The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

Yes, and the greater obsession to "have" to know

 

I fully agree. Especially when alcohol is involved on a Saturday night...

 

Deal?

 

Apart from the discussion about how a wishbone does or does not transfer energy I think this is quite an important message from David thru Nathan - or am I missing something?

This is something I've never understood about the whole 0846 debate - why didn't Jim get together with David and just simply ask David what he knows?

So far Jim has countered a lot of the naysayer's opinions but this one is a strong vote against Jim's theory. I'm not qualified in any way to be a naysayer nor a Glickophant ( I only have a degree in static physics) but I follow this debate with great interest.

Ciao, Peter

 

I think Mr. Piper cannot participate because then he would have to admit publicly that he had three chassis made, when only one was authorized.

Of course, it might be in his interest to admit that 003 was really made from the remains of 0846. Then, it wouldn't have been an additional chassis, would it?

 

If Piper in fact made more than one chassis, which is believed to be the case, he didn't tell the truth to Ferrari. What makes anyone think he would tell the truth now?

 

Everyone

Re read pages 63-79 very carefully. Note the forward engine mounts on my chassis and the triangulation of the chassis tubes at that point (P3 Chassis). Compare that with the forward chassis engine mount and the position and triangulation of that chassis forward engine mount at that point in chassis where it is attached to the P3 engine of 0844 (P3 chassis). Look at the forward chassis engine mount and the triangulation of the chassis tubes at that point and the configuration of those tubes on chassis 0856 where it is attached to it's P4 engine (P4 Chassis). Look at the rear engine mount triangulation of my chassis (P3 Chassis). Look at the rear engine mount triangulation of 0900 and 0900a (Built to P4 Chassis Blueprints). Compare with 0856's Rear Engine Mount triangulation (P4 Chassis).

OF COURSE 0003/0846 can be fitted with either a P3 or a P4 engine. That is the ENTIRE POINT. Once again this "Bombshell" proves my point. What you CANNOT DO is fit a P3 engine into a P4 chassis without building a triangle that REACHES BACK to the P3 engine's, engine mount from the point of triangulation of THE P4 forward chassis engine mount. IF YOU TOOK A P4 CHASSIS AND REACHED FORWARD FROM THE TRIANGULATED FORWARD CHASSIS ENGINE MOUNT, AS DAVID REACHED FORWARD FROM THE TRIANGULATED FORWARD CHASSIS ENGINE MOUNT OF MY CHASSIS WHEN HE FIT A P4 ENGINE INTO MY CHASSIS, IT WOULD ONLY WORK IF YOU STARTED WITH A P3 CHASSIS.

Wayne A. has responded re: Wayne S's statements and unlike anonymous hearsay Gerald, in writing, confirms exactly what Wayne S. said in front of several witnesses, who by the way, all have the exact same recollection as Gerald as to what Wayne S. said.

I stand by the Physics I've posited. I welcome anyone to build a model and test it as others have and also welcome, as I've said many times, anyone to inspect my chassis for themselves. Which is of course why 0846 is in Italy at the present time. It is being inspected.

 

I'm not trying to knock Piper. It's mainly that I feel Jim has been totally open about what is going on, and Piper hasn't really said much about anything. There has to a a reason for that. I have no idea what he actually did or did not tell Ferrari.

 

Nathan

I really must thank you and I am being totally serious. You have proved conclusively, once and for all that David is wrong about the chassis that he sold me. This is very big. I assume that your statement is based on your visit with David and what he told you:

"The chassis was built to P4 plans but modified by David Piper to fit a P3 engine. (See photo which shows 003 fitted with a P3 engine, which it had for years.)"

As I know, and can prove, that I did not counterfeit a P3 Chassis the FAT LADY HAS SUNG.

I think you have also proven that you are in search of the truth by proving something that is contrary to what you think it proves.

David stated in writing twice, confirmed to Max and just now as reported by you CONFIRMED that:
"The chassis was built to P4 plans but modified by David Piper to fit a P3 engine."

The chassis David sold me, without realizing just how unique and special it was, WAS BUILT TO P3 PLANS AND MODIFIED, ONCE BY FERRARI S.p.A. to fit a P4 engine and once by David Piper to re install a P3 engine and once again at a later time, by David Piper by adding a FORWARD REACHING TRI ANGLE, NOT PART OF THE CHASSIS, TO RE INSTALLED A P4 ENGINE IN WHAT AGAINST ALL ODDS IS 80+% OF THE REMAINS OF P3/P4 0846'S CHASSIS.

What I assumed would have happened, that the next "Bombshell" would have been David suddenly remembering (By reverse engineering my research) that: "Oh one of the three chassis I built was built to P3 plans, um... because...) but David has not done that. He has spoken what he believes to be true but WHICH IS WRONG. It is EXACTLY the same thing he said twice in writing, to Max, and now to you:

"The chassis was built to P4 plans but modified by David Piper to fit a P3 engine."

It's amazing and quite wonderful that even today David and others do not understand that the physical configuration of my chassis absolutely proves that this is not true.

0003/0846 IS NOT BUILT TO P4 PLANS. That is, was, and remains fact.

 

Mr Piper is obviously not talking about the chassis in Jim's P4 when he refers to this particular chassis.

A P3-chassis modified to P4 specifications is quite different from a P4-chassis, modified to fit a P3-engine. Almost the exact opposite in fact.

So, when will mr Piper start talking about the chassis in Jim's car?

 

I can only assume that the answer to that question is never.

 

Jim,

Who is inspecting it? Is the why to put this debate to bed once and for all or is it to sort out some of the details on the restoration? I seem to recall you had mentioned in a thread last year (?) after Monterey that some of the details like little odd and ends like lights and stuff may have been off.

Matt

disclaimer
***not wanting to enter the debate***
***i did not want to read pages and pages***
***This is for Jim ONLY and he can reply if he wants via PM or post ***
***the word RESTORATION was used in a since that Jim had the car restored and not to imply that is was not in any shape, way or form a real car or that is may/may not be a recreation***

 

That's the point. Over many years David has very specifically stated exactly what he believes the chassis that's in my car to be. Twice in writing. Once to Max and once to Nathan. Every time he's said the same thing. His story about 0003/0846 has never changed:

"The chassis was built to P4 plans but modified by David Piper to fit a P3 engine."


He wasn't lying on the Bill of Sale. He wasn't lying on the COO. His statements as to what the chassis he eventually sold me is have been consistent for 18 years. They've remained exactly the same. Nathan has confirmed this and proven my point.

David has consistently said what he believes to be true. The chassis that he sold me proves he's wrong. In the end that's what it comes down to.
Pretty cool.

 

Where's horsefly when you need 'em to question whether 80% of anything adds up to a darn thing?

80% of the frame + 20% of the rest = 100% heart and soul of a CHAMPION

 

Another great thing is the photo Nathan posted of 0003/0846 when David owned her and had re installed a P3 motor in her. THE P3 MOTOR'S ENGINE MOTOR MOUNT FITS RIGHT INTO THE P3 CHASSIS ENGINE MOTOR MOUNT OF 0003/0846 WHICH IS NOT BUILT TO P4 PLANS AT THE PROPER P3 TRIANGULATED CHASSIS ENGINE MOUNT EXACTLY AS IT DOES ON P3 0844's CHASSIS. (Page 68) WITHOUT ANY MODIFICATION BECAUSE DAVID IS WRONG AND 0003/0846 IS NOT BUILT TO P4 PLANS.

The point of mating of the P3 engine motor mount and the P3 chassis engine motor mount can be seen just above and behind the top of the upright. The triangulation of the tubes can be seen from that point as they stretch back to the front engine bulkhead. (See page 68 for comparison)

Comparing Nathan's Photo with photo's of my chassis AFTER I BOUGHT IT FROM DAVID (Pages 66 and 69) PROVES THAT I DID NOT COUNTERFIT 0003/0846'S P3 NOT BUILT TO P4 PLANS CHASSIS AND THAT THE CHASSIS THAT IS IN MY CAR IS THE SAME AS WHEN I BOUGHT IT FROM DAVID: P3 NOT BUILT TO P4 PLANS.

The Fat Lady has sung on that possibility as well.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

holy crap............... this is big news............. wow , congrats Mr G.

 

Jim,

Ignoring the engine part of #003/0846 and water pipe modification are there other differences to the cars chassis that 100% conclude that it was never a P4 chassis?

From my memory the centre section is different between a P4 and P3 ... and thus this is conclusive proof (?).

We also know that Piper, at one stage, claimed that he had a P3 chassis built with the improved centre section from a P4 ... referencing the auction catalogue comments. What he really meant is that he converted a P4 chassis to allow the installation of a P3 engine (and bodywork, etc.) ... I guess?.

Now returning to Pipers latest comments that he (or his team) modified #003 to accept a P3 engine. Did Piper at any time also own a P3?. I know he owns (or owned) a P2 and a P412 (ie. carbed customer P4).

Thus remembering that a Ferrari prototype chassis is nothing but a few simple tubes, could his team have cut up a P4 chassis enough and then remade enough of it so that it DID infact resemble a P3 chassis? ... and then replicated (ie. why reinvent the wheel ... not for illegal or trickery reasons) the P3/4 modifications to enable him to swap engines about.

I am trying to understand if his team cut the chassis right back say to the rear bulkhead and then rebuilt it as a P3 whether this is possible?? or whether the differences between a P3 and P4 chassis are so numerous that you really would have to have started with a P3 chassis to end up with your #003/0846 chassis?.

Pete

 

Q:
Ignoring the engine part of #003/0846 and water pipe modification are there other differences to the cars chassis that 100% conclude that it was never a P4 chassis?

A:
Yes. Many. Look at pages 8, 16, 20, 63-79. The differences between a P3 chassis and a P4 chassis are subtle but substantial. The triangulation is different. The bulkheads are different. Shock mounts are different. The wheelbase is different. A P3 Chassis is longer.

Q:
From my memory the centre section is different between a P4 and P3 ... and thus this is conclusive proof (?).

A:
Among many other subtle but very real differences. (See my last answer.)

Q:
We also know that Piper, at one stage, claimed that he had a P3 chassis built with the improved centre section from a P4 ... referencing the auction catalogue comments.

A:
Not true. The auction catalogue NEVER referred to the chassis as P3. (page 113): "The chassis frame has again been manufactured to original form and all the aluminum work ON THE FRAME'S P4-STYLE SIMI-MONOCOQUE CENTER SECTION HAS BEEN EXECUTED BY MARIO ALLEGRETTI, FORMER PARTNER OF PIERO DROGO. The work executed by Allegretti was the aluminum body panels that were riveted onto the "The Frame's P4..."
THE FRAME BY PIPER'S OWN WORDS AS RECENTLY AS NATHAN'S LAST VISIT WITH DAVID HAS ALWAYS BEEN REFERRED TO BY DAVID AS BEING BUILT TO P4 PLANS/BLUEPRINTS THAT WERE GIVEN TO HIM BY ENZO FERRARI. (Page 14) DAVID'S DISCRIPTION OF THE FRAME WAS, IS, AND REMAINS:

"The chassis was built to P4 plans"

Q:
What he really meant is that he converted a P4 chassis to allow the installation of a P3 engine (and bodywork, etc.) ... I guess??

A:
That is exactly what Nathan reported David said and meant:
"The chassis was built to P4 plans but modified by David Piper to fit a P3 engine."

BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT HAPPENED. THE EXACT OPPOSITE HAPPENED. DAVID REMAINS WRONG ABOUT: "The chassis was built to P4 plans" THE CHASSIS WAS BUILT TO P3 PLANS AS NATHAN'S PHOTO AND THE PHOTO'S OF 0844'S P3 FRAME AND P3 ENGINE (Pages 67&68) CLEARELY SHOW. DAVID REINSTALLED A P3 MOTOR INTO A P3 FRAME WHICH SLIPPED RIGHT IN AS NATHAN'S PHOTO SHOWS AND LATER PUT A P4 ENGINE INTO 0003/0846'S P3 FRAME EXACTLY AS FERRARI S.p.A HAD DONE IN DECEMBER 1966 AND THE PHOTOS ON PAGE 66,74,75 AND 76 CLEARELY SHOW.

Q:
Now returning to Pipers latest comments that he (or his team) modified #003 to accept a P3 engine. Did Piper at any time also own a P3?. I know he owns (or owned) a P2 and a P412 (ie. carbed customer P4).

Thus remembering that a Ferrari prototype chassis is nothing but a few simple tubes, could his team have cut up a P4 chassis enough and then remade enough of it so that it DID infact resemble a P3 chassis? ... and then replicated (ie. why reinvent the wheel ... not for illegal or trickery reasons) the P3/4 modifications to enable him to swap engines about.

I am trying to understand if his team cut the chassis right back say to the rear bulkhead and then rebuilt it as a P3 whether this is possible?? or whether the differences between a P3 and P4 chassis are so numerous that you really would have to have started with a P3 chassis to end up with your #003/0846 chassis?.

A:
Yes, the differences between a P3 and P4 chassis are so numerous that you really would have to have started with a P3 chassis to end up with my P3 #003/0846 chassis.

Q:
I am trying to understand if his team cut the chassis right back say to the rear bulkhead and then rebuilt it as a P3 whether this is possible??

A:
No. The main reason being that to fit a P3 engine into a P4 chassis all one would have to do is reverse, reach back instead of forward with the simple unboltable triangle shown on page 66 which is near label "B". NOTHING ELSE WOULD BE NEEDED. IN A P3 CHASSIS THE CHASSIS ENGINE MOUNT IS AT THE POINT WHERE THE CHASSIS TUBES TRIANGULATE TO FIT A P3 ENGINE,ENGINE MOUNT. (PAGE 68)

IN A P4 CHASSIS THE CHASSIS ENGINE MOUNT IS AT THE POINT WHERE THE CHASSIS TUBES TRIANGULATE TO FIT A P4 ENGINE, ENGINE MOUNT. (PAGE 65)

ALL YOU NEED TO SWAP ENGINES IS THE UNBOLTABLE TRIANGLE SHOWN ON PAGE 66 NEAR LABEL "B".

A P3 ENGINE FITS INTO A P3 CHASSIS WITHOUT THE UNBOLTABLE TRIANGLE NEEDED TO REACH FORWARD TO FIT A P4 ENGINE INTO A P3 CHASSIS.

A P4 ENGINE FITS INTO A P4 CHASSIS WITHOUT THE UNBOLTABLE TRIANGLE NEEDED TO REACH BACK TO FIT A P3 ENGINE INTO A P4 CHASSIS WHICH IS NOT WHAT DAVID DID AS NATHAN'S PHOTO CLEARLY SHOWS. DAVID FIT A P3 ENGINE PERFECTLY INTO 0003/0846 AT THE PROPER POINT OF TRIANGULATION BECAUSE 0003/0846 IS NOT MADE TO P4 PLANS BUT IS A P3 CHASSIS. TO FIT A P4 ENGINE INTO A P3 CHASSIS LIKE 0003/0846'S P3 CHASSIS YOU DO NEED A SMALL UNBOLTABLE TRIANGLE TO REACH FORWARD AS DAVID DID WHEN HE FIT A P4 ENGINE INTO 0003/0846 AND AS FERRARI DID IN DECEMBER 1966.

 

My neighbor across the hall from me used to work for Robert Rauschenberg. He used to stick stuff on the canvases in the day when Rauschenberg was doing paintings with stuff stuck on the canvases. Though my neighbor was also an artist, he was put off with the idea that it was he and not Rauschenberg who was the one determining where the things should be stuck. Of course, at the end of the day it really didn't matter who stuck what where because Rauschenberg signed it and it was sold as a Rauschenberg.

I asked a bunch of people in the Ferrari business at the events last week about the whole 0846 thing. And it seemed to me that what I was hearing was, Jim doesn't have 846 because he doesn't have 846. It's irrelevant whether he has some chassis tubes raced by Ferrari or a new body built for him, or this gear box, etc.

A GTO owner told me he would go by Chinetti's for parts back in the '60's and they would be in the back totally taking apart three cars that had just come back from the races and making one good one. All natural and unnatural orders have their rules. I guess as someone said there are plenty of non original cars out there that are still considered Ferrari's. Yours doesn't seem to be one of those.

It isn't about rationality or parts. I do enjoy the Quixotian aspects of the debate though.

Yale

 

Thanks Jim ... while I knew most of the answers already I just wanted to get my facts (er, head) straight .

And that for many is how it is, and why many cars have become genuine while conversely the collection of components that made that histroy are considered bitsa's. People who limit their thinking like this should stick to road cars

Pete
ps: Infact I wish Ferrari competition cars did not even have chassis tags just model tags, that would simply make ALL old Ferrari race cars simply old Ferrari race cars ... and the collection of said cars would rightly have been responsible for creating the heritege.

Thus they would all be viewed as equals of particular model tyres.

After all we ALL know for a fact that the race mechanics swapped parts around as they saw fit to keep them racing ... and yet some still think that their little Ferrari race car somehow never had this happen. That is plain and simply BS in my book

 

Yale
It's funny you should mention Mr Chinetti. I remember standing with him at the New York Auto Show many years ago. He had a Black Daytona on the stand that he was asking 15K for and a 512S which he was asking about 25K for. Mr Chinetti told Coco to let me test drive the Daytona so after the show we set off through Central Park. I still remember the tail going out and correcting it with a touch of opposite lock. The wiper had scratched the windshield and the scratch split the sunlight into prismatic color. I can still see and feel that drive.
Mr. Chinetti really wanted me to buy the 512S and take it to Le Mans. "24 hours isn't much use at all." He told me. "You can drive for a few hours."
I told him I didn't think that was such a good idea and asked him about buying a P4. After a while we came around to talking about 0846. I told him I thought it had been destroyed. He smiled for a bit and told me something I didn't understand until recently: "Sta amuchata ma siviri."
BTW I wasn't the only person he told that too.

Pete
I think you and Yale are right about race cars. They are a breed unto themselves. Anyone who has rebuilt a Can Am motor at 3 in the morning with parts scavenged from the car they drove up to the track in on a bed in the motel room understands that.

Wayne
What someone wishes to label something as is personal and those who feel a certain way were advised, years ago, that they should stop reading the 0846 Papers after reading the first two paragraphs of page 63.

As you've put it: "These are the folks that are more concerned with what Jim's car is labeled than discovering what happened to 0846 after Le Mans, 1967."

 

Nathan,

If I understand your post correctly, Mr. Piper modified 003 (a P4 chassis built to P4 blueprints) to accept a P3 engine. In the picture, as Mr. Glickenhaus commented, the triangulation appears perfect (could you send me a higher resolution version of this picture as it's difficult to see 1.2cm size details with the resolution you are allowed on F-chat). Are you stating that the modifications that Mr. Piper made match the tube alterations done on 0846 by the factory? To me, it seems unlikely that if Mr. Piper altered a P4 to accept a P3 engine that he would end up with modifications identical to those of 0846.

My company is just completing the development of an advanced ignition system for engines and I've noticed many similarities between our development group and Ferrari's racing department. I can give you two comments: 1. Prototype level modifications are done quickly and crudely (read racecar) while production stuff has a much higher level of detail. 2. The design path from A to B is usually not the same as from B to A (unless all the blueprints are available).

Regarding the issue of physics (mechanics) and frame damage: if a link is broken it will no longer transfer force. You are correct in this statement. However, the other people commenting are also correct as if the force continues being applied; a new link will form allowing the force to transfer. If the impact was significant enough to snap the A arm and break the wheel, it is likely that the broken bits got wedged up into the frame and continued transmitting force. It is very possible that the force was transmitted as Jim says. However, I doubt that there is a simple way of modeling it (too many unknown variables).

Thank you for posting your posts and thoughts. New material helps to keep the conversations from going around in circles.

Sincerely,

Art S.

 

Interesting article I stumbled across in a 1967 car magazine.

[edit] this one's cool too!

http://141.151.68.66/pages/glickenhaus/Daytona_Continental_R&TLR.pdf

I'm only going to leave the link up for a couple of days, so if interested, grab it now.

DM
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I'm always around, reading what is posted here and "elsewhere". I'm sure this great debate will end up turning really nasty after a while. Things like, "0846 is NOT dead because Chinetti said so with a wink and a nod "many years ago", yet "0846 IS dead because Piper said so last week". Why are Chinetti's words "many years ago" worth more that Piper's words last week or last month?

If I sat in my easy chair and wrote a book about ground combat in the Vietnamese jungle in 1968, would you take my word over a Green Beret soldier who was actually THERE when it happened? Theories are just theories, but I will always bet my money on the man who was there and not some Monday morning quarterbacks who expound a theory that conveniently ignores THIRTY YEARS OF MISSING PROVENANCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Next thing that will turn up is an 8mm home movie conveniently showing the chassis of 0846 being transported out of the Modena junkyard in a truck labeled "PROVENANCE STORAGE COMPANY, London, England".