/n 17073 did sell for way more then other Spyders seem to fetch, but it had also extremely low milage.

I have lots of papers in and around my desk that have survived for over a decade. IF Mr Ferrari promised 99999 to mr Swaters and that promise was kept some 7 years after Mr Ferrari had died, there had to been someone within the factory that knew about it. And that would mean mr Ferrari had to communicate it internally some how. When or how is only speculation, but it isn't difficult, nor hard to believe to hand out a message like this.

 

No.

The JS 99999 is exactly what it is. It is the first Customer F50. It is the car displayed at the Auto Shows. It's providence is without question as is it's Classiche Certification.

There has never been any question about that. The only questions have been whether or not 99999 was put on any other F50 Prototypes. Marcel Massini clearly reported he saw two 99999's and posters in this thread confirmed that this number was on another F50, some say a styling model, some say prototype, for a while at the Ferrari Galleria put on by Ferrari and later removed.


Whether or not Ferrari put 99999 on another F50 Prototype at some point in no way effects the value of the JS 99999. I own a Ferrari Prototype, Dino Competizione with VIN number 10523. Ferrari also used 10523 on a Road Dino Prototype. The idea that this in anyway effects the value of Dino Competizione is absurd. More importantly for a JS car is the chassis swap Ferrari did to the car JS entered at Le Mans in 1967. If Ferrari is to be believed they swapped 0856's and 0858's chassis plates and restamped their engine numbers before Le Mans 1967 for carnet reasons. This was thought to be material enough to mention before 0858 was unsuccessfully auctioned off at the Factory Auction but frankly it didn't effect my bidding even though it slightly buffed 0858's race record at the expense of 0856's. Ferrari's statement that 0858 was an 350 Can Am not a P4 did but that's a separate issue.

This entire thread is not a knock on the JS 99999 it's a reasoned attempt to determine whether or not Ferrari as MS, MM and other's have stated used the same number on other F50's at any time.

I still think Dave's post was excellent as have been other's.

Limiting the JS 99999 box to a 5 speed for EPA regulations makes sense but I still wonder why the Chassis plaques seem to be in different locations in Andrews photo and Jason's photo's. Was it moved? Are there two plaques?

 

Of course that would be absurd, but anyone, and I mean anyone, could see that your Dino Competizione is a different car than the other car carrying the same VIN number. No argument about the exact identity of the car, no particularly interesting VIN in a numerical sense.

I am not so sure when it comes to making the destinction between a prototype F50 and the first costumer F50, carying 99999.

And of course this particular VIN is of numerical interest because it is the final five digit number (that it comes with the first costumer F50 is just a happy coincidence I think. You couldn't orchestrate it). That claim is hard to substantiate when there are other Ferrari's around carrying the exact same number.

I think there would be people around who do care about these 'factual features' but it is this feature that has become pretty vague. Now you wouldn't just be selling the car with the last five digit VIN. If you'd use this as a selling point, you'd better add some explanation about the possibility of other cars being able to claim the same feature. And then you wouldn't have THE last five digit car, you would have ONE OF THE last five digit cars. That could be an issue, no?

Yes, and that is for me the only reason why this is an interesting debate. I am not in the F50 market. Far from it actually. I have no personal interest in the outcome, other than to educate myself a little bit further in all that concerns Ferrari.

 

Another Faux Pas? How can this be?

 

Think so, too.

 

Okay I'll chime in now. I've been in contact with Jim via PM and we're working on clearing a few things up. It is my Uncle and Cousin who purchased the Swaters F50 from the RM auction a few months ago. It's also pictured in this post that was referenced in this thread: http://ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=336541 . I knew my cousin had it at the Watkins event over Labor day and saw his #70 Challenge car pictured next to it so I knew it was his car. I am not sure why someone there said it was a five speed. It does indeed have a 6 speed tranny and shifts and drives into the sixth gear.

I'll try to provide more info as it becomes available.

 

Key Lock Number????

 

See MS article for relevance.

 

See Post #93 in this thread.

 

If it doesn't turn out to be N° 325, its going to be awkward.

I still keep hearing voices in my sleepless nights that say: "For example, he spotted two F50s in Mugello on the same day, both with s/n 99999. One carried factory plates Prova MO2112 while the second had Prova MO2268." I just cant get that out of my mind, and why spotters who have no vested interest in the cars themselves would care to make that up, or be so inaccurate. But, we live & learn...
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Any clarification is welcome. Providing it provides more answers than questions..

As Enzo Ferrari used to say to journalists: Shoot, but aim correctly.

 

On the one and only 99999:
Door lock 325.
Build Assembly 19445 plate in boot.
MO2112 was always 99999.
MO2268 was 98170 (made from F40) as previously noted on p.8 of this thread.
6th gear is there and always has been - it is an EPA FTP (federal test procedure) gear in order to get 10mpg highway and is useless at (U.S.) highway speeds as the tach drops to 2000+/- rpm and there's nothing there. When you shift into 6th the first time you think you broke something. I had expected all the F50 owners to answer by now.
This is getting really boring.
Mr John Mushman

 

" The 5-Speed Titanic has sunk so quickly that the band didn't get a a chance to play."
Please forgive me, I couldn't resist, as I have been subjected to my own good share of humour in the past few days.

So much then for the "5-speed 99999 prototype" debacle. I nearly believed that a second 99999 had been located and that we were about to see the final proof of its existence shortly.

But nothing is less true : it appeared to be a combination of second hand information and misinterpretation and it happened to be ... the JS car - again !
Just like at least 3 of the "alternative 99999" sightings in MS's article.

A lesson could be learned here : superficial sightings without thorough investigation are simply not valid evidence. There must always be additional info like an assembly number, lock numbers, photos of vin numbers on chassis (not just plaques, like the Galleria car's, which has been glued on and removed), title, registration document and any other relevant documentation/history.

There are still a couple of things to investigate : the MM sighting and the Galleria car.

The latter will be easy to check the day someone opens the hood, and my personal feeling is that there will be no 99999 to be found.

Perhaps some day MM will supply more detailed information about what he saw...or not.

The discussion will go on until these two issues are cleared.

 

After about a year since his final post, Mr Massini showed up in the 288GTO-thread earlier today. Let's hope he finds the time to contribute in this one as well.

 

As it's not it is...

 

How about this:
1. We'll skip - as some of you do automatically - the simple fact that there is and always has been only one F50 99999, and go directly on to...
2. It's really up to you all to ask the experts to turn loose their cohorts of trainspotters and get out there and locate those two - or is it four - other 99999s. Since the experts have already 'confirmed' that these ghosts are out there why don't you all go find them? After all, it has been since the 2007 article (conveniently when the car came up for sale) and you experts can't find even one of the two - or is it four - that this fairy tale is based upon. Then you can ask about tumbler numbers and build plates and trivia that's been hashed out already.
3. Leave the new owners alone to enjoy their 99999 - it has already been out in public more since they bought it than it has since 1995. They bring it out for Ferrari fans (that would be you) and car fans in general to see and hear and touch and smell and inspect and photograph it.
4. Face the fact that it is not the first production F50; or the third; or the fifty-ninth. It is the definitive F50 prototype and as P1-3 one of only three prototipi, the other two being mulettas (yes, of course there were later pre-production cars such as Marconi's made during the production process-development stage but they all have correct VIN numbers as necessary).
5. Accept that as the definitive prototype the car is unique and differs from production F50s in ways which are obvious upon inspection. In another fact, 99999 had concours points deducted because it was unlike any F50 the judges had ever seen.
6. Consider the fact that Mr Walters (who did seem to know what he was doing with cars) chose to ignore the 2007 article and by golly went ahead and bought the 99999 from Garage Francorchamps through BelgoExports despite the expert's confirmation.
7. Consider the fact that the new owners (who do seem to know what they are doing with cars) also ignored the ghost story and bought the car. And then they freshened it up, put new tyres on it and actually drive it!
8. As an aside to Mr Yoda, your uncle and cousin know what they have and that's the only part of this story that's important. And personally, all the best to your uncle.
8. Just sit back and enjoy the ride.
Thank you and good night. (But watch out for ghost tales).
Mr John Mushman

 

I appreciate your opinions here.

And perhaps I am simply not rich enough to have such concerns. But, I can tell you that I have never--EVER--purchased a car with any consideration whatsoever to its serial number. Oh, I do pre-purchase inspections, for sure. In fact, I generally hire consultants. Steve Ahlgrim has done some of the most comprehensive and in-depth due diligence and inspections I have seen (and I highly recommend him).

While I appreciate the fact that 99999--no matter how many there are--is/are special car(s), there is nothing in me that inspires me to have "THAT" car.

As Napolis and Joe have said previously, a car with some racing pedigree is more interesting to me. I admit that others may have a preference for numbers, and that is what makes the world go around.

I continue to watch this thread with a good bit of amusement.

 

I think there's some novelty associated with 99999 but as a true lover of the F50 I wouldn't ever consider that one more valuable than another - I'd simply want the best example I could find and probably not a red one.

>8^)
ER

 

Very good post indeed. However, A good ghost tale can provide some much needed entertainment from time to time.

 

There's also the issue that this car as Classiched is a Euro car. The work done to federalize it is not in compliance with that and while it could be restored if it was it would no longer be US legal. Euro converted cars usually sell for less than US spec. cars in the US.