The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

Seems like this thread has morphed into a debate about the debate, and worse. This car IS a fake, most of us know that. I've kept reading only to see if there as anything else new and useful about the car & history of the parts, but reading a lot of the daily BS has become very unpleasant, which is why I stay away from watching any network news these days. The rest of my two cents... I highly doubt there is anything more to be said or shown about Jim's "kit" car, but if anyone has anything new, real, valid, or worthwhile to add to the debate/conversation about it, then great. Otherwise I see no reason to keep beating a dead horse.

 

Educational: Yes, but only to a point (I never look at Facebook - too much of a cesspool). Who really needs all the extra recent BS, especially at this juncture in the thread? &

 

Some of you don't seem to get that this thread discusses a real Ferrari, chassis 0846. Whether that car had gone up in flames and was eventually scrapped (seems the most likely scenario) or whether some part of it lives on in Glickenhaus' car, 0846 was a real car and a real Ferrari and so the one and only thread that proposes that debate should be in the real car forum. We're all capable of coming to our own conclusions about the car in Jim's collection given the facts and opinions raised in this debate, and that conclusion may change given more facts and opinions over time, as it has for many of us. Wanting to put a period at the end of a debate is more of an exercise in ego massaging than anything else. If you've said your piece, then that should be enough. No one except for a laughably small portion of mankind who have the financial means to trade in and own these cars will be directly affected by the outcome of such a debate, and even then, people are free to do with their money what they please. Some are always better at doing homework than others.

 

Just to be clear, I was referring to 0856 bringing more than double that figure ($20M) if it ever came to public sale, as it is the closest to a "no stories" 330 P4 out there. With the recent media coverage given the Ford Ferrari movie, and the fact it's alone out there, that car is really something special. Almost GTO money special.

 

Seems reasonable that an X-Ray survey of the complete chassis would be definitive. That survey would show all of the different type of metals and processes that were use in construction..a X-Ray survey of the chassis would show different technologies used from the 60’s, 70’s, 80’s and 2000’s which welding and metallurgy has developed over the years, irrespective of claims and photographs. The truth lies in the metal, the welding and the chassis. If there is the smallest part of the original chassis on the car, it would be revealed.

This process is quite common and done on major pipelines, industrial pressure vessels, and Space-X rockets etc…not unusual or impossible. I don’t think Mr. G’s claims or Mr. R’s claims will be known until the chassis goes under X-Ray inspection. Two dimensional comparisons are one method but far from optimal or definitive; a three dimensional model won’t be able to be refuted.

It’s a metallurgy archeological exercise, quite simple really, given today’s technology.

It’s up to the owner to find out.

 

Doesn't seem to be forthcoming.

 

It surely is up to the owner ... not just because he owns the car, of course, but because he seems to be the only one unwilling to let-go of any claims of authenticity.

Since all available evidence now points to this car being a replica (including the chassis), the burden of proof ... to prove authenticity ... is with the owner ... now, more than ever! Glickenhaus surely has the means to do as you suggest, should he so choose ... but until then, there's no material reason to even doubt the conclusion demonstrated in this thread.

What i'm really saying is this: it would be erroneous to think that "the jury is still out" until a high-tech metallurgical analysis has been performed on the chassis. All available evidence has already been presented, the jury has deliberated, and the verdict is already known.

 

I strongly suspect JG had such an inspection (X-ray and/or metallurgy) performed when the car was stripped down some number of years back. He alluded to having a significant inspection done back in 2016 for which he was going to provide the documentation, and of course never did publish it here or elsewhere. I read that to mean the “proof is in the metal” result didn’t go his way.

 

Yup.

Jim was quite fond of two concepts: 1) let the metal speak...and, 2) Occam's razor.

1) The metal has spoken. While no x-rays were involved, see Steve's comprehensive photo evidence.

2) Occam's razor suggests that the comprehensive photo evidence backs up the original story. That is, based on the evidence, the easiest explanation is the one David Piper has given from the beginning. Anything else requires some serious mental gymnastics to make the evidence fit some other desired narrative. We should never confuse what is POSSIBLE with what is PLAUSIBLE or PROBABLE.

Opinions are not facts. Some people are absolutely convinced it's the real deal simply because they admire JG. Others are convinced it's a replica because they don't care for him. Many who think that way have a tendency to project and assume that every other conclusion is also based on opinion which makes it easy to dismiss. Jim's initial .PDF document presented some evidence. The document was biased, but that's understandable...it would NEVER stand up to scrutiny if it were, say, submitted to a scientific journal. The evidence has since been refuted in a very methodical and progressive way.

Whether it matters or not depends on many different things to many different people. If it doesn't matter to you, that's fine...that doesn't make it a meaningless conversation to everyone.

 

Do you suppose JG may try to get it through Classiche at some point, or would that present the end of all doubt? Could he "buy" a certification?

Perry

 

I doubt he cares at this point. For many reasons.

1. Classiche has approved incorrect cars so it would not end the debate. So why bother?
2. He is a manufacturer and is building the cars he dreamt of so why bother?
3. He loves his P cars as they are, can drive them as they are when he wants

I dont think Jim is a guy who needs validation from others, esp if it's from Classiche which is far from perfect.

 

^^ For a guy that supposedly doesn’t need validation from others he sure has spent a lot of time, effort, and money to convince people DP003 is the LeMans famed 0846.

 

Both true... just wondering, because you never know. I could see if he got certification, that would be a feather in his cap, a sort of, "See, I told you so, the factory agrees" kind of thing. Doesn't make it so, but....

 

As I said before, and I will say it again…it seems reasonable that an X-Ray survey of the complete chassis would be definitive, and final.

Two dimensional comparisons are one method but far from optimal or definitive; a three dimensional model won’t be able to be refuted.

If an X-Ray survey was done, regardless of the outcome it would give Mr. G. a platform to “save face”, and all parties could celebrate the respective “victory”.

 

While interesting, such a test is wholly unnecessary.

There's simply NO reason to believe, anymore ... NO reason remaining ... to believe that this chassis is that from 0846. All claims have been refuted, with stronger evidence than any original claim!

At this point, the results of the test you recommend would have the same interest as for any barn-find, where the finder claims "royal heritage" ... based on nothing but well-refuted and entirely-dismissed claims.

 

Wholly unnecessary and yet completely requisite for a definitive outcome.

Apparently, Mr. G isn’t on board with Mr. R’s assessment.

An X-Ray survey would put this to bed.

La fine.

 

Not required at all. Allow me a hypothetical:

I find an old chassis in a barn, tomorrow. Based on a few photos, I claim that it's the chassis of a very valuable old racing Ferrari. But, all of my theories and speculations are ultimately refuted by hard evidence ... many more detailed period photos, testimonies, expert opinions, etc etc. There's just nothing left to support my claims and theories!

Would you consider a metallurgical analysis to be requisite, in this case?

 

Apparently Jeff, my point has been broadcast where you are not able to receive it.

I find that odd, because Mr. Massini and others have been able to receive it and understand what I’m trying to elucidate.

Once more, and finally; an X-Ray survey would be definitive for all parties, irrespective of any previous claims or evidence provided to date.

la fine

 

I think, perhaps, you're still not understanding the current state of the "debate" Have you read the entire thread?

There is ZERO surviving evidence, now, to support the claim that the car in question is anything but a replica. None.

Therefore, the following analogy is entirely valid:

If someone on this thread bought a Norwood 330 P4 replica tomorrow, and claimed it to be 0846 ... you would assert that a metallurgical analysis of the chassis is warranted. Correct?

I simply disagree.

 

See the recent La Voiture Noire story....

 

From Classiche certainly not, because he has said so before, and because I have visited his shop and spoken at length to Sal his chief mechanic and I believe he knows as much as most Classiche affiliated specialists do, if not more, about fixing and restoring these cars.

I do think he likes the attention. His focus has just shifted, that's all. Good for him too, as he's pulling off some amazing things under his own name.

 

Attention =/= validation