The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

The stampings 218 N1 and 242 N3 tell a different and the true story which is that was a 312 F1 engine that used 2 and 3 valve heads.

 

Ing. Solofast. The pic in post 8023 is of an engine being used in a Formula 1 car, not Jim's car. You quit this nonsense. There's no tipo 237 P4 stamp on Jim's block anywhere. Jim's block has the number 0003 also which is a Formula 1 car and by coincidence the car the engine in post 8023 is taken from. I'll post a link when I get home.

 

No, youre just badmouthing a piece of original Ferrari history. First calling it a "bitsa" which is obvious BS and was quickly retracted.

The frame identifies the car. PERIOD. 0858s frame has continouus history since its birth as P4 and to convert a P4 frame to CanAm and vice versa takes a couple hours work and few tubes, nothing structural. Therefore 0858 is a P4 today, not the whole thing is P4 spec, but the most important part certainly is.

 

I forgot the 4.2 litre engine is clearly not important at all...as for the "simple" conversion, nothing I have read suggests its a few hours work and nothing structural but perhaps you have first hand knowledge that I don't.

 

In the grand scheme of things to define the identity of the car its really not too important as....

1) removeable parts on racing cars get and got swapped all the time

2) the engine is the same base unit as used in P4s

3) enlarging the engine bore is common practice and very few 40+ year old engines retain the original bore diameter

4) at least one source indicates P4 (or was it P3/4?) ran with the larger engines at the end

...several 250 TRs and MMs were run with Chevy V8s sometime in their long life....they didnt lose their identity ....therefore 0858 is a P4 today even if its not 100% P4 spec as it was born in 1966/67.

 

Discussions of 0858 belong in the 0858 thread, where you will also find some information about the frame being modified in period, making a 350 Can Am frame different that a 330 P4 frame. Differences in the car were enough for Ferrari to re-name the car once it underwent said differences, meaning the car is no longer a P4, no matter what it used to be. Ironically it is the well documented continuous history that proves what 0858 is and what it no longer is.

 

I don't mean to be cheeky, but did you look at the pictures of the actual suspensions? Post 7943 has three separate examples and they all look to be identical.

The lower part of the hub is attached to the frame via a tubular A-arm. The chassis mount is NOT a U-shaped bracket...instead, it is bolted to the rear of the frame cradle. This mount could only be shimmed rearward...as-is, they all appear to be mostly flush against the rear of the cradle. The hub side of the A-arm could be shimmed forward or backward...a different hub could be used...or, a different A-arm could be used. The frame side mounting point is pretty static...the whole rear frame "comes together" at the lower cradle...moving the cradle forward would pretty much require a new rear frame.

The upper part of the hub is located by two (presumably) adjustable struts. One short strut goes from the top of the hub to a mount just aft of the top shock mount...this one would essentially set the camber angle. It is a U-shaped bracket on the frame side, but this is not locating anything forward/rearward, so its precise location is not important. The heim joints would allow for subtle changes in geometry...

The other strut that locates the upper part of the hub is the longitudinal strut that runs from the bulkhead to the hub. Again, I'm presuming that this one is adjustable (the heim joints all seem to have a lock-nut). This strut would set or correct the caster angle of the hub/wheel. This one also has a U-shaped bracket on the frame side, but its location is even less subject to precision than the short one controlling camber.

Within the existing suspension components, the only way it would really make sense to adjust the wheelbase would be to shim the bottom of the hub relative to the two mounting points of the lower (only) A-arm. Then the longer upper strut (from the bulkhead to the top of the hub) would be used to correct the caster...and the short, upper strut would be used to set/correct camber.

Of course, the components could be changed...A-arms with different geometry or hubs with different lower A-arm mounting points.

Regardless...the bottom line remains. Moving the engine. changing the engine, changing the gearbox, etc...none of these things will change the wheelbase. Some of them may necessitate a change, but they do not make the change. If the claim is that the wheelbase was changed at some point, we should be able to understand how it was done. Until I have some information that has not been shared, it sure seems as if any change (in wheelbase) would be wholly independent of the chassis...and, therefore would not be relevant to the identification.

 

I agree that it belongs in the 0858 thread. I cant see though VV not bringing it up again sooner than later here as he seems to have an urgent desire to badmouth 0858 on every possible occassion.

 

If you would have read the comment before mine you would realize why I called it a bitsa.

0846 was called a bitsa due to it's parts came from here and there. If you know anything about race cars in the days you know the parts were swapped around quite regularly. When 0858 was converted to Can Am there is no saying how many of it's P4 ended up in it after the re-build. The exact same amount of swapping could have happened in either chassis whether intentional or not. 0846 was built from original parts. 0858 does not have it's original motor, does not have it's original body, and who know if it has any other of it's original parts in it minus the frame. The same amount of swapping could have happened in both cars. So if someone is going to call 0846 a Bitsa then the same would apply to 0858 continous history or not.

The continous history applies to the frame. Not the continous history of what parts went in and out of it. If you have that kind of continous history then you'd be right about it being retracted. I did not retract anything. I am saying that any parts could have ended up in either car. So if one is called a Bitsa by one person so is the other.

I was responding to someone, next time you need to read. Do I think it's a bitsa? No mere then I think 0846 is.

Am I badmouthing Ferrari history? No. I'm badmouthing the decision to destroy Ferrari History.

But if you think I am, I'd rather be the guy who's badmouthing it versus destroying Ferrari history which is the case of 0858.

There is absolutely no more 0858 Ferrari P4 history rolling around due to Talacrest's conversion.

There is however less of 0858's Ferrari history due to Talacrests conversion.

That is a fact.

 

I'm sure you do think that.

I'm also sure you think that the frame is a replica but don't have a clue of how it came to be.

You quote an auction description that in no way describes the chassis building process which is all that really matter here, the building of the chassis, not the building of the car.

So I'm not really concerned that you think this.

You say that it's crazy to think Piper had no knowledge of the unique characteristics of the frame.

If so why wasn't the crash damage mentioned to Jim when he sold it?

Why wasn't the modifications that Miura believes compromises the frame disclosed to Jim when he sold it?

Do you believe it is good business to sell a car while hiding what Miura believes are the frames flaws?

 

Been alot more in the ten years then proof that is was built as a replica.

You just have fire and anger.

But when it comes down to it your story of what actually happened is nothing more then a display model.

Yeah your right Miura, the frame was damaged to the point where they had to weld in a replacement tube, but that's no big deal, it's just a race car frame built to do excessive speed. New owners not gonna want the details of that.

 

It belongs in here when it pertains to 0846.

Miura makes contradictory arguments depending on which car he is rooting for.

In 0846 Ferrari's word was all that mattered. But in 0858 Ferrari's word doesn't matter.

In 0846 the originality of the motor mattered. In 0858 it doesn't matter at all.

Sorry boys but it has already been determined that these points cross pollinate.

A point about one sometime lies in a point made about the other.

 

Re 0858 It was Jim who made such a big thing about the Tipo 247 Can Am engine never having been in a P4, not me, yet during this time he knew full well that he had a Tipo 218/242 block in the car he claims is the original P3/4 0846 and with a P4 engine. Let me tell you, Vincent there has never been a Tipo 218 or 242 engine/block in a P3, P3/4. 412P or a P4.

When I spoke to Ferrari about 0858 potentially being Classiched as a P4, I reported back that they would not Classiche it at all, even with a White Book as a P4 which went against what I previously believed to be the case. However, I reported back the true facts rather than not say anything without twisting what they said and without omission of words to mean something completely different as Jim has done on numerous occasions re 0846 as has been proved in this thread recently.

 

Sorry, was not implying that chassis was #0846, but showing that he did indeed take chassis'

Also how do we know it was #0818?
Pete

 

No casting mark can related to Le Mans. When Ferrari was casting the engine parts they did not have a representative from Le Mans there altering their molds and then following the castings through the machining process to ensure they ended up being used at Le Mans.

The purpose of those stampings is so the teams cannot swap major components because that is not allowed.

BTW: The Le Mans stampings are the circular ones ... anything else has nothing to do with Le Mans .
Pete

 

Steve, go back and read Solofast's post. You have not understood it.

Solofast confirms what I believe Chris Amon said. These engines were designed for endurance work first and foremost, not for F1. Yes they saw duty in F1 but they were over engineered for this task. His point is that the block is correct for a P4, whether it was stamped otherwise does not matter they are 100% interchangeable.

The otherway around would work too, ie. if you owned a 312 F1 and blew it up you could put a block stamped Tipo 237 in the car and all would be perfect.

BTW: Jim has never said that the current block was ever #0846's so relax. And yes I would not be worried about the 4.2 ltr engine in #0858 either but I also would never have converted the last original Can Am Ferrari of the type back to a P4 ... I simply would not have bought it. Selling it was the only motivation ... sad in some ways, but understandable in this modern world.
Pete

 

Another flight of pure fantasy...

I guess his photos of P4/5 parked at the factory gates mean nothing to you??

"Ferrari will never go to him", indeed.....it is he with his new race venture, that has left Ferrari behind...

Twist that up, my man!

 

I think they are 'still friends', and all.....

 

We could have made a fine "runner" of it, although the costs were huge....


Ahem.....sorry for the OFF topic post!

 

Marcel Massini said it was 0818.

 

But he has never taken 0003 to the factory.

 

Z5Z Trademark - Registration Number 0567424 - Serial Number 71614354 :: Justia Trademarks
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Has Jim ever listed anywhere against all the indented stamps on his components how he derived the conclusions he makes in the pdf for them, he must have based his theories on something?

 

I understand Ing. Solofast's point about the bell housing but that doesn't alter the fact that the block in Jim's car is 312 F1 as clearly identified by the tipo 218 and 242 stampings. It's not stamped tipo 237 anywhere. The heads do seem to be from a P4 as well as the fuel injection system, but AFAIK these were additions by Jim to the 312 F1 block along with the crank etc. I believe the block did not have the P4 heads or the fuel injection system installed as sold by David Piper. For this reason Jim's claim that DP said the engine is real P4 ("Vrai P4") is not right at all.

Regarding the block, it's not 100% clear whether a 312 F1 block would have to be built up with sandwich plates to up its capacity to 4 litres. I've read that there is approximately 0.5" difference in the height of the blocks. I am told the liners are different also between 312 F1 and P4.

No, Jim hasn't claimed the engine is from 0846 but he has claimed it's P4 and it clearly is not. Tipo 218 N1> Tipo 242 N3 0003 identify a 312 F1 block. BigTex, "Twist that up, my man!"

Ferrari 312 F1 0003: http://trackthoughts.com/2009/01/03/ferrari-312-sn-0003/

 

Very nice photos and informations. Thanks for sharing.