The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

I think that honor currently goes to this guy:

www.kingkongmovie.com

 

Arium,

Your comment regarding aircraft spares does not apply to antiques, especially unique ones. Jim's 0846 was built up from original P4 spares by David Piper, who purchased them from Mr. Ferrari, all of the 'original' P4s are built up in a similar manner being assembled from the 'pool' of spares, first at the factory, then at Piper's. During their racing career, the factory cars had parts mixed and matched as required, as far as I know none of the cars would qualify for a Heritage Certificate from Ferrari. Once they were decommissioned in '68, and sold off, the logs were no longer kept to aircraft standard.

Now that the cars are valuable again, enthusiasts are trying to sort out the history of the bits. Jim's 0846 has an original P4 engine (If I recall, this issue is now resolved - but I'm not sure); both P3 and P4 transmissions are present; a body built by the original panel beater shortly after the original production run, as a spare; and a chassis which was originally thought to be built to P4 blueprints for David Piper back in the late '60s/early '70s (Jim bought the car from David) - the dispute primarily surrounds the chassis as it does NOT match the P4 blueprints yet seems to match the P3/4 design.

David Piper hasn't said much but from various posts here, he seems to claim that the modifications were done at his request - to his spec in order to fit a P3 engine. Jim has stated that this cannot be the case as the chassis matches the P3 design (an example of which he happens to also own) modified to accept a P4 engine, not visa versa. Additionally, Jim claims that accident repairs corresponding with 0846's known accidents are visible in the chassis.

This is as far as the debate has gotten in the public forum. Whether you believe or not is up to you.

Regards,

Art S.

 

ArtS:

I am in total agreement with Jim's offered information and opinions. It seems to me that Ferrari literally played with a veritable "Lego" or "Meccano" set that they drew parts from to populate their chassis. Naturally there were a great number of spares that were floated through different cars racing in differing series and events and discarded when obsolete and carried over while still servicable. Talk about thrifty. Mom and Pop racing at its best.

Jim has reconstructed a period correct car from those components. We are not talking about a car that won a significant race and was rolled into the paddock and retired thereafter being sold complete to a privateer at a later date as salvage/whatever.

The only item anyone contests has been the chassis in his example. I agree that the similarities to the original are striking and remarkable. But then again the world has seen many van Goughs and Renoirs that have turned out to be not so remarkable either. The question that remains unanswered is that when Ferrari says "it's gone" can they make it come back from the dead? The defacto standard for a cars identity has alway been that itty bitty little tag tacked onto the frame. In this instance it was lost due to being involved in a mishap and the balance of the chassis being tossed in the scrap heap. Needless to say, it was stripped of anything and everything that held any inherent value and was utilized in furtherance of Ferraris racing program.

Problem is, no one can actually positively assert Jims chassis is 0846 without doubt. Perhaps Piper knows but he doesn't seem to want to forward a definitive comment. The body certainly once was (or soon will be), most of the drivetrain and suspension is correct but the one single deciding factor that gives 0846 its unique identity is missing. That's that darn stamped piece of metal tacked onto the portion destroyed.

In most minds this vehicle obviously has considerable value just because of the components it is assembled from. It has some historic value irregardless of a less than stellar racing career. I am just unsure as to how one validates an assertation or assumption that it is what fate said it no longer can be.

Will Ferrari reissue a VIN for it? I cannot conceive of that possibility since that would open a legal can or worms you could never reseal. Open it for one and a lot of other cars will crawl out of the crypt too.

J.G. is a fanatastic caretaker for many wonderful cars. It is fairly obvious from what is on his plate that he is not persuing this for financial gain. I just think we're whipping a dead horsie here.

Steve

 

Steve

While as Nino in his letter to me, after inspecting my car in great detail at the Historic Targa, pointed out 0846 did have a few unfortuneate races, it did however also finish 1oa. at the 24 hours of Daytona which isn't too bad.

Best

 

http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=87454

What is VERY INTERESTING about the caption to that photo of 0846 at the 1966 Targa Florio???

Remember this is 1966 P3 0846. Remember the arguement I had with Doug Nye about Wayne Sparling's statement that the 330 blocks were sometimes run as 3 liter (275's) and that there was a special block that Wayne said could be set up either as a 3 liter or a 4 liter and that on tracks with LONG laps, keep in mind the Targa Florio was a 45 mile lap, they used the block set up as a 3 liter as it got better gas milage and could go extra laps before refuling and that could make the difference?

Still think I misreported what Wayne S. said? Still think Doug was right???

0846 crashed twice at the Targa. Once in 1966 when Bandini flipped it and once in 1967 when Nino hit the curb hard.

The 66 crash/flip twisted the chassis. The 1/2 twist is still very much there and measurable.

The 67 damage and repair that Wayne made and talked about in the 0846 papers, Wayne's statement, Gerald's confirmation of what Wayne said about making the repair and recognizing my chassis as 0846, and a photo of the repair Wayne made are all in the latest version of the 0846 papers.

As an aside much new information has recently come out and will be included in the final version of the 0846 Papers.

Best

 

This is all very interesting.

In 1963 the 250P used the TR/GTO engine.

In 1964 the engine was enlarged to 3.3 litres (also used in the 275LM), and the 330P was built with the 4.0 litre engine; it was generally faster, although a little heavier IIRC (anyone got the exact numbers?), and the 275P only won Le Mans through the bigger-engined cars hitting problems.

Yet in 1965 Ferrari produced the 4-cam engine, the revamp of the 290/315/335S of 1956-57, on both 3.3 litre and 4.0 litre versions. In races where both were used, even at the Nurburgring, the 4.0 was faster.........or was it just down to the driver pairing there? But they only ran the 3.3 litre cars at the Targa Florio - why? Was it fuel economy? Was the 4-cam 3.3 lighter than the 4.0?

(In which case they might have wanted to follow the same path in 1966 and 1967.)

Or did they just think a 3.3 litre was plenty big enough to beat the Porsches?


Paul M

 

It very well could be fuel econ. The Targa Laps were 40+ miles. If they could go more laps before refueling it might have made a difference esp. if it could cut out one pit stop.

Best

 

Note caption: "275 P3"
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

http://www.classicdriver.de/uk/magazine/3700.asp?id=11686
This article indicates the course was 45 miles - and much more trivia - including quotes by Vaccarella.

http://8w.forix.com/vaccarella-bondurant.html
This article is more fully realized as a reflection on the Lotus Climax, Bondurant and Count Giovanni Volpi di Misturi, but the 1965 victory, in a Ferrari 275 P2 is mentioned as in the above article - along with comments about Vaccarella not being a lawyer.
But, I'm giving away too much info about a wonderful article filled with anecdotes. Ah, hell! I can't take it! There's a fire while testing for Targa Florio and a broken arm at the 'ring. Bob drops by the Doctor's office...

http://www.barchetta.cc/english/All.Ferraris/Victories/Victories.1.htm
Here's a concise list of victories - 275 P2 had 3, again, one was at Targa Florio, with Vaccarella-Bandini in 275 P2 - but no mention of a 275 P3.

 

Does anyone have the date when the 4-cam 3.3 and 4 liter engines were actually available for use? I would tend to think they would give slightly better mileage than the 2 cam versions.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_P

250 LM

The 250 P evolved into a saleable mid-engined racer for the public, the 250 LM. Introduced at Paris in November, 1963, the LM was successful for privately-entered racers around the world. About 32 models were built in 1964 and 1965, with all but the first few powered by 3.3 L 320 hp (238 kW) engines, though the name did not change with the increase in displacement. A fully-independent double wishbone suspension was specified with rack and pinion steering and four wheel disc brakes.
[edit]

330 P

The 250 P was stretched in 1964 to accept the 4.0 L 330 engine, becoming the 330 P.
[edit]

330 P2

An entirely new car, the 330 P2, followed in 1965. It was first used by Luigi Chinetti's North American Racing Team (NART) at Daytona that year. It was powered by a 410 hp (305 kW) version of the 330 V12.
[edit]

330 P3

The 1966 330 P3 introduced fuel injection to the Ferrari stable. It also used a P3 (Type 593) transmission that was prone to failure and was replaced by a ZF Friedrichshafen AG transmission when the P3 were converted to 412P's, another Ferrari first that would only last one season when the ZF's were replaced by 603R P4 transmissions in the 412P's.
[edit]

330 P4

1967 saw the ultimate mid-engined 330 P, the 330 P4. With a 3-valve cylinder head added to the P3's fuel injection system, output was up to 450 hp (335 kW). Only four were ever made. Due to its great fame and good looks, more than a hundred P4 replicas of various design have been built since.

The 330 P4 electrified the racing world when three of the four crossed the finish line together (in first, second, and third place) in the 1967 24 Hours of Daytona and became a symbol of victory over arch-enemy Ford GT40. Surprisingly the 330 P4 had poor aerodynamics even in comparison with its rivals, but its sexy looks continue to grab attention.

The original P4 cars are estimated to be worth about US$10 million each. A high-quality P4 replica built with genuine Ferrari engine (e.g. a 400i V12) may command as much as $200,000, but simpler ones (often with Rover engines and Renault drive-trains) may be sold for $50,000.
[edit]

Controversy around chassis no. 0846...

 

`

According to official Ferrari figures the 275P2 (350cv @ 8500)weighed 875kgs, and the 330P2 (410cv @8200) weighed 820kgs.
The official figures put the 330P3 at 720Kgs ! (surely a typo - s/be 820kgs?)
The official figures put the 330P4 at 860Kgs.
But at Le Mans 1966 0844 weighed 981kgs, and at LM 1967 it weighed 997kgs.
In all my years of Ferrari research and reading I have never heard of a 275P3 and would presume that it's merely a typo. 'Sporting Motorist' of 1965 printed that the 1965 Le Mans race was won by a 330LM. I wouldn't believe that one either.
Nathan

 

I have never heard of a 275/P3 as any kind of official designation either, but 275 = 3.3 liters, and there certainly times when P3s ran the 3.3 rather than the 4 liter motors.

I've always wondered why Ferrari used the 412P designation, as they had used the Tipo number 412 back in the late 30s as a designation for the Scuderia Ferrari/Alfa 8c2900A cars with 12c36 4.1 liter motors (depending on the source, between 2 and 4 of these were built)

 

Jim G,

I'm having difficulty visualizing how the same block can be used for multiple displacements without altering the compression ratio using '60s technology. I know how this is done on advanced engine designs. Can you explain or direct me ot an explanation of how it was done then? Also, was this changeover so easy that they would change the engine's displacement rather than dropping in a new engine? To me, it seems easier (and probobly cheaper) to just have two engines available.

Sorry to open this back up Jim, but I'm confused.

Regards,

Art S.

 

I'm a bit confused over the same issue. The bores in the block could have been big enough to use thicker or thinner liners and bigger or smaller pistons, but that would alter the compression ratio, as Art said...

 

Hi Stu,
On what occasions did Ferrari run 3.3l engines in P3s? I've never heard of it.

I presumed the 412P designation means 4litre - 12 cylinder. Same as 1967 312F1 = 3litre - 12 cylinder F1, and 512S/M = 5litre - 12 cylinder.
Nathan

 

The Targa was a long lap/low speed race. Low speed means poor mileage. Wayne Sparling unequivocally stated in front of several witnesses who have confirmed his statements that the P3's sometimes ran as 275's. He stated that there was a special block that could be set up as a 330 or a 275. If you read the factory technical Data sheets, (The ones for the 248 tipo 1967 F1 engine are on the owners site) they state for example that the 248 67 F1 engine was "derived" from the P4 237 engine. Derived is a very interesting word. Wallace and Alberto said that these blocks could be set up as 3 liter or 4 liter motors. The proof Art is that somehow Wallace and Alberto were able to do it. Another interesting point is that the block in my car, which unlike the heads, is not original 0846 but is a NOS spare block and has both 248 and P4 stampings. It is also, by the curved casting rib, and comparative measurement with 0856 externally exactly the same as 0856 yet both 0856's block and the block in my car are externally different than the straight casting rib 1967 F 1 engine block shown in some photo's. This is what leads be to believe that Wayne was right and there was a special block. The following race report does state that 0846 was 4 liter in 1966 but when Bandini set out before his crash/flip from his last refueling stop the Porsche's were refuling as well. Think about Le Mans which following NASCAR's lead has become a restrictor plate race. HP is therefore limited to 600. The car that will likely win next June has found an clever solution. The R10 is a Turbo Diesel. The same 600 HP but 800 FT/LBS of torque and more importantly MORE FUEL MILEAGE, fewer pit stops. Wayne could be wrong. They may have used different engines. While the 4 liter race report could be right I think once again it comes down to physical evidence. 0846 was on the same refueling schedule as the Porsches and Alberto and Wallace were able to build the engine in 0846 up as a 4 liter. I think the caption was right. Finally the description of Bandini's 1966 flip is once again consistent with the 1/2 inch torquing of 0846's chassis that is quite evident and measurable in my car today.


It's not surprising that the majority of retirements were not caused by mechanical flaws, but from accidents. After the finish the pilots said that the track conditions were dradfull, somewhere the track was wet, somewhere completly covered with filth. Bandini who with Vaccarella was driving the only Ferrari 330 P3 was a victim of a misunderstanding, when he was trying to pass a slower driver,- driver in front of him waved with his hand and Bandini thought that was a sign to pass, but infact it was only a sign that he will soon let him through (after some corners ).
Hit from behind as he was terminating to overtake the other driver, Bandini spun and flipped the car. He was able to come out of it, not easily, crashing with punches the plexigas of the car's door. His fear was that the car could catch fire.
This was in some way the crucial event in the race.
At the begining the things didn't go as planned (reasons were explaind at the begining of the article) for the Ferrari. The powerful 330 P3 which after Monza seemed to be competitive, was not particulary suitable for the event, specially because of the demanding track conditions. Vaccarella was driving for the first 3 laps and then gave the car to Bandini who was supposed to drive 4 laps. The P3 was then still competitive but the Porsches were so numerous and they fit the track so well to hope for a win of the 4litre of the two italians.
Targa Florio is known as a difficult race especially for the frequent retirements and accidents it produces. All in all after the numerous retirements in the second half of the race the 4000 could have turned the score on our side. It would have been important Bandini had finished his turn. Infact we all know how fast Vaccarella is on these roads well known to him. He would have given definitely his best for the last 3 remainig laps, that he was supposed to drive. Probably he would have been able to achieve his dream, that is winning two Targas in the row. This is, anyway, a simple speculation.
Actually Porsche won the race fair and squer. It doesn't matter that the winning car was not officially written by Porsche. This has happened before for example at 24 hours of Le mans when the Luigi Chinetti's NART Ferrari 250LM of Rindt-Gregory won the race.

 

Jim,

I try to look up the specs on the 248 block. I'm not questioning your block's originality, I'm just trying to understand how the engine was switched from 3.3 liters to 4.0 liters. I can't see a simple solution and if a total teardown is required, why bother designing in this capability rather than use a second complete engine.

On a separate note, I'll be curious about the results of the turbo diesel race engine. The biggest advantage of a Diesel it that it is fuel throttled vs. air throttled as on an Otto cycle (gasoline) engine. this means that it is much more efficient at part load (idle, cruising, etc.) but the advantages are significantly reduced (possibly eliminated) at wide open throttle, though the increased compression over gasoline is may still overcome the negative aspects of the Diesel layout.

Panoz had a more interesting solution - overcome the restrictor plate by using hybrid-electric. Excellent in theory however, at the time the technology wasn't far enough along and the weight of the batteries killed the effort. This approach might be worth revisiting as battery technology is rapidly improving.

Regards,

Art S.

 

Nathan:

My mistake; I was thinking of P2s not P3s....although the photos does say 275 P3...you know more about Ferraris than I do; my specialty is "etceterinis".......

and yes, 412 would generally mean 4 liter 12 cylinder by typical Ferrari designations, but as Ferrari (well, actually Scuderia Ferrari/Alfa) had already used the 412 designation 30 years earlier I question why they used it again. This is the only time, as far as I can see, when Ferrari used a designation number twice.

 

Stu
There was also a 412MI in 1958 - Ch.0744MI. But if we are being pedantic then I guess that 412, 412MI and the 412P are not quite the same designation.
Nathan

 

Forgot about that one

I am obsessed with finding out more about the pre-war 412 sports cars. Were there 2, 3, or 4 built? Which 8c2900As were used, etc, etc.

FYI, I have also seen the Alfa 12c37 GP cars called Tipo 412...

 

Using the same block and heads, but replacing the liners with larger or smaller diameter ones, you also change pistons. Pistons have a crown that either can be flat, raised, or recessed, and this changes the combustion chamber volume at TDC. Combustion chamber volume TDC, plus swept volume, divided by combustion chamber TDC volume, equals compression ratio.

 

Duh! I never thought about changing the shape of the top of the piston...

 

They were a combination of the 8C 2900A chassis with the 12C37 4492 V12 engine. No superchargers were fitted and only 220 bhp was available. My source "All The Alfa Romeos" published by Editoriale Domus states four were produced.

 

4 engines were produced, only 2 cars are accounted for: the Bonetto and the Daetwyler cars. The chassis was a slightly modified 2900B chassis. The Colombo designed engine reflects the design he has put into the first Colombo designed V12 Ferrari engines.