The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

When you find TRUTH, I'd like an introduction to her foxy sister, FAITH. LOL!

 

Why you want to meet Faith? She is the sister that can't deal with reality, and who always acts simply on personal feelings.

 

Yep, that's the one.......

You get it now........

I really think Jim G. started sharing with the internet world based upon a "here's something interesting I've found" intent. You know, 'car guys sharing' type of bench racing. Everyone else seems to think it's about the value of the car, but not many Fchatters are potential customers.
Maybe a handful at best.

I really doubt it was to get in an endless arguement with Paul Skett.

Of course, I'm pretty naive, that's why I'm leaving now,...with FAITH as my companion.

 

Perhaps this will answer your question.

>I was present when Wayne Sparling inspected the Glickenhaus car, and also
>talked
>with Wayne about it afterwards.
>
>Yes, Wayne saw where he had repaired the chassis. Wayne also pointed out a
>number of details with the car that were "wrong" as far as it being a
>"correct"
>restoration/re-creation/resurrection.
>
>FWIW Wayne also repaired the bodywork on the Le Mans-winning 250 LM S/N
>5893
>after its crash at Daytona in 1968 and worked on the car on several other
>occasions. At Pebble Beach on Sunday he showed me the many "non-original"
>aspects of the car.
>
>Ciao,
>Gerald
>
>Gerald Roush
>Roush Publications
>dba Ferrari Market Letter
>770-381-1993
>770-381-0518 FAX

 

Also, you say that repairs or replacement of parts done back in the day is ok and does not convert the original car to being a replica, but such repairs done in more recent times would make the car a replica. So how do you apply this to cars with a continuous race history? Many historic cars have been racing since day one. If the chassis was replaced on a '70 917 in 1972... seems you would still call it an original car. What about the chassis being replaced in 1977? 1985? 1998? When is the magic cutoff time?

I see a MAJOR difference between a 1970 Porsche 917 which had the chassis repaired or repleced by the factory in 1972 as opposed to a similar car who's repairs were done by someone other than the factory 20 years after the car was built. I do not know of any Porsche 917s with a continious race history. Racing in competition and racing in historic events have nothing to do with each other. Once a car's career in competition has ended, it's race history ends for me. It's involvement in historic events after the fact do not add in any way to the history or value of the car; in fact any modifications or replacements due to a cars involvement in historic races only detract from it's value, as far as I'm concerned. A historic race car that is origonal but has had only enough modifications to make it safe is FAR more valuable than a similar car that has had modifcations to make it competitive or to improve it's appearence from scruff looking but origonal. The value of any two similr cars is relative, but to me the one that would be more valuable would never be the one that looks better or runs better because it was restored.

 

Why would Piper NOT be willing to fill in the gaps? What written documentaion exists as to what Piper says the car is? Certainly written documentation is better than hearsay and second or third hand oral statements.

As far as I'm concerned, the value of a car lies in it's originality. Values are realative; and if two cars of the same type exist, the more origonal one is always the more valuable one. The market will, of course, detirmine the values...I am just attempting to explain my standards.

 

Very interesting. Particularly as Jim, from the beginning, never set out to restore this car to "correct" 0846 specs. How could he have? When Jim began this project he had no idea this car was 0846! Jim restored this car to be what he wanted it to be... not to try and make it "correct" to any give specification so of coarse it has lots of historically incorrect things about it. Oh well. Personally, I think it looks tons better as a coupe than as a spider!


Terry

 

With all due respect, if that is the case, than why so much insistance on the part of various people that the car IS 846?

 

if you look back through the unbelievable amount of posts regarding this car, the discovery of it's possible origin came as the restoration was underway as the frame showed signs of damage from the Accident and the other things that showed up.

He did not start thinking he had purchased the remnants of 0846 until the evidence began to show that it most probably is 0846.

 

But I notice that nowhere in this story did you actually tell the "young boy" (or anybody else) that this "P4" was serial number 0846.

It seems we have a contradiction. If it's "JUST" about the delight of the car in a young boy's eyes, then why is so much effort being put into this forensic examination in a desperate attempt to PROVE to anybody that will listen that this car is constructed around some scraps of the original frame of 0846?
In the end, what difference does it make if some small portions of the frame are original scraps of 0846? That still doesn't make the body, the engine, the transmission, the wheels, the suspension uprights, the wiring, the brake lines, the WHATEVER, into being the actual car that roared around the LeMans track in 1967.

It still sounds like whistling in the graveyard. If you're not scared, why are you whistling. If the "0846 heritage" is NOT what is important, why put so much effort into proving that THIS is THE car?

 

Arlie
More than a small part. I and other beleive that Most of my chassis is the remains of 0846 in addition to other parts all of which will be gone into in upcoming articles. Why do I care? That's something that you either understand or you don't.

 

I couldn't agree more!

 

I "understand" the process of documentation. But I don't agree with what amounts to a "philosopher's stone" type of documentation. The attitude that "maybe if we examine something enough then it will become what we WISH it to be". Sort of like alchemy. We desperately search for a philosopher's stone that will turn lead into gold; or a piece of documentation or mass approval that will turn scraps into "0846". Sounds pretty desperate to me. Why not just be happy to have a nice P4 replica. Or is there REALLY more at stake here?

 

Dr. Schaller & Horsefly,

I bought my car when I was 24 (it is older than me) with the intention of making a buck. I ended up falling in love and have been losing money ever since, but the experience has been worth it.

I think the last sentence in Jim G.'s post 159 sums up the differences between the two sides best. For those that are able to own these cars the money is generally not the motivating factor. The love of the car and the possibility of finding a lost piece of history is.

Even if, in your eyes, the sum of the parts doesn't constitute an original car, wouldn't it be neat if the mystery of what happened to 0846 was solved and a substantial amount of the original car was incorporated into a reconstituted car? I think the parts can have their originality proven. The discussion as to whether those original parts add up to 0846 is similar to the discussion: Is there a God.

Regards,

Art S.

 

Your standards are certainly valid when evaluating a production car. A racing car is a different animal. As Pete and others have pointed out.

A lot of people are criticizing (sp?) Jims car. They point out features that are "incorrect" for 0846. By that I mean, his car is not exactly like the car was on the starting grid at Le Mans in 67 They hold that out as evidence that this car is nothing but a replica, and a not particularly accurate one at that.

The world believes that 0846 burned up at LeMans in 1967. Its history ended that day. Therefore any modifications to that config are incorrect.

Jim has discovered that the history is much richer than this. This car has a history as Piper's chassis 0003. All those races, all those modifications that Piper made are really part of the history of 0846. Those changes aren't wrong, they are part of the history of this chassis. Up to now the history was not continuous. Jim has gathered info to tie the history of two cars into 1. Way to go Jim.

Erich

 

Stuart (and I hope you don't mind me calling you this), the problem is that, by definition, the documentation that you wish to see doesn't exist.

Chassis #0846 has definitely been on a "long and strange trip" and has occasionally been lost from sight while it traveled on the "dark side of the moon." (sic)

Surely, if Ferrari had the documentation to clearly state whether the chassis that Jim has is #0846, don't you think that we would have heard by now?

With respect to Mr. Piper, you need to keep in mind that there were multiple owners of this chassis before it came into Mr. Piper's hands. This is seer speculation, but perhaps Mr. Piper, given the lack of providence, is uncomfortable with making any public statements as to the authenticity of this rat's nest of tubing. Perhaps, Mr. Piper doesn't want to say anything for other reasons that are purely his own. Who knows? As an analogy, we still don't know who Deep Throat was over 30 years later.

So there you have it. The sole reason for this thread and all the others like it is because no one has the paperwork that you'd like to see.

Jim has stated his case. No one else has publicly responded to the contrary with any objective response other than (1) they don't like guys who drive racecars on the road, (2) they think that rich guys who restore cars are just looking for ego toys, (3) they don't think that Piper would make a bonehead mistake like selling Jim #0846, and so forth and so on. But to the best of my knowledge nobody has come forth with any objective evidence showing that #0846 is NOT Jim's car. Granted the lack of a negative response doesn't prove Jim's case, but it does make for a one-sided debate.

Further, Jim is not asking for an appraisal. He has been quite clear that this is not a money-making deal for him.

Is he looking for validation? Sure. Didn't you ever have buddy pick something up and holler, "Look what I found!" From my perspective, Jim is just showing us what he found.

With respect to Jim's car, WYSIWYG. It is starting to look like "last call for alcohol" for those who disagree with his premise.

Anybody?

Dale

 

Dr, A lot of what you have said here I agree with, ie. the historic racing career means little to the cars history (by that I mean once it is racing as a historic car, winning is no longer important at all).

But I think where we differ is that I see cars as cars, ie. they should be driven and if race cars, they should be raced (carefully). I think you think that they should be rolled into a museum (probably with the dirt from the last race still smeared over the car).

Now that attitude I think just does not make sense with a car. A car is something that, via it's movements and need for control comes close to being able to talk to the driver ... to suddenly see all this beautiful engineering as just a static display is like putting a lid on the amount of passion an Italian opera singer can display ... to me anyway.

Thus while looking at Jim's photos of #0846 is great ... seeing that car twitch sideways out of a sweeper, engine howling would be close to a life changing experience ... well atleast something to dream about.

Therefore I do not see the cars life stopping when it finishes REAL racing. What I see is the car now serves a different purpose and that is to enrichen the ears and souls of us car nutters by being exercised as often as possible. Note I said exercised ... I find nothing more anoying and really upsetting than watching some confused driver abuse the cr@p out of an old race car to pump up their ego ... wrong race series mate, piss off! is my attitude.

So lets move on to how my attitude affects this originality you and I both strive for ... but at different levels.

First and foremost ALL cars must be 100% able to be driven ... I personally think that to enter a concours competition the car has to pass a roadworthyness test (ie. like a race scrutineering test, checking for play in the suspension, brakes, fuel lines and general ability to actually be driven safely). If a car fails this ... go home!

In the end we as car enthusiasts have an obligation to show the NON-car enthusiasts of the world how to CORRECTLY maintain a car ... striving for originality so much that NOT replacing a suspension joint or upright or oil filter because it was originally put on by the factory ... and thus making the car dangerous is hardly the right message is it?. Many road accidents are caused or atleast made worse by poorly maintained vehicles, we should be showing the right way not the maintenance is for fools direction.

The next test a concours eligible car needs to pass is submission of the cars maintenance record. As far as I am concerned if the car still has its original wearing components ... again fail. Remember a car was first and foremost designed as a method of travel, and if it cannot do that safely, then what has it become?

Therefore a car that shows up with its original tyres from 1960 ... should be sent home with the owner completely embarrassed by his/her ignorant to safety attitude.

All components that are used to replace original components though have to be to the same specification, thus if you buy an old car that has won a concours competition not only would look fantastic it would drive just as well as when it left the factory! Now wouldn't that be cool.

Modifications away from the original design specs ... yes, should not happen, but replacing parts as required to maintain safety has to happen. And yes I agree that historic events do not add whatsoever to the cars value (other than it can still be driven properly). All historic events should not have finishing places IMO.

Agree.

And again I have to disagree. While I agree with the looks side, the one that runs PROPERLY has been correctly maintained the other car has been neglected and the owner that neglected the maintenance should be ashamed of themselves.

Pete

 

I know I would be proud to have found or to own such historic car and I think even more proud than if it was just a replica....now who would not???
For everyone who is a true fanatic about historic cars, or has just the least interest in Motoring history, it will matter if the remains of the #0846 has eventually been found! And for sure it matters to me....to know and be sure of, if the remains are lost forever, or if the main part of the chassis still survives in the car belonging to JG.
I really dont get it why so many people , calling themselves enthusiasts or fanatics seems to be unhappy with the possibillity that just maybe the remains of the long-lost #0846 has been found, and beautifully restored by JG.!!!

Best regards

Carsten

 

Step 1: Convince yourself that you possess a portion of item number WXYZ

Step 2: Convince the experts that you possess a portion of item number WXYZ

Step 3: Convince the masses that you possess a portion of item number WXYZ

Step 4 (EXTREMELY IMPORTANT): Convince yourself, the experts, and the masses that possession of a mere "portion" of item number WXYZ means that you actually "possess" item number WXYZ

Step 5: Enjoy the limelight

Step 6: Ignore little boy's questions if they ask "Is that REALLY item number WXYZ?"

 

I try not to get involved with Horseflies teasing, as that is all it is ... but here are my answers to his questions :

Evidence is pretty convincing that the chassis Jim has used has continous history back to the chassis that Ferrari made as #0846. Yes it has been repaired ... so what. Should all race cars be completely destroyed if they require repair ... gee that would make motor racing even more silly expensive.

Yes this is what you usually do when you make a discovery and tell somebody else. Most people do not find something important and just keep it to themselves, do they?

So far quite a few 'experts' have examined the chassis and confirmed that Jim is right.

Again you either talk to other people or you do not. Gee I talk to many people about my Alfa.

Again Jim has NOT said that he owns the body that #0846 once wore, the tyres, the oil, etc. Just the chassis and gearbox, and has an engine that once ran at Le Mans.

Thus we have 2 options:
1. Jim restores the chassis and leaves it as a chassis and displays it in a museum as the remains of #0846, OR
2. Jim builds up a car using correct and authentic parts around chassis #0846 so that the chassis can once again become part of a car.

Last time I looked cars were about driving, and buggered if I would get as much excitement or interest seeing #0846's chassis sitting in a museum ... compared to a fully running car!

He is only human

Little boy and 99% of the population could not give a damn whether it was a cheap and nasty replica based on a VW ... hardly interested in the cars history, he wants to sit in it and make car noises (like many of us ).

Pete

 

Dr.
Bill Noon told me an interesting story that Mr. Forghieri told him about the conversion of P3 0844 into NART Can AM 0844. It was done at the track with a hacksaw and a pair of tin snips.
These were race cars. Sh it happened to them.
Arlie
Hope all's well.
Best

 

Page 128 of Forza October 2004 has a very interesting blurb in the last paragraph about S/N 0720 TR. Makes for some interesting reading and shows just how complicated this thing can get.

 

Were you there? I don't recall the little boy asking me what the serial # was. If he had I would have told him what I believe it to be. Do you really think I convinced Wayne S. who was there on the day 0846 crashed at the Targa Floria? Does it sound like I did from Gerald's post? Wayne S. walked over to look at my car. I haven't seen or spoken to him since I was an 11 year old boy hanging out at Mr. Chinetti's if indeed he was there then.

Pete
Heads and other parts of the engine. I believe the block is a factory spare.

 

After the aforementioned details, facts stories and so forth, i'm still in awe that folks like Arlie continue to stand by this thin-air-fabricated fallacy that Jim is making this all up or bending the truth in some way, so that people think he has more than he really does...

It's a racecar. When racecars race, they get f_cked up... People repair them... Are you folks aware that there's a GTO out there that has VERY LITTLE of what it left the factory with...? Is it splattered with doubt...? Nooooooooo... Because it's owned by a big time collector and yadda yadda yadda...

Chassis seem to be the most important part of the car in the Ferrari world... If you have 250 GTO s/n XXXX and you swap out the factory engine for a new one, you still have 250 GTO s/n XXXX; however, if all you have is the engine from 250 GTO s/n XXXX, then you don't have 250 GTO s/n XXXX...

Let's go a little further... Let's say, after putting in a new engine in 250 GTO s/n XXXX, you crash it and now need to make some repairs... Some of the body needs to be bent back, other parts need to be replaced all together... It's still 250 GTO s/n XXXX, right...? Of course it is... You're racing it, there needs to be a way to identify it, **** happens, you make do and that's that... At that point, if someone asks you which GTO you have, do you tell them you have the remains of 250 GTO s/n XXXX because you no longer have the original engine and some body panels and paint have been replaced...? Um, no.

Over the years, you keep racing it, you have a few mishaps, whatever... You get new tires, the wheels are all banged up, you decide to replace those with wheels from another GTO... More of the body gets messed up and winds up being refurbished or replaced... Over time, you've ridden this car of its "originality", piece by piece... But you don't care, you race it, you have fun, **** happens, you make do and that's that...

Sure there are differences between my hypothetical little rant there and what Jim has done, but how severe are the differences...? No so that it merits scrutiny beyond denial... There are some folks here who obviously REFUSE to believe anything other than what they've already made their minds up with...

i'm just a dufus enthusiast with a big prancing horse on his chest, but i've seen the car... Like Pete said, i'd rather see the whole thing than just the chassis, hanging on a wall, in some museum... The car is gorgeous... the chassis is not... i've seen the paperwork, the documentation, the photos, the letters, this, that and the other thing and i gotta tell you, as interesting as it all was, i was much happier to see the CAR... Just like EVERYONE else was in California... No one was going up to Jim asking to see paperwork; i was amidst a huge throng of people, fighting for position to get a clear shot of Jim's car...

Occasionally, people approached him and asked questions like, "What is it?" or "What year is it?" or deeper, more technical questions, like, "How many cylinders does it have?" and normal, enthusiastic questions like that... i stood there and listened to Jim explain to Wayne and others exactly what he's explained here and the crowd only grew... No one up and left when they heard the "story"... No one was turned off when they found it out that it's not a cut and dry car... Everyone was still bumping shoulders, trying to get pictures... If there were protests and picket sign wielders demanding a factory-authorized certificate, i missed them... We all missed them... 'Cause we were all too immersed in the car... and that's what it's all about...

 

i seriously doubt that. after all 0846 was the car that took he and bandini to victory in the 67 daytona 24 hours. if anything i'd venture to guess that he was rather fond of it.