The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

More 0846 POV on track video:

http://www.youtube.com/v/rFTyitiOpS8

 

FYI

Originally Posted by dino286
and further

http://www.classicdriver.com/de/maga...00.asp?id=3593


Dear Jim,

Did you see and understand (because it is in German language) that you now can make an end to the 0846 debate?

The article says:

"Mit dem Zertifizierungs-Department bietet Ferrari gerade Sammlern die Möglichkeit, Automobile auf ihre Echtheit und ihren Originalzustand hin zu überprüfen. Mit einem festgelegten Ablauf wird geprüft, ob es sich genau um das Fahrzeug handelt, welches es vorgibt zu sein. Um ein Ferrari-Classiche-Echtheitszertifikat zu erhalten, werden die Automobile einer gründlichen Inspektion unterzogen. Sie kann entweder direkt in der Ferrari Classiche-Abteilung oder bei einem speziell hierfür autorisierten Händler abgenommen werden. Die gewonnen Erkenntnisse fließen in ein abschließendes Gutachten ein, das den mechanischen Zustand und die Originalität der verbauten Teile belegt. Jeder Ferrari, der über solch ein Classiche-Zertifikat verfügt, darf bei offiziellen Veranstaltungen, wie zum Beispiel bei der Shell Ferrari Historic Challenge, starten."

Greatings,

Eugène Vingerhoeds


Hi

There is NO problem or debate between Ferrari and I on 0846 as I clearly go into here:

http://www.autoblog.com/2006/08/02/a...-ferrari-p4-5/

For many years I've never disputed that under the "Authentication Definitions" Ferrari came up with and chose to adopt, Ferrari using their own definition could not "Authenticate" 0846. For many years Ferrari has recognized that the Legal Identity of the car I own is 1967 Ferrari P 3/4 0846 and for many years Ferrari has NEVER disputed that the car I own contains many of the original parts of P 3/4 0846 including the majority of the chassis remains of P 3/4 0846 which enables it to have the legal identity 1967 Ferrari
P 3/4 0846.

As an interesting aside the same legal doctrine of estoppel applies in that failure to refute as well:

"Estoppel by acquiescence may arise when one person gives a legal warning to another based on some clearly asserted facts or legal principle, and the other does not respond within "a reasonable period of time". By acquiescing, the other person is generally considered to have lost the legal right to assert the contrary."

There is also no question that Ferrari scrapped and discarded (Never sold) the chassis remains of 0846 to anyone and that the car I own was rebuilt by me (Ferrari's words) using the parts and chassis remains of 0846 as delineated in the document linked in the link above with help from Ferrari who recast the P4 type 603 suspension uprights for me that are currently in my car.

Those that wish to believe that there is any "problem" what so ever between Ferrari and I on this matter are mistaken and over many years our relationship remains extremely cordial. Indeed recent photos of my 0846 at the 2006 Historic Targa Florio are posted on their "Ferrari Owners" web site which they publish and hold the copyright to.

Best Regards

Jim

 

FYI:

Note date, who publishes this web page and recent photo of 0846 in it's proper spyder configuration at the 2006 Historic Targa Florio.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Also interesting to note that Ferrari has NEVER disputed that the 1957 Chevrolet that I own was powered by a V8 engine. Also interesting to note that Ferrari has NEVER disputed that Neil Armstrong landed on the moon in 1969.

The fact that Ferrari doesn't dispute someone's pet theory doesn't necessarily mean that they approve;......maybe it means that they just don't really care about it????????

If I stick my head outside the window and yell "Is anybody hungry?"....and nobody replys, does that mean that there are no starving people in the world?

If somebody says they own P4 Ferrari 0846 and Ferrari doesn't bother to reply, does that mean they AGREE with what is said, or that they just don't really care to waste their time responding?

In basic chemistry class, it's called proving a theory with a "negative" response. It doesn't fly.

 

Can't get this to open..

 

Open's for me.

Best

 

I am also interested in high res pictures like those in post 1430. If those are available in high resolution and could be emailed to me as well that would be well appreciated.

[email protected]

Peter Hatch

 

Got it with Mozilla. ,she sound's sweet on the blips.
How much diiferance in cab temprature with the roof off now?

 

Pick a Ferrari, any Ferrari...

Go to the owner's site

Register

& claim you own said Ferrari

___

Good Luck!

 

Then we have a contradiction because of:

You can't use Ferrari's listing of a car on their web site as "authentication" if Ferrari themselves can not "Authenticate" 0846.
Face the facts, all the kings horses and all the kings men and all the Ferrari web site listings are NEVER going to find those missing serial numbers on a scrap of frame that has yet to be proven to come from some theoretical, hypothetical trip to a Modena junkyard.
Keep dreaming, keep hoping, and keep twisting the logic any way you want, but those numbers are gone and they ain't coming back!!!!!!!

 

I believe that is this instance it does fly. When due diligence requires that a party speak against an assertion in order to preserve a claim and the party chooses to remain silent, the legal implication is one of admission to the extent that they cannot later come forth and argue against the assertion. It creates an estoppel--a bar against further argument.

Would Ferrari have an interest in preserving a claim in the instant case? I believe so. Therefore their silence is, if not thunderous, legally significant.

 

Why would Ferrari waste their lawyer's time with "due diligence" concerning somebody's claim of owning a car that Ferrari disposed of nearly 40 years ago? What's in it for them? They don't own the car any more. Why would they even care? If anything, it would seem to me that any verification of the car from Ferrari could only come after extensive review of FACTS, not theoretical supposition of mysterious junk yard sightings that have never been confirmed. And once again,.....WHY would they concern themselves with the entire matter? To place a stamp of approval on a modern day resto-replication could possibly open themselves up to some future, unknown, legal can of worms. They washed their hands of the whole matter nearly 40 years ago. Why would they get their hands dirty again?

 

Legal notice/duty to act.

 

carreaper, I've noticed Really Successful People do NOT sleep too late....

Back to our regular story...LOL!

*salute*

A GREAT find, the race documents........

 

Arlie,

There are levels of authentication, like in a criminal trial requires 'beyond a reasonable doubt' whereas civil proceedings have a lower standard.

Similarly, for Ferrari's formal authentication program, a very high standard is required (including the original SN on the chassis, etc. which everyone agrees is not possible in the case of 0846). However, for other applications, a lower standard applies.

Regards,

Art S.

 

Something Ferrari has obviously agreed with for six years as the pdf. I posted above, which Ferrari in their sole discretion publishes, has complete control of what is permitted to be published on that page and allowed to be updated as recently as June 06 clearly proves.

 

Reading through this thread, I've noticed that your posts present frivolous and irrelevant information and rhetorical questions that take us nowhere nearer an understanding of things. Though it doesn't rise to the level of Hugo's Thénardier, your dogged pursuit of this matter causes me to wonder whose interest your posts represent.

That you fail to grasp the imperatives of due diligence as it relates to the status of '0846' puts the entirety of your posts, with all due respect, into the realm of opinion rather than informed perspective.

 

And the constant bending of previously accepted standards of antique automotive originality and documentation makes me wonder whose interests other postings really represent. It is not my "opinion" that throughout the modern era of automotive collecting, the confirmed serial numbers and proven provenance of any givern car are the standards by which it is judged.
But along comes a hypothetical tale of an UN-numbered chassis with NO proven documented pathway from LeMans in 1967 to the present day "alledged" incarnation of the car.

If we are to come to an "understanding of things" as you say, then why not throw ALL the questions onto the 0846 table? What has the previous owner said about the whole 0846 debate? (many know what he really thinks.) What has one of Ferrarichats most respected Ferrari historians and documentarians said about the whole 0846 debate? (Absolute nothing. Isn't that VERY strange???!!!)

If you get irritated by a lowly Horsefly, then you probably couldn't tolerate a discussion that would encompass ALL the available information and cast of players. And since that is never going to happen, the debate is pretty much just "internet automotive entertainment" and will probably remain so.

 

In all of that, you failed to answer my question as to whose interest your posts represent. Further, I am not irritated, so there's no need to restate my case to your advantage. If you have facts, why not submit them as such? Your argumentative comments only serve to discredit you.

 

In a way I like hearing about the 0846 story since it is an intriguing one. But in another way, we're really just going in circles here.

Krasnavian and Horsefly feel free to go at it, but I'm sure whatever you come up with, it has been already covered somewhere in the 75+ pages of this thread. Which btw made this thread one of the all time highest counts on FChat.

 

Arlie

Once again you are wrong.

Nathan has reported exactly what David has said about the chassis he sold me, provided a photograph to back up what he thinks and that statement and photo prove beyond the shadow of any doubt that David is 180 degrees wrong, that neither he nor I forged the chassis.

David has also publicly commented as to what he believes that the gear box he sold me, in spite of warranting under the penalty of law that it was P4, is F1 and once again irrefutable transmission stampings and casting codes, original Le Mans ACO documents and stampings confirm that it is in fact the 593 P3 transmission that ran in 0846 at Le Mans in 1966.

David has also commented publicly as to what he believes the engine he sold me, in spite of warranting under the penalty of law that it was 330 P4, to be a 3 liter F1 engine. Once again irrefutable original Le Mans documentation and stamps, and irrefutable engine stamps and casting numbers confirm that he is again wrong and that and that the block he sold me, recently confirmed by another friend of his, has the EXACT typo stampings and casting numbers (different serial numbers and the one in 0900 isn't from 0846 either) as the one in 0900 which David and others claim is 4 liter. In addition the most respected Ferrari Mechanic of the period, Alberto Pedretti, who personally rebuilt my engine has confirmed that it is now 4 liter.

Marcel has commented to me at length about what he thinks and he, as is anyone, more than welcome to say exactly what they think here or anywhere else.

You're more entitled to your opinion but your constant posting of thing that are not true and you know are not true: That David has not publicly commented on this situation or that I couldn't face it if he did, once again proves, as many have come to realize that you're simply a troll who should be ignored which once again I going to do.

 

JG, I thought that you had me on IGNORE??? Good to see that the lines of communication are still open. Several quick questions and observations.

You mentioned Alberto Pedretti. As I asked many months ago, (and you never answered), will HE confirm that your car IS THE 0846 Ferrari that raced at LeMans in 1967?

As for the UNnamed noted Ferrari documentarian: He personally told me in a PM that he does not comment on the 0846 debate.

And who said that a guy in England PUBLICLY commented on anything? PRIVATE comments can be just as interesting.

We all know that there are plenty of missing items on the 0846 debate table that are too hot for open debate. Let's not kid ourselves.

 

Can we just put this to an end? Some us are of the opinion that the car is 846. Others are not. I don't think we will ever have anything close to absolute proof one way or the other....

 

I agree.

I don't want to close the thread, but think that unless something really new comes up, there is little point in plowing the same field over and over again.

 

to add a pause break to the debate and answer your obseravtion, i have a drug resistant sinus infection that keeps me from sleeping much. doctors are on top of it, no big deal.


back on topic, we all have a voice of doubt and reason in our heads as to what we read on the web. i still stand by the facts and the evidence that there was only ONE P3 MODIFIED to P4 specs to race. not hundreds, like a GM car, but only one.

what else can this car be, but the REMAINS of 0846. why is it so hard to accept. its not like there were hundreds of them and Mr Piper or Mr G. pieced them together for fun.

Mr Piper is a racer. he did what he could to stay on the track in the drivers seat for reasonable expense and time. he did not care about codes, numbers or stamps. the pile of parts was just that, a means to keep him racing , and trade for what he wanted or needed. this debate has made me look elsewhere into his racing career, and i have to admit i admire the man for all he has owned and raced.

i cannot fathom the folks who come on here and joust with Jim about his car, when he owns all the other cars he has, and has shared so much with the world and this community. i learned stuff from P4 Replica, but i did not agree with his tactics or person attacks. i have learned more about the racing world from the Vintage section here on Ferrari Chat than i could have ever imagined. some of the people who post here, were there when the history was made. i would ask the doubters to not cheapen thier work and contributions with conjecture and "what ifs".


by the way, i have rarely even chatted with Mr G, so i am not an "insider" or one of the "chosen elite".

i am just a airplane mechanic, who loves classic cars. and i can darn sure recogize a good thing when i see it, even if it is "all that remains of " a great race car.

good day to all.


Michael