Ferrari Modulo

Exactly what problems have been solved, impossibilities achieved and convention denied here then?

 

Turning a concept into a runner, solving the cooling clearly, lets be fair the modulo is a 512s in a new set of clothes a 512s works and with modern techniques e.g. CFD problems that were major when the car was conceived can be easily solved. As your premise is to knock anything Jim does then it is a pointless conversation.

 

Steve

You have suggested that Jim Glickenhaus is driving a car that is unsafe. By doing this you are implying that Jim is guilty of legal negligence. You’ve also implied that the cooling is his car is currently inadequate.

You do not have any first hand knowledge what has been done to the car.

It’s clear you don’t like Jim, but please be careful about crossing the line.
You’ve made false implications and assumptions about the present state of this car. I don’t have time, nor does Jim, to respond on this forum to every negative allegation you make about him or this car, but I caution you about allegations you make in a public forum.

I note that you do not state that what you repeat are opinions. You declare them as facts. I would caution that you take upon yourself a risk by making such declarations so definitively. If you are right, you have no problem. If you are wrong, you do.

I like to come to these forums to enjoy the conversations. The constant negativity is, at a minimum, a drag. My advice, as a fellow enthusiast, is to move on to another thread.



Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat.com mobile app

 

It looked OK. The slowness off the truck was down to the tyres and no power steering I imagine, but he reversed it left off the truck, and turned 90 degrees right with no problem.

 

We were not shown in the video if the wheel bodywork, that is said to restrict the steering, which was not present when Modulo was being taken off the lorry, had actually been re-attached to the car at that point.

 

All that is clear from the second video is that the driver is being super cautious with the car. Car in front and behind of them, giving the lorry a wide berth.

We don't even know the purpose of that drive. Maybe just to demonstrate progress, a small test maybe.

(At Pebble when reversed off the truck it made a sharper turn.)

 

I thought you were referring to the video with Modulo coming off the lorry at Pebble. In the video you posted you can see from 1.55 that Modulo makes a 6 point turn, and that is at a point where the road actually widens out at both sides at the end of the road, and with no wheel bodywork.

 

It doesn't have the turning circle of a London taxi, but he is applying more steering lock as he moves the car, probably to protect the tyres which are going to pebble beach. He doesn't apply full lock and then move the car.

At 4.50 he takes a sharp 90 degree turn at quite low speed with no problems.

 

Well I'm sure we will see a video very soon of Modulo doing a 3 point turn as Glickenhaus claims the car can do. There is no reason why it shouldn't be able to do one if the wheel wells are swelled.




Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Why do you care?

 

I feel I must answer this post. I do not dislike or hate Jim as you and many people think but I do dislike his constant statements to him owning Ferarri P3/4 0846, when clearly the evidence proves it is not. You must have spoken to him about this being so close to him. I mean surely you can't possibly think the car is real? Or actually, do you? What actually is your view on it if you have actually looked at the evidence? Personally I think the claiming of the car being 0846 damages his credibility for his new products. I wish him luck with his new cars but please do not compare him to Enzo Ferrari who made his own engines. Certainly not at this early point anyway, where few (if any?) cars, have actually been completed yet in the SCG Factory in New York. Regarding Modulo's cooling solution, you saw what Paolo Martin, Modulo's designer said about it. Do you have any pictures that prove that I have been misinformed and that there is plenty of room for the wheels to turn without them hitting the bodywork? It would be good to clear this up. If they do hit the bodywork that is very unsafe actually.

Regarding SCG004 JG now states the cost is $440,000 which is very much more than a 488 and I can't see where a Miura has been its inspiration being nothing like one. Having no airbags is not the greatest thing either. I agree that SCG004 is a great looking car and sincerely I hope that it is a success. I do have a question regarding its engine as there is no info on the web site about its origin. We were told initially that it was an unspecified 5.0 twin turbo V8 which then changed to a Nissan Nismo V6 but I read somewhere it will now be using Chevrolet power. Having ordered a car and getting the first one you must know the details of the engine and I'm sure people here would like to know.

 

You reek of jealousy and I’m pretty sure Jim couldn’t care less as to your angst about his cars..... maybe you need a new hobby? You don’t sound like your having fun!!

As far as 004 yeah there’s a whole group of people who want a raw experience and the lightest weight possible. Now that’s a possibility with SCG and guess what? Maybe people would rather have 4 points and no airbag with a racing grade crash structure? Does a 919 have an airbag? Get real buddy.

It seems like it will be a LT4 powered all American muscle machine. The designs got a bit of everything to it in my view. A lot of Dino Competizione I see. Anyway, why don’t you contribute kindly or just not at all.

 

I will make a note to the moderators that this note demonstrates how Muira SV is clearly hoping from one forum to another about different cars in different forums to troll Jim Glickenhaus.

In response to objections to false insinuations about this concept car Muira SV has brought in trolling from several different threads. We are not hear talking about 0846 (Muira SV has already been warned about this in another forum) or 004.

Muira SV is constantly hopping from one discussion about assets owned by Jim G to another disparaging Jim.

In this thread, I and others are talking about a concept car. Muira SV is bringing in irrelevant content for the sole purpose to put down the owner personally.

Miura SV is spreading falsehoods about this car’s present state. I’ve tried to be nice an diplomatic. But I don’t understand why the forum should allow someone to hop from thread to threat constantly trolling of Jim Glickenhaus and his assets. Miura SV has made false allegations regarding the present state of this car and Jim Glickenhaus and his company committing civil negligence by driving an unsafe car on the roadway.

Neither Jim nor most people who can afford his cars have the time to go behind these continuous disparagement and defend each one on this forum. But this public forum is being monitored.

Maybe the moderators can curb this because it’s getting in the way of civil enthusiast discourse.


To Miura SV I’ll say this. It’s clear you have your ego too far into this with Jim G. I’ve tried to be kind and give you good advice. If you are trying to establish yourself as an expert for hire, you are hurting your personal credibility. As someone of means who hires experts everyday. People with substantial means want unbiased advice and research. Anyone can research but not everyone has the time for it. When busy people of means hire experts to do research for them, the first thing they look for is bias and agenda. They run from this type of stuff. Do yourself and this forum a favor and move on from Jim G and commenting on his assets.

Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat.com mobile app

 

Is this what is commonly referred to as a deflection post? In far less time than it took you took to write the above you could have answered and satisfied the questions. Have you now by not answering any of the simple questions raised a bigger question regarding whether the wheels have enough room to turn and what engine will be in $440,000 SCG004? The thing is you see, even Jim has stated previously that the wheels hit the bodywork on Modulo, so it is natural among Ferrari enthusiasts to want to know the truth of the matter. If Jim doesn't want to answer these kind of questions about his cars he shouldn't show them off in public arenas where there are inquisitive, intelligent and knowledgeable people. The questions regarding Modulo are totally reasonable and the fact that they are asked does not amount to disparagement or trolling, just as my questions regarding DP3/"0846" were reasonable before he decided to leave FerrariChat rather than answer them. The content is absolutely relevant on a Ferrari forum and it is ridiculous to suggest the content is brought to put the owner down personally.

And no, I am not spreading any falsehoods whatsoever.

 

pretty much like your deflection posts, you have not answered any questions just acted as a postman to what other people have said.

 

You have brought into this thread criticism of the 0846 thread,and 004 into this thread. The only connection between the debate over 0846, 004, and this thread is that they are owned by Jim Glickenhaus. You follow him thread by thread to disparage him and his assets.

You’ve stated through innuendo that Jim Glickenhaus is driving a car on public negligently because the front tires hit the bodywork. And you have said the car in it’s present state has a cooling issue that prevents its operation above 87.

You have not personally viewed these cars and instead claim what you say are facts about this car based upon you claiming to have spoken to others who have also not seen the present state of the cars. And yet you contradict people who have seen the present engineering of this car. You aren’t asking questions about the car, you claim you are stating facts and what is not possible about the present state of the car. This isn’t opinion, you are declaring facts about the present state of the car, that I am informing you, are false. You want to state your opinion, you have no responsibility. You declare something false as a fact, you may have a problem.
(I know you don’t see this, but I’m trying to give you a hint to help you personally here.)

I’m not deflecting anything I’m intentionally not following you from thread to thread with to defend irrelevant commentary about other cars. This is the very point I am making.

You have proven in this thread to be intentionally following different cars around to disparage them. The only common connection between these cars you criticize is the present owner. I am trying as pleasant a method I can think of, and I am asking you, as a gentlemen, to please stop this.




Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat.com mobile app

 

30-day thread ban for introducing 0846 content outside of the 0846 thread.

 

wooo hooo!!!! Yessss!!!!
Thank you

 

Such an iconic car. I had a die cast model of this car when i was a kid and the hotwheels car. Wish I still had them. I think Hasbro made a transformer toy also.

I would love to see and hear it!

 

I know Jim long enough to know that if he's making it road worthy it is road worthy. I saw it at Monterey and saw no problems with it moving, turning or anything else. No rubbing that I could detect and I was right next to it as it drove in

 

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

The ex 612 can am chassis
Car now has many new parts to make it a road car. I was happy to help the owner.
I would have brought it to Classiche and have a 612 can am made of it, but that’s just what an owner wants. All about taste, money and opinions

 

It would be good to see actual proof Modulo's chassis was used in a 612 Can Am car previously. Paolo Martin believes the chassis was one of the last 2 512S unsold of the 25 built for homologation approval.

 

Very nice article on the restoration of the Modulo in jan 2019 edition of Classic Cars, explains how all the problems were overcome to make it driveable.

 

At Villa d'Este 2019. Was awarded "Most Exciting Design".