The (one and only) '0846' Debate Thread

here a nice video to enjoy one of the P-Cars
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViP_UO4Bu0A

 

I can't see how the wheelbase is even relevant...

The suspension mounting points of the frame determine wheelbase...NOT the location of the engine mounts. Bolt-on components such as spacers, shims, or different suspension components will change the wheelbase...not shifting the engine forward or rearward.

We've seen many photos in this thread. The engine bolts to the frame. Separately, the suspension components bolt to a different part of the frame. (in fact, we've seen pictures in this thread of P cars with wheels attached, but no engine...proving their 'independence'). The two are connected by a driveshaft with U-joints at either end...a device that by design allows one component (the suspension) to move independent of the other component (the gearbox/differential).

I see plenty of evidence that the frame was modified to change the engine mounts. I have not heard any credible suggestions as to how those changes led to a wheelbase change. So, once again, how was the wheelbase changed?

If I'm missing something, I'd love to have someone point it out to me...

Believe it or not, I'm on the "it probably is" side of the fence...the "wheelbase evidence" is not good science, though...at least the way it has been presented to date.

 

+1

 

I cannot find anywhere in the thread that Marcel has referred to 0846 as it stands today as "resurrected".

"Marcel Massini and Keith Bluemel have only stated 0846 has attended certain concours because you claim that you have legally registered it at the US DMV as the number 0846."

Yes, I said the above and I am not alone in my thinking.

Jim said above: "Doug Nye clearly stated P3 to P4 wheelbase was decreased. This is fact."

My reply: It is not a fact. It wasn't Doug Nye who said it but Hans Tanner who said it in the 1968 3rd edition of Ferrari, the original author of this series of books before Doug Nye edited errors and expanded it after Tanner's death in 1975. Hans Tanner was wrong and Doug obviously missed this error in his edited 5th and 6th editions. What is a fact is that the P3 and P4 wheelbase lengths were both 94.5" = 2400mm as documented in the "Ferrari Technical Data Sheets" and published by every credible Ferrari historian as well as the Official Ferrari Web Site (see here: http://auto.ferrari.com/en_EN/sports-cars-models/past-models/330-p3/) and Ing. Mauro Forghieri. The P3 wheelbase was NOT 2412mm and the P4 wheelbase was not reduced by 1" to 93.5" or 2375mm.

Hans Tanner did get the P3 wheelbase right at 94.5". Doug Nye has stated the P3 wheelbase as 2400mm. Now this is interesting: Doug Nye has also stated in his book, FERRARI. The Red Dream the wheelbase of the P3/412P chassis as 2400mm. Please note the car in his book, P3/412P 0848, has the Ferrari tipo 603R gearbox which all 4 cars in the 412P group got after Le Mans, '67. He also states the wheelbase of the 412P as being 2400mm in his book The Colonel's Ferraris.

Jim said above: "Your calling his one inch a rounding error speaks for itself."

My reply: I said no such thing. Re read my post. There was no error. I did perhaps overcomplicate my post and I should have kept it simple. I was trying to explain how imperial dimensional figures in inches would be rounded up or down to 1 decimal place. Metric dimensional figures in millimetres were mainly given in whole figures being such a small unit hence 94.5" = 2400mm.

Jim said: Even your BFF admits some P3/412P wheelbases were 2412mm and P4 wheelbases were 2400mm even though he stated 0854 has a 603R gearbox which it doesn't it has a 603.

Jim said: Your following statement Is laughable.

"Only the P3/412P and 412P cars 0844, 0848, 0850 and 0854 ever had a wheelbase of 2412mm and this was when the ZF 5DS gearbox was installed in them, not the tipo 593 and tipo 603R Ferrari gearboxes."

My reply: It's not laughable at all. CH didn't say "some". You clearly haven't understood what he said. He said P3/412P and 412 P cars had a wheelbase of 2412mm but here is the big thing you don't seem to understand: The wheelbase figure of 2412mm is with the ZF 5DS gearbox installed which was a temporary fix for the unreliable tipo 593 Ferrari gearbox until the Ferrari tipo 603R gearbox became more readily available. The ZF 5DS gearbox is the common denominator for cars with the 2412mm wheelbase. 0846 never had a ZF 5DS installed in it, so its wheelbase was never 2412mm. These chassis had to be modified at the back to accept this ZF 5DS gearbox. CH doesn't give a wheelbase figure for the P3/412P and 412P cars with the Ferrari Tipo 603R gearbox installed. Why wouldn't it revert to 2400mm when the Ferrari 603R was installed in all these cars after Le Mans 1967? Ferrari and all credible sources state the wheelbase as 2400mm for the P3/412P and 412P cars which I would guess is stated with the Ferrari 603R installed.

You should get someone to remeasure the wheelbase of 0854.

 

Here is a scanned copy of the actual Official Ferrari Notiziario Technical Data Sheet/Document for the 330 P4 issued by the Ferrari Factory. We have Factory proof that the P3 and P4 wheelbase lengths (PASSO) were both exactly the same at 2400mm. The P3 was not 2412mm and P4 wheelbase was not shortened P3 v. P4 as Jim states. That Jim's chassis wheelbase with a P3/412P engine is 2412mm proves it is not 0846. 0846 was the actual car presented to the Press in February, 1966 and stated by Ferrari as having a 2400mm wheelbase.

I will say again that the only cars from this group that had a 2412mm wheelbase were those that temporarily got the ZF 5DS gearbox as the Ferrari gearboxes were not available in sufficient numbers. This adaptation necessitated changing the rear part of the chassis and the lengthening of the wheelbase from 2.400m to 2.412m. 0846 was not one of those cars
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Post 8604

Post 8609

Post 8617

Do you ever get that feeling of Deja Vu ?

 

I would really like to see the evidence where Ferrari clearly described the above. The above is not true.

 

It is clear that Steve not only doesn't think Jim's car is 0846 but more importantly than that HE DOESN'T WANT IT TO BE either.

He will not be convinced no matter how much patience he is shown and indeed evidence. This once deservedly banned poster coming back to stoke the flames is just beating a dead horse and blatant trolling.

He has nothing new to add, no revelations, no new compelling evidence. It is just a rehash of his many, many other posts on the matter.

Pointless but very much expected and a shame that he is allowed back given his previous history here. If I ever need to know what Talacrest's stock is he may prove useful but on this car his trolling undermines any original point that he may have had.

 

So what you have been saying for years about how the original chassis maker took the scrapped chassis of 0846 from the scrap yard/skip to save work that you changed to Enzo Ferrari selling the remains of chassis 0846 to Tom Meade, the alleged death bed statement confirming that to now totally back tracking the above by saying that David Piper bought a P3 chassis from Ferrari is how David ended up with 0846 as it was the only missing chassis. You have also said that David didn't know what he had when he sold you a replica chassis but has now changed to knowing he had a genuine P3 chassis which was 0846. Which one is it? Ferrari have confirmed in writing that they never sold the chassis of 0846.

 

+1

 

James has said that the above unauthenticated email from Ing. Forghieri back tracks his email to me. Not true. He confirms it.

MF saying that the wrecked 0846 chassis was sent to the scrap yard and not destroyed by his department does not mean that it was not subsequently destroyed in the scrap yard. It merely means that chassis 0846's provable whereabouts ended in the Ferrari scrap yard.

As MF has said that he cannot rule out that the modifications to the Glickenhaus chassis could have been performed elsewhere, perhaps even by another Ferrari department, this means that it is NOT 0846 as MF again confirms here, as well as in his email to me, that he did not perform the modifications to the Glickenhaus chassis.

It is documented in many places, including Mauro Forghieri's recent book "Forghieri on Ferrari 1947 to the present" that 0846 being transformed from 330 P3 to 330 P3/4, the "prototype P4" for the 1967 season and its modifications were very much the work of Mauro Forghieri and his Racing Department and NOT another Ferrari department. Ing. Forghieri was given carte blanche by Enzo Ferrari to build a "superlative Ferrari" after losing the championship in 1966.

Mr Glickenhaus has provided more proof from Ing. Forghieri that his chassis is NOT the original Ferrari 0846 that won Daytona in 1967 etc.

In the interest of full disclosure to eliminate the risk of misinterpretation, statements being misunderstood and taken out of context, I have asked Mr Glickenhaus to post the full content of the exchanges of messages with no omissions between himself and Ing. Forghieri but he has failed to do so.

 

+1 and I'd like to understand why he was unbanned... I thought it was permanent...

 

There have been many prototype, or show cars that were supposed to be scrapped and indeed were taken to a scrap yard here in the States only to be found and restored. It's not far fetched.

You have too much time on your hands and too large an axe to grind.

Perry

 

Haven't you read Jim's total back tracking above of the story(s) about the skip, the Tom Meade death bed statement etc he's being telling everyone for years? He now says David bought the chassis directly off Ferrari.

 

Makes no sense that he would be allowed back to pursue his obvious vendetta once more??

He clearly doesn't care, but he's embarrassing himself and in turn his repeated posts accusing Jim of some level of deceit are a shame to read on this forum.

>8^)
ER

 

As the late but much missed yogi berra said, its deja vu over again........

Not sure why but Mr MiuraSV will burn himself as he won't be able to stop attacking as opposed to asking questions. It would be interesting to know if anything would prove to him that the car is what Jim claims...........

 

Not fair. I ask many questions in my pursuit of knowledge including on FerrariChat. I have asked many questions of Jim that he unfortunately, for whatever reason, will not answer. Much of what he has written regarding the evidence that his chassis is the original 0846 that won Daytona does not stand scrutiny.

 

I have to say, that after having survived cancer, stage 3 esophageal, the most dangerous type along with pancreatic, that all of this hyperbole regarding 0846 is secondary. Steve, if you wish to pursue the authenticity of Jim's ownership of 0846, fine by me. That you should, after so many months, open this up for discussion is your prerogative. That the mods allow it, is theirs. All I can say is, that for all intents an purposes, Jim does own 0846, he has restored it to all its former glory, and I, at this stage in my life, would consider it a privilege to not only see this iconic masterpiece of motor racing history, but to have a seat in it. Life is too short to re-buke or de-bunk what some of us feel is the true essence of a great red car.....the documentation has been provided. For me it IS the Amon/Bandini #23, and it always will be.......

 

I am sincerely very sorry that you have been ill and very pleased that you have survived. Yes, it is a great red car, the fact of which I have never denied. I wish you well and I'm sure you will thoroughly enjoy a seat in the car that I know Jim will kindly give you.

Steve.

 

I apologize if my choice of words was harsh, i did not mean to personally attack and I apologize if that was the case. My intention was simply to point out that myopic thinking is pretty much guaranteed to end in tears AND that we have had far too many posters with one point that gets debated to the point of frustration for all parties and eventual inconclusive outcome .....

Again I apologize for any hurt caused. At some point like my nieces favourite song, you might need to "let it go, let it go".....

 

An apology loaded with an insult. I assure you that there is nothing myopic in my thought processes. Quite the opposite, thank you.