The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

You may have missed this list of archives in February
http://ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7370

 

Wax,

I knew you had done that. I should have checked because I thought yours was a list of the threads in the NEW FerrariChat site.

Anyway now that yours is linked here all is good ... and as yours is in the correct order, er, even better.

P4Replica,

Nothing was missed on purpose ... I did not add every single link that contained the text 'P4'. I went in to most of them to see if they were relevant or atleast interesting ... and yep missed that one. Now that you have added it, great atleast one less that I missed.

Horsefly,

Yep the Corvette world thinks a car starts and ends as simply a number. Without that number they have nothing ... how sad. Imagine if they had started making cars and had never thought of the serial number concept ... no Corvettes would have ever existed.

Others with their feet on the ground realise that while serial numbers are great way to audit cars, etc. they do not make a car or anything. Thus there is far more to a car than the little badge (whatever) that has a number on it.

We even know that Piper, for example, has a 4 cam Ferrari engine for his P2 (I think) that has no number at all (refer to Barchetta.cc) ... guess he might as well throw it away, because it has no number thus cannot be real or worth anything .

Pete

 

I guarantee that there are no other car collectors in the world that rely upon serial numbers as a reference point more than Ferrari collectors do. NOBODY in the Corvette world ever looks at a car and says, "Thats number 2764" or "this is the original frame off of 762" or whatever. But whenever the subject of rare Ferraris is discussed, the F-car historians immediately start with the serial number buzzwords.

But now that the discussion concerns whether or not a particular rare car actually HAS it's original serial number, the Ferrari historians want to ignore the issue. Interesting double standard. The serial number is always used as a reference point, but when it is missing from a car that everybody admires, that's consider perfectly acceptable.

Once again, the Ferrari sheep are marching in line.

 

While most of your points are very well made I do disagree with the 'but when it is missing from a car that everybody admires, that's considered perfectly acceptable'.

This is how I would have worded that sentence:

'The serial number is always used as a reference point, but when it is missing from a car that everybody hopes is a historically important car, that's considered perfectly acceptable'.

That is my view. I for one really hope Jim's car is 0846 because that is so very exciting. We have been allowed to become part of a historically significant Ferraris restoration ... how cool is that! Now if it was yet another 308 restoration (as cool as that is ... no disrespect at all intended) it just is not as exciting as the possible rebirth/rebuild/restoration of one of the most significant prototype cars Ferrari built.

Pete

 

I think what Pete meant (and the point that some are trying to make) is that a car doesn't necessarily need to have the serial number plate in order to be the frame of a certain serial number...

 

As for the lingering question about how much of the car has to be there in order to BE that car, I would like to put my humble and unlearned opinion out there and suggest that particularly for vintage Ferrari race cars, the chasis IS the car. Why, for so many years, was P5 refered to as 0846? Because it was said to have 0846's chasis. The chasis makes the car. If it is proved that Jim has 0846's chasis, I would say that he has 0846.

 

But how would one go about confirming that the chassis is ORIGINAL or an exact copy that Piper could have produced because he had access to the original Ferrari blueprints? If Ferrari welded together a bird cage frame out of 13 millimeter tubing, how could one tell the difference between that frame and one that Piper could have welded out of 13 millimeter tubing? Pipe is pipe and welds are welds. And as everyone always says, Ferrari frames are somewhat rough anyway.

 

That's the question. The thing is that 0846 was a P3 modified into a P4. So, the original blueprints would not be able to tell him all, because if he followed them, he would not be building a P4 modified from a P3. So, an important point is that 0846 in its final 1967 configuration could not have been replicated from blueprints alone.

So, the next question is: could he have built a P3 chasis from the P3 blueprints and then modified it (just like 0846 was in real life) into a P4. The answer is: who knows? Antiques have been replicated for years. There's a famous fake antique chair that fooled the experts for years. People bore fake wormholes into their cherry cabinets. People buy new jeans with holes in them.

But my personal opinion is that if Piper had wanted to build a P4, he would have built a P4 from the P4 blueprints, not a P3 chasis modded to be a P4.

 

Since that famous airplane was brought up, I'd like to mention that Larry "Bozo the clown" Harmon was removed from the clown hall of fame when it was discovered that in fact Pinto Colvig was the original Bozo. Luckily the transfer of Bozo was documented etc, and so the error was correctable.
It seems in this case, if Piper is unwilling or unable to document that Jim's car is 0846, or even best case that it has some real tubes in it that once were attached to 0846, we will never know for sure.
If Jim just spends the next few years portraying his car has "probably 0846" it will become 0846 to almost everyone. After all, if I had the real 0846 in my shed why wouldn't I come forward?
If I were Jim I'd just make sure the car had a little 0846 sign on it whenever it was in public, and soon the transformation to the real 0846 will be complete a la pinocchio.

 

So are we suggesting that just because a car has five dollars worth of original tubing in the frame, then that makes the car a 5 MILLION dollar original?

 

Jim's car will never be a "no-stories" P4. Its had a long story on this board already. Tube or no tube from 0864, it should not be worth as much as a p4 with a true traceable history back to the factory.
Still a pretty car, and hopefully Jim will use it and show it as often as possible.

 

I know something you don't know .... ....




(every now and then it is fun to be an Sh!!t Disturber)

 

Brian.
Thanks for the offer, but I don't think that will be neccessary now. You may remember that I also suggested, earlier, the possibility of locking down this thread, to prevent further posting. Well everybody seems to have gone back to posting on the '#0846 Poll' thread, so again - forget that I asked.

No thank you, Brian. Definitely not - please don't merge these posts into the #0846 Poll' thread - it's got big enough (and long enough - call it ugly enough too, if you like) all by itself already !

So as Macca doesn't seem to care; the thread starter Arlie (Horsefly) and the other major contributors to this thread - Pete (PSk) etc., haven't posted a reply - I'd leave it just as it is - to fall back to the bottom of the 'queue' again, eventually.
I'll 'take up the cudgels' - this time using only facts (not conjecture or sarcasm) with Paul (Macca) over my questions on the Dean Batchelor Ferrari books and further Engine / Gearbox issues, back in the 'Gearbox Issues' thread, where they belonged in the first place .....

Thanks once again .....

 

I'm transplanting this question from the bottom paragraph of post #37 in Horsefly's 'P4 0846 thread NUMBER 2!!!', rather than carry on discussions in a third P4-related thread. It's going to involve a bit of 'cross-threading' and 'cutting and pasting', so please bear with me ....

Sorry, Paul. That was me, just being plain lazy, back there - I didn't go to the book case and pull it out; I didn't go back to your post to check, and I didn't even manage to quote the title correctly !

Touché !

Likewise ! - Even though I actually had this one listed in my 'P4 Bibliography'

And therein lies my question. If Paul doesn't still doesn't feel inclined to (see his last quote, in the previously mentioned thread "I have nothing more to add at the moment in information about Ferrari P3s and P4s"), then could any other Ferrari book collector, who knows the answer, please reply:

The late author; ex-hot rodder; R&T contributor Dean Batchelor produced an excellent series of landscape format paperback books in the mid to late 70's. They contained specifications; model and race history; an excellent (and in many cases different) selection of B&W photos, and superb 1:24 scale drawings by Jonathan Thompson (which probably dictated the landscape format). In the back cover of the third book (published in '77), it listed the titles:

FERRARI - The Early Berlinettas & Competition Coupes (October, 1974)
FERRARI - The Early Spyders & Competition Roadsters (April, 1975)
FERRARI - The Gran Tourismo & Competition Berlinettas (December, 1977)
(Ommitting a similar Porsche title)
and soon to be published
FERRARI - The Sports & Sports Prototype Competition Cars
(which one assumes would have included such Tipos as: 330P3 and 330P4 Spyders; the NART and 350 Can-Am's).

But was it ever published ?? I bought my three copies back in the late '70's. More recently I've checked on the Internet, and eBay in particular, looking for that 4th title in the series, but to no avail. The first three titles come up on eBay from time to time, but apart from the above, I've never seen so much as a mention of the other one. Anyway, if anyone's looking for relatively cheap, but high quality Ferrari reference material - I cannot recommend these books highly enough.

Just one thing, Paul (and PLEASE don't take this as a criticism). You cite these photos in the Dean Batchelor book (and others), but you don't upload them to support your posts. Any particular reason ? Me ? I've got the perfect excuse right at this moment - I've exceeded my 5MB photo posting limit, until I get a subscription sorted out !

 

Not to labour the point, but to reply to some of Macca’s earlier statements, that I hadn’t answered:

I don’t have a full set of Cavallino – just the odd issues that contain the P3 and P4 articles. The photo that I posted, referred to above, was actually scanned from the cover of July 1968 ‘Model Cars’ magazine. The front cover note reads: “This beautiful Ferrari power plant detail shot comes again from top motor sporting photographer Max Le Grand. Absolutely no excuses now for neglecting rear end details.”
Funny coincidence that, bearing in mind the topic of this thread !

In fact, it was nothing to with full size cars, the comment was directed at modellers. ‘Model Cars’ was a MAP publication, in those days aimed at, and catering for the slot racing fraternity. Slot racing was going through its boom years, and the technological changes were coming thick and fast (for instance, the width of rear tyres, in assorted compounds, were growing faster than REAL F1 cars). But I digress. One of the major changes was in the choice of bodywork. In the early ‘60’s the hobby was mostly supported by modellers, who produced ‘scalish’ looking cars (1:32 in UK; 1:24 in USA), usually carved from hardwood or balsa or in fibreglass. Then of course there were the more expensive commercial injection mouldings. But in 1966, the hobby swung dramatically in favour of the new ‘clear’ vacuum-formed lightweight bodies – usually moulded in Acetate (nowadays Lexan). Initially, these were reasonably accurate (and there were some particularly nice bodies produced by ‘Lancer’ in the USA), but as the racers demanded more speed, the bodies became more distorted – some, even Lancer, produced ‘Handling’ bodies. The term ‘Blob’ body was coined.

One area where these bodies veered away from scale appearance, particularly was in the gearbox. Most late ‘60’s F1 cars had an exposed (usually Hewland) gearbox. In 1:32 scale, this was tiny. The slot car regulations of the day stated that the bodywork should cover all parts of the workings – including the gears. Most racers were using 48DP or 60DP Bevel or Crown gears. So gearboxes tended to get ‘distorted’ even more – and hence the quote from the cover note.

You may scoff at my quoting ‘Model Cars’ as a source. In fact their race reviews and ‘Prototype Parade’ articles (which included very accurate 1:32 scale plans) were bang up to date, and contained not only full specifications and dimensions of the cars featured, but also many useful B&W photos. In fact, if a true Ferraristi has never opened a copy of Model Cars, he will most likely have seen their plans. Pick up a copy of Ferrari, by Hans Tanner. Flick over the pages and you will see some 1:32 plans sprinkled throughout – the ’66 F1 Ferrari, and the P3 and P4 spring to mind. Where were these lifted from ? Model Cars !

Getting back to my reply to Macca:

I don’t have ‘F1 Ferrari’ by Schlegelmilch, but I do have his ‘coffee table book’ ‘Ferrari Formula 1’. On page 70, it includes a photo of Bandini’s 1967 F1 gearbox, taken at Monaco, unfortunately – Lorenzo’s last race. Is this the same photo ‘(the small one)’ that you are referring to ? Because, if it is, then not only is it small (3” x 3”), but it is also taken through a ‘fish-eye’ lens. The gearbox is in shadow, hidden behind a grossly distorted tubular protective cage. Quite the ‘Blob’ in fact !

Again, I don’t have Tanner’s 6th Edition – only the 5th – so I can’t comment. But, as I've asked before, Paul,
‘Why don’t you upload some of the photos that you quote ?' (instead of just criticising my choices of photo).
It would not only support your arguments, but make it more interesting for the readers …..

 

That was before my PC crashed, on the evening of Friday 05/21 (a night I remember well !) and took me nearly a week to restore. In fact, at that time, I was still also waiting for some scans of photos from various (May '67) issues of ‘AutoSport’, to arrive from a friend, which subsequently never materialised.

So I had decided, instead, to scan some photos from Tanner (5th Edition), which now, obviously, having somewhat exceeded my 5MB photo upload limit, I am currently no longer in a position to do.
May I refer you to page 157 (top left hand corner photo, with the engine cover in place); page 158 (with the engine cover removed – note also the ‘Model Cars’ plan of the ’66 F1 Ferrari above it) and again the top of page 159. These are all very clear B&W photos. There is also a colour photo of the engine (lowest in the group of three) on page 175, but this does not show the gearbox.

In fact, a far better photo of the interim ‘66/’67 F1 engine and gearbox has been posted to this forum many times – Jim’s own photo of the engine and gearbox in the back of the 250 P5 !
The last time I can remember seeing this was in post #249 of the '#0846 Poll' thread, where I myself posted it.
See: http://ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?p=67308014#post67308014 - Sorry, Paul - probably a bad post to choose !

 

You may scoff at my quoting ‘Model Cars’ as a source. In fact their race reviews and ‘Prototype Parade’ articles (which included very accurate 1:32 scale plans) were bang up to date, and contained not only full specifications and dimensions of the cars featured, but also many useful B&W photos. In fact, if a true Ferraristi has never opened a copy of Model Cars, he will most likely have seen their plans. Pick up a copy of Ferrari, by Hans Tanner. Flick over the pages and you will see some 1:32 plans sprinkled throughout – the ’66 F1 Ferrari, and the P3 and P4 spring to mind. Where were these lifted from ? Model Cars !

Model Cars lives on the net!

Check these drawings out:

P3
http://www.vsrnonline.com/Mags/MC/MC_V3N11_p534.jpg
http://www.vsrnonline.com/Mags/MC/MC_V3N11_p535.jpg

P4
http://www.vsrnonline.com/Mags/MC/MC_V4N9_p430.jpg
http://www.vsrnonline.com/Mags/MC/MC_V4N9_p431.jpg

If you search the site, there are other Ferrari plans there. Interesting comment in the P4 article about what happened with P3 transmissions at LeMans 1967. . .

 

Thanks, Tom - but I still have my 2 complete full sets anyway - both bound AND loose - and all the issues of sister publication 'Miniature Auto' .... Superb magazine, wasn't it ? Are you also an ex-slot car racer by any chance ?

Incedentally, there weren't any P3's running at Le Mans in '67. Only P4's and 412P's (and of course P3/4 #0846).
Three P3's ran at Le Mans in '66. I think you need to clarify this statement, in the light of the current debate ....

 

I’ve been ‘cross-threading’ and ‘cutting and pasting’ to try and gather all your statements together, before replying, Paul. But I thought that I’d eliminate this one first:

We were not talking about the ’66 F1 gearbox (and engine) Paul, but in fact the ‘66/’67 INTERIM engine and gearbox – the same as now fitted in the 250 P5 (and Parkesi’s ’67 Syracuse GP winner).

Yes, and I suspect (as I’ve said before, and I think that you might possibly agree with me for once) that this is one of the factory press shots. It is quite conceivable that the factory ‘cobbled together’ the first P3 (#0846) using a modified version of the then currently available interim ‘66/’67 F1 gearbox, so the car could be rolled out
for the press (before it was actually ready to race).

See previous.

And so would I, Paul !

One thing I have since found that is interesting, though, and may later lead to the ultimate undoing of my own arguments, regarding this gearbox, is to be found in a post by Jim (‘Napolis’) in one of the Old FerrariChat threads – see: http://www.ferrarichat.com/discus/messages/251280/210353.html See post dated February 24th - there Jim writes:

“The transmition (sp) is original P4 Serial#593A N7 made by Ferrari unlike the box in the P3's which was a ZF.”

There are other claims in this post (and other statements, elsewhere in this older thread – one of which concerns the doors off John Surtees’ #3 car, which I found highly amusing in the light of Jim’s later claims that they were saved from the burnt #0846) that I would strongly dispute. However, this one is plausible and rather interesting.

Grab your copy of Ferrari P3/412P by Christian Huet – (aka Cavelleria #11) - turn to page 106, and look at the centre column. Note the gearboxes listed for #0844 and #0846:

Ferrari Type 593; ZF Type 5DS then Ferrari Type 603R. Interesting ?

What we need to find out, to settle our arguement is:
What was the Type (factory designation) of the ‘66/’67 interim F1 gearbox ? 593 or 593A ?

On thing I will stand by though, and that is, that the gearbox in Jim’s car is definitely NOT a P4 (as he is re-building the car) gearbox - a type 603R. But, maybe it actually is a ‘prototype’ P3 gearbox (i.e. a modified '66/'67 F1 box).

 

I was referring the comment on the first page of the P4 Profile, discussing the 1967 updates to the former P3s, which ended:
"However, the 1966 engines and transmissions were used until LeMans when the new gearboxes were supplied." I take this to apply to the 3 privately entered 412Ps.

My slotracing days were hampered by chronic hamfistedness.

 

Correct. Thanks for clearing that up, Tom.

I was a 'builder' rather than a 'racer' in the '60's - so my cars were never driven that hard, and hence my original stable of cars (including scratchbuilt Ferrari 330P3 and P4's, and '66 and '67 F1 cars) all still survive to this day.

 

So are you having a dig at Arlie (Horsefly) or are you saying that YOU know something, Jim ?
Like the F.C.A. have already made up their mind, maybe ?
Personally, whatever Ferrari decide, I think there really is only one person knows the answers .....

 

I’m doing a little ‘cross-threading’, and ‘cutting and pasting’ (again) this time from the ‘Gearbox issues’ thread (in this case, the last paragraph of Macca’s post #71) to bring this particular part of the ongoing #0846 debate back to the thread where I believe it belongs. (From http://ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?p=67313082#post67313082)

In fact, Paul, not only do I already have the postcode, but also David’s phone number. Can’t remember exactly who I got it from, or even when. Though, personally, I wouldn’t consider myself anything other than a casual acquaintance of David’s (“another one of those bloody Noble P4 replica owners”, I think he once said to me).
I have only met him a few times: at Goodwood F. of S.; Coy’s Silverstone, over the years, and latterly at a charitable event at the now defunct ‘Garage on the Green’ in London, a couple of years ago.

Right at this moment, I don’t think it would be a good idea to phone him. As you have quoted him recently, perhaps you are possibly ‘closer’ to him. Fancy giving him a quick call ?
Probably not a good idea though, when you read the following:

From Max’s post #57 of the ‘Gearbox issues’ thread: http://ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?p=67293570#post67293570

More recently, Max Wakefield (P4Racer) in post #273 of this thread, see:
http://ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?p=67311520#post67311520 asked me to write on his behalf:
“Max has made it very clear that David (Piper) has asked him NOT to offer any opinion on this car (Jim's P4) ….”

Which is a shame really, because whatever Ferrari (or the Ferrari Club of America) decide that Jim’s car IS, there really is only one person who actually knows: David Piper. It is a great pity that he will not go ‘on the record’, and let us in on the secret, as to exactly what he sold to Jim, and, more to the point, how it was actually represented to him. It would make life one helluva lot easier for us all. Especially for all the impatient P4 enthusiasts like me !

 

Paul,

I'm sure Ferrari will talk to Piper. Come on that would be insane not to.

Pete

 

"Quote:
Originally Posted by macca
Clear pictures of the 1966 F1 Ferrari gearbox (before they hung coils and a battery on it) are in 'Road & Track' (USA) for March 1966, page 39, and 'Autocar' (UK) of 25th February 1966, pages 369 and 371.

posted by P4Replica:
We were not talking about the ’66 F1 gearbox (and engine) Paul, but in fact the ‘66/’67 INTERIM engine and gearbox – the same as now fitted in the 250 P5 (and Parkesi’s ’67 Syracuse GP winner).

Quote:
Originally Posted by macca
.... the P3 gearbox has a different backplate and bolts to the 1966 F1 gearbox (and also slightly different ribs, since I've studied my library some more). Also the P4 block has different ribs on the casting to the F1 block - all this is visible in the public domain in the various books and magazines from which I quoted chapter and verse. If you know of a published photo that shows a P3 with the gearbox visible during the 1966 racing season, please let us know so that we can all study it. All the books and magazines SAY Ferrari used a ZF gearbox in 1966, but I've never seen a picture.

Quote:
Originally Posted by macca
The only contemporary photograph clearly showing the gearbox of a 1966 P3 without a spare tyre in the way is one of 0844 being unveiled at Maranello on page 324 of 'Ferrari Sports-Racing & Prototype Competition Cars' by Antoine Prunet.

posted by P4Replica:
Yes, and I suspect (as I’ve said before, and I think that you might possibly agree with me for once) that this is one of the factory press shots. It is quite conceivable that the factory ‘cobbled together’ the first P3 (#0846) using a modified version of the then currently available interim ‘66/’67 F1 gearbox, so the car could be rolled out for the press (before it was actually ready to race).

Quote:
Originally Posted by macca
The gearbox of the P3 looks very similar to the 1966 F1 car, but has a different backplate and more bolts on the top. The gearbox in the pictures of Jim's car IS identical in appearance to a P3.

See previous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by macca
Although it has always been said that the P3 used a ZF gearbox, the one on 0844 in early 1966 doesn't appear to look like that in the GT40, for instance …..

Quote:
Originally Posted by macca
I would welcome it if someone could find and post a picture from during the 1966 season (not at the pre-season launch) of a P3 with the engine cover open so we can see the gearbox, if such a picture exists. While all the reference books say the P3s in 1966 and 412Ps in early 1967 used a ZF 'box, I think that should be provable, or not, as the case may be."
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Just to clarify exactly what I'm talking about, and going back slightly over one of my previous posts about F1 Ferraris; the first 1966 (c/n 010) car is the one that I referred to in photographs from R&T and Autocar (and I can't post those pictures because I don't have a scanner of my own, not for some ulterior reason). The other two 1966 cars were identical except that Parkes' had a longer chassis. After the first press photos, when the gearbox casing was clearly visible, the position of the coils was moved to the right side of the 'box, the battery was hung on the left side, and the fuel pump was hung on the backplate with a heatshield, so very little could be seen. All three cars were fitted with the 36-valve side-exhaust cylinder heads for the Italian GP, but kept the same gearboxes.

Into 1967 the three 1966 cars were still in use, and a new 36-valve engine was made with the central exhaust cluster; since Parkes was too tall for the standard length cars, rather than make another special chassis, a new engine was fitted in 'his' car c/n 012, but as the new engines became available they were fitted in the new slimmer chassis design. Parkes was in 012 (with the centre exhausts) and Scarfiotti in 011 (with the side-exhausts).

HOWEVER.....the 1967 F1 gearbox pictured in the thread and in all the contemporary and recent photos has the ancillaries arranged differently to the 1966 'box, AND it appears to have the clutch external to the backplate which the 1966 'box didn't...........so that's the one we should be discounting in comparing pictures from 1966.

Look at the P5 box; that's the 1966 F1 box (identical to the Autocar and R&T pictures) and it's hung on the side-exhaust late-1966 F1 engine. Look at Jim's gearbox; it has the different backplate and three additional bolts visible on the top, and the vertical ribs over the differential section are higher. THAT'S the one in the Batchelor and Prunet books.

I have been going through every contemporary report I can find of the 1966 season and the first half of 1967. I found one picture of a 1966 P3 in the paddock at Monza with the engine cover off (and Enzo looking on) but the gearbox is invisible under the spare wheel.

Yesterday I was at the historic races at Silverstone - oddly enough, although Piper wasn't there, his 330P2/3 c/n 0836 was parked in the paddock, repaired after its major practise crash at the 2002 Goodwood Revival, AND painted at last in its original 1965-1968 Piper/BP green once again for the first time since about 1986. I browsed the trade stands and looked in the Ferret Photo archive for a P3 gearbox picture, without success; but I did find some more information in 1966 and 1967 copies of Autosport and Motor.

Those speculative words "quite conceivable" and "cobbled together" have appeared again. I will get chapter and verse of what I have found tonight and post it tomorrow.

I've got all the copies of Model Car with Ferraris in them, by the way, and had spotted that they were used in the Tanner/Nye book, and I'd also discovered the website with the drawings, and I agree that they are excellent in their way.

I don't have a complete set of Cavallinos by any means, or even all the Ferrari books that are available. I quote book/issue and page so that anyone who has whichever books and magazines can check the pictures and maybe scan & post them (irrespective of whose arguments they support).


Paul M