The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

Found some more pics. First another pic from 1966, then to small ones from 1967.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

See for more old b/w and color pics of 0846 also "Ferrari Racing a pictorial history" by Colin Goodwin.

 

really enjoyed those, thanks! WOW!

cannot imagine what those cars must sound like in anger running on the track.....

 

let alone through my town... down my street... then back again after they've blasted through another 45 miles... one by one they come and go...

 

Because those questions are 'red herrings', 'could be' questions.
The only questions worth answering are;
Which cars, which races ran smaller engined P3s or P4s?
Until you can answer these questions this particular debate is going nowhere.
Nathan

 

i was born too late.

i love / cherish the old cars, old guns and old guitars. hell i even prefer older aircraft. all this new "technology" is actually more labor intensive to sustain and keep working. the old stuff was built by hard working folks and built to to the job and last .
here "we" are , in our "free time" debating with great passion and devotion, the inner mechanical makeup of some super rare ferrari race engines.
man those were the days. computers and technology are cool and i use them all the time. but the simpler things are sometimes the best means to an end.

i like the logic of the displacement versus fuel milage. these were not " mass produced" parts, but surely there is a logic to the weight / fuel / fuel mileage debate. i feel almost as if i am trespassing in the debate. pehaps i should just stay quiet and watch ...


thanks for the picture you painted for me WAX, of the cars, screaming in the fading light. guess we can keep them alive forever, as long as we remember.

 

LOL!!

I guess it pays to read

 

http://www.sovren.org/competition/rules/fia/FIA%201962.html
1962 FIA Regulations
APPENDIX C

TO THE INTERNATIONAL SPORTING CODE

(1962)

SPECIAL REGULATIONS FOR SPORT CARS

205. Fuel Tanks

The total capacity of the fuel tanks (principal and auxiliary, if such exist) shall not exceed the following maximums:

Cars of an engine cylinder-capacity up to 1000 cc: 70L. (18.5 gal.)
Cars of an engine cylinder-capacity from 1000 cc to 1300 cc: 85L. (22.4 gal.)
Cars of an engine cylinder-capacity from 1300 cc to 1600 cc: 100L. (26.4 gal.)
Cars of an engine cylinder-capacity from 1600 cc to 2000 cc: 110L. (29.0 gal.)
Cars of an engine cylinder-capacity from 2000 cc to 2500 cc: 120L. (31.7 gal.)
Cars of an engine cylinder-capacity from 2500 cc to 3000 cc: 130L. (34.3 gal.)
Cars of an engine cylinder-capacity exceeding 3000 cc: 140L. (36.9 gal.)

205. Fuel Tanks
APPENDIX J

TO THE INTERNATIONAL SPORTING CODE GENERAL REGULATIONS

FOR TOURING AND GRAND TOURING CARS

(1962)

CHAPTER II—GROUP 1—SERIES PRODUCTION TOURING CARS
261. Changes and additions authorized
2. RADIATORS AND FUEL TANKS: any radiator or fuel tank provided by the manufacturer for the model considered and mentioned in the maintenance booklet and on the recognition form may be used.
_______________________________
As you can see here:
http://www.sovren.org/competition/competition.htm

1962 FIA International Sporting Code
lists the following:
Appendix C (Sports Cars)
Appendix J (Touring Cars)
Formula Cars

but, for 1967:
1967 FIA International Sporting Code Appendix J
Touring Cars (Group 1 and 2)

is the only listing/update

____________

http://www.sovren.org/competition/rules/fia/FIA%201967%20Appendix%20J.html
FIA International Sporting Code
1967

APPENDIX J

Touring Cars
Group 1 and Group 2

Group 1 - Series Production Touring Cars
Article 257-Mountings and Modifications authorized:
b) Fuel and oil tanks: must be those normally provided by the manufacturer for the model concerned, the capacities of which are mentioned on the recognition form. If, for the said model, tanks of different capacities are normally provided, only those mounted on the required number of cars necessary for recognition of the said model will be authorized.

The location and type of filling port for the fuel tank(s) may not be changed.

The use of a fuel tank with an increased capacity may be authorized by the ACN with the FIA's agreement, in the case of events organized under particular dlimatic conditions (on desert or tropical courses for instance).

 

As I say it always comes down to physical evidence/math. Note that +3 liter and 4 liter cars are restricted to the same size tank,140 liters. Note that the Porsches were 2.2 liter and thus were restricted to 120 liters. (Not the 100 liters Nathan posted)

Now assume the P4's at Le Mans were 4 liters. Look up the mileage of the car that won the index of thermal efficiency at Le Mans at Le Mans in 67. Hint it's sister car sits in my garage. BTW that was the only time at Le Mans where a car had finished 1 oa. and won the index of thermal efficiency. Note the miles per gallon at racing speeds at Le Mans of J5. Use the the index of thermal efficiency of the P4's to figure it's miles per gallon at racing speeds. Multiply mileage at racing speed by the difference between the 3-4 liter limit and the 2-2.5 liter limit. Compare that number to lap length at Targa.

You could do all of that or you could simply stop when you read that +3-4 liter cars had to use the same size tank and that you were racing on a low speed (smaller engine needed) long lap (better MPG needed) track with many, many, twists and turns that further diminished fuel efficiency.

Wayne Sparling, who was there when the P3's/412P's/P 3/4/and P4's raced unequivocally stated that they used different displacement engines in these cars depending on whether top speed or fuel efficiency was more important. That remains fact.

That a 3 liter P3 would travel more laps before needing refueling at the Targa than a 4 liter P3 is provable fact as well.

 

We've been here before.
The only questions worth answering are;
Which cars, which races, ran smaller engined P3s or P4s?
Proof please - not "would be, could be".
Until you can answer these questions this particular debate is going nowhere.
Nathan

 

Post 757 in this thread has a photo with a caption that the car WAS a 275. Why don't you consider that some form of eveidence? I am NOT saying it is proof, but it is as much evidence as other documents that say 330. I think the only way to know for certain is to obtain Ferraris actual notes for each race, and I have no idea if they still exist.

 

Stu
1 photo says 275 - ALL other race reports, from English, Fench and Italian magazines, and photo captions, subsequent articles by historians and researchers say 330, no drivers have ever mentioned lower displacement engines, and you want to accept one wrong caption as some sort of evidence?
You seem very keen to believe that P3s or P4s ran with less than 4L engines - why? Do you know something the rest of us don't?
Nathan

 

No, but in my 40 years of experience with Italian automobiles, I have found many captions and race reports with errors. All I am saying is it IS possible that the one photo caption is correct, and the others are wrong.

As I said earlier in the thread, the only real proof that exists would be in Ferrari's set up sheets for each race. Until I see the set up sheets, I really don't KNOW anything.

The reason I suggested that the drivers MIGHT know is that they were there, but as you say, they usually have little or no involvement with setup.

I've spent 20 years trying to find the FACTS of the Alfa Tipo 412 sports, but all involved are dead, and the archives don't have evidence that convinces me one way or another. Maybe in some cases there is no proof, and the answer, like all theological questionms, is based on faith and not "science".

Quite frankly, you seem to have a bit of a closed mind about the POSSABILITY of some things, and I have found with Italian cars, many things actually do exist that are not supposed to (especially with Alfa)

 

Stu,
And '275P3' is another!
We've been here before.
The only questions worth answering are;
Which cars, which races, ran smaller engined P3s or P4s?
Proof please - not "would be, could be, possibility".
Until you can answer these questions this particular debate is going nowhere.
Nathan

 

I agree!!! You have more contacts at Ferrari than I do, so maybe you can get copies the individual factory race set up sheets. I have no real sources to get data from, outher than having many Ferrari and other Italain car books, and maybe 200 assorted Italian car magazines. Now that Busso has passed away, and Elvira Ruocco, the head of their archives, has retired, I now have no real inside track to information on Alfas either

 

Unless and until the factory build/tech sheets are produced that state categorically that ONLY 4000cc engines for P4s were ever raced or tested (either on track or on the testbed), this debate/discussion is still open.


Paul M

 

Nathan,

There is a period picture and caption in post 757 stating a 275 P3 ran in the 1966 Targa. You are right that it may be a typo but rather than continuously asking for proof, can you provide evidence to dispute this claim?

Also, I raised the question about switching displacement volumes with a given block. Based on the discussions here, it seems unlikely that a specific block would be rebuilt as a different displacement engine by the factory. It is much more plausible that spare engines were could have been built up with different internals. Per the discussion here, there is no reason why this type of block couldn't have been built into an engine with lower displacement. Is there any way to check old documentation - maybe the build sheets for the spare engines - that would shed some light as to whether this was ever done by the factory?

Regards,

Art S.

 

Hi Art
Thank you for a nice polite post. I can do no more than refer you to my answers already given in posts 836 & 834.
Regards
Nathan

 

Hi Nathan,

If I understand your point, you are saying there are countless other references to the same race stating the car had a 330 cc per cylinder displacement, not 275.

On another note, do you oppose Jim's view as to the type of engine block he has mounted in his 'P3/4'? If not, why was it previously built up as something less than 330 cc per cylinder displacement. If you do oppose, on what grounds - physical discrepency or stated history?

Regards,

Art S.

PS. I see no need for anything other than politeness.

 

I originally scanned and posted this picture, with this caption, in the thread about Ferrari's internal memo regarding the 1966 Targa Florio. I certainly did not think it would cause any controversy, I just posted it because it showed the car in question at the race in question.

The picture was scanned from the August 1966 issue of Sports Car Graphic, page 63. The byline for the article says "Text & Photos: Bernard Cahier". On page 60, the car is again referred to as a "275-P3". But on page 63 in the text, it reads "The fact that the four-liter P3 Ferrari had difficulty holding its own against the two-liter class cars gives an added importance to this victory." So although Mr. Cahier (a knowledgeable and experienced writer) incorrectly called the car (0846) a "275-P3", he was aware that the car had a four liter engine.

I have checked all of my magazines covering the 1966 season, and I have found no mention of any of the P3's using an engine of any capacity other than 4 liters. There were other Ferrari prototypes using 3.0 liter, 3.3 liter, and 4.4 liter engines, but not P3's, as far as I can find.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Hello Jim,

(dont know if its a repost or you already know this pic?)
Just found this wonderful pic of your car #0846 Targa Florio 1967 on the net.

Best
Wolfgang
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Wolfgang
REPOST!
That's my picture.........and I posted it already on 2 January 2006 in a new thread about the 1967 Targa Florio and 0846............
Marcel Massini

 

Sorry Marcel,
haven`t seen it and din`t knew it.
Thank you and all credits to you.
I found the pic this morning (without any credits or remarks) at carpassion.com
http://www.carpassion.com/de/forum/andere-modelle-ferrari/21288-classic-pictures-only.html#post400453

Wolfgang

 

Hi Art
That's exactly what I'm saying. And I think that Miltonian in Post #844 is saying the same thing.

Art
It's all 'could have', 'might have', 'possible'. I don't quite see why this has come up in the first place - is there a suggestion that Napolis's car might have an engine of less than 4L?
Nathan

 

Nathan,

I believe you will have seen in a previous thread long ago that Jim said he had his motor 'rebuilt as a 4-liter'.

Pages 50-54 in the hard copy of Jim's dossier show clearly the differences between a Formula 1 engine and a P4 engine, and pictures of Jim's block and heads confirm they are P4, as well as having the Le Mans stamps.

So the question we are investigating is 'how could internals of a cubic capacity other than 4-liters end up inside what is clearly a P4 engine?'


Paul M