Forghieri speaks on the Glickenhaus car

[miurasv]

Compare the pictures above with the one in this post and the one below which are of the real 0846 at Daytona 1967 by noted photo journalist Karl Ludvigsen where the chassis mountings match the engine mountings and slot right in with no need for bolt on adaptors as are on the Glickenhaus chassis.

Edited by miurasv on Tuesday 19th July 19:05

[miurasv]

[ferrisbueller]

[miurasv]

Above is a picture from Mr Glickenhaus's 0846 on line pdf with his own disproved description of the left side rear engine mount on his "falso P4" replica.

Edited by miurasv on Tuesday 19th July 19:16

[LaurasOtherHalf]

Thanks for taking the time to post your evidence OP, I've expressed support before and I'm not entirely sure why some posters continue to berate you.

[miurasv]

LaurasOtherHalf said:

Thanks for taking the time to post your evidence OP, I've expressed support before and I'm not entirely sure why some posters continue to berate you.

I remember your support. Thank you. It was very much appreciated then, as it is now.

[Mousem40]

I also don't see why he is getting such a hard deal? Would you like to be sold a car, who's owner purports it to be the real deal, if it transpires it's not? Miurasv is taking serious time out to research its history, his motives are irrelevant, as long as the truth is revealed. He isn't some kid munching on Doritos having fun on a forum, he is uncovering real evidence here.

If Mr Glickenhaus is so annoyed by this (and he should be as it can only cast a dark shadow over his car) then he should agree to settle this in court once and for all, costs to be met by him. If it is the real deal, the court costs will pale into insignificance compared to the uplift in the value of his car and the final contractual silencing of Miurasv.

[ferrisbueller]

Mousem40 said:

I also don't see why he is getting such a hard deal? Would you like to be sold a car, who's owner purports it to be the real deal, if it transpires it's not? Miurasv is taking serious time out to research its history, his motives are irrelevant, as long as the truth is revealed. He isn't some kid munching on Doritos having fun on a forum, he is uncovering real evidence here.

If Mr Glickenhaus is so annoyed by this (and he should be as it can only cast a dark shadow over his car) then he should agree to settle this in court once and for all, costs to be met by him. If it is the real deal, the court costs will pale into insignificance compared to the uplift in the value of his car and the final contractual silencing of Miurasv.

Reading between the lines, the OP appears to asserting a claim that Mr Glickenhaus is trying to commit some kind of fraud or deception with regard to the origins and provenance of his car.

Nobody likes to see anyone ripped off or deceived. However, is PH the place for this? It isn't a court of law. I know of people on here who have been through a legal process following a car purchase and still are not allowed to post about it. My feeling is that it is on PH because it has been booted off other fora.

The OP has not presented one single cogent argument about the situation, rather a series of smaller drip feeds which require joining up; Nor has he clarified his stake in the issue, which would be required to apply some form of judgement about the situation in terms of its overall context.

In a world of photoshop a series of blurry pictures purporting to be evidence of something one way or another is hardly a slam dunk.

As such, without the context, to myself and others, it looks like some kind of obsession with no definitive grounds or obvious conclusion. One would assume ultimately it would need to be put infront of a panel of appropriately qualified minds to decide one way or another.

If Mr Glickenhaus were trying to con the World, then I don't think this is the means by which to hold him to account.

[simonr100]

I personally am glad that people talk about questionable cars. They MAY protect others from making a bad purchase. I have no idea on this car and it is not a car that would interest me to purchase.
Thumbs up to the OP for having the dedication to look into this. I would like to know what the OP's interest in the car is - does he want to buy it for what he thinks it is rather than what is alleged to be? Is there anything personal going on?

[ferrisbueller]

The debate has been going on for over a decade.

https://www.velocetoday.com/cars/cars_69.php

Ferrari themselves have agreed with the number being assigned.

If the OP is certain, then perhaps he should contact Ferrari themselves to correct it.

[miurasv]

Where is there evidence of Ferrari agreeing the number 0846 being assigned to the Glickenhaus car?

Edited by miurasv on Wednesday 20th July 18:36

[simonr100]

simonr100 said:

I would like to know what the OP's interest in the car is - does he want to buy it for what he thinks it is rather than what is alleged to be? Is there anything personal going on?

Still waiting............

[miurasv]

Elex said:

Elex said:

Silent1 said:

Elex, what do you want to get out of this?

Let me tell you what I get out of this: I am passionate about the history of Ferrari and it sickens me that that history is being distorted by Mr Glickenhaus claiming that his replica is the original 0846. The link below by Road & Track is just one example where the Piper/Glickenhaus chassis is being stated as 0846 which is of course total BS. If I can inform people of the true facts then I admit to taking pleasure from that.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-videos/ferrari-330...

I have no vested interest. If you had all read this thread properly you will see that I have already answered the question.

simonr100 said:

simonr100 said:

I would like to know what the OP's interest in the car is - does he want to buy it for what he thinks it is rather than what is alleged to be? Is there anything personal going on?

Still waiting............

I've already answered this question in this thread. See above. Nothing has changed.

[simonr100]

Ok just wondered, then I think what you are doing is great!

[miurasv]

simonr100 said:

Ok just wondered, then I think what you are doing is great!

Thank you.

[LaurasOtherHalf]

ferrisbueller said:

Reading between the lines.......

Reading between your lines, you've continually insulted the OP and tried to rubbish his evidence at every opportunity without offering any contradictions, for some reason. You don't see the parallels between what you claim of the OP and what you personally attempt?

If under your reasoning the OP must have a vested interest in the case, what interest do you have in your trolling of his thread?

[ferrisbueller]

miurasv said:

Where is there evidence of Ferrari agreeing the number 0846 being assigned to the Glickenhaus car?

Edited by miurasv on Wednesday 20th July 18:36

AIUI it is registered as 0846 in terms of the actual registration of the vehicle for road use and on Ferrari's own database.

Per:

https://www.velocetoday.com/cars/cars_69.php

"All of this information—plus a great deal more-- was then sent to Ferrari via the Owner's Website. Glickenhaus then registered on the site that he was the owner of 1967 Ferrari 330 P4 0846 (the telaio number is required before Ferrari allows you to register a car in "Your Garage") on the Ferrari Owners site. After about a week Ferrari came back and put 330 P4 Rossa Corsa with a date of construction of 1966 (they changed the date as Glickenhaus had entered 1967), and that Glickenhaus had owned it since 2000. The photographs and information are still online and posted for all owners to see. There has not been an attempt made by Ferrari to remove this information from their website."

Per above, Ferrari are st hot on things such as these, a trait which filters all the way down to concours events and the like.

Per above, in the same way JG submitted his evidence to Ferrari, so should any evidence to the contrary to allow Ferrari to consider.

[ferrisbueller]

LaurasOtherHalf said:

ferrisbueller said:

Reading between the lines.......

Reading between your lines, you've continually insulted the OP and tried to rubbish his evidence at every opportunity without offering any contradictions, for some reason. You don't see the parallels between what you claim of the OP and what you personally attempt?

If under your reasoning the OP must have a vested interest in the case, what interest do you have in your trolling of his thread?

Not entirely sure I follow your logic tbh.

I don't have any connection to 0846, Glickenhaus or the OP. I don't particularly want to perpetuate the debate - as above, I believe the only definitive conclusion to this would be a statement from an entity qualified to make the judgement. I don't think this forum is the place for it and I don't think there's going to be a conclusion herein. As such, Why?

There is stuff dotted about all over the internet about this story and the car. I've attached a couple of examples below.

From here

site said:

This letter confirms that 0846's chassis was written off and scrapped, not melted into oblivion. For many years this is ALL and Exactly what Glickenhaus posited happened: That his car contains 80+% of the chassis remains of P 3/4 0846 among other original parts. He's never disputed that as far a Ferrari is concerned 0846 was written off/scrapped and under Ferrari's authentication definitions his car could not be authenticated by them. Glickenhaus is not the one who retrieved the chassis remains of 0846 "from the trash container" and used them to "to rebuild or to revival a car which was written off..." but he was the one who discovered exactly where the chassis remains of 0846 wound up and to insure that Umberto's wish: "We all would like to see forever these glorious pieces..." remains possible.

From here

JG said:

JG: There is NO problem between Ferrari and I on 0846. There is no question that Ferrari scrapped 0846 in 1967 and never sold the chassis remains of 0846 to anyone. Ferrari has never disputed nor confirmed that against all odds I discovered what happened to the chassis remains of 0846 that Ferrari scrapped and discarded or that they now are in the car with the accepted legal identity: 1967 P 3/4 0846. 0846 is exactly what it is. No more, no less.

As above, Ferrari are all over things like this. If they aren't shutting it down then........

Where does this end? What has JG done that is so heinous? Why post it here, rather than sending it to Ferrari to enable them to straighten the record?

[LaurasOtherHalf]

ferrisbueller said:

Why post it here, rather than sending it to Ferrari to enable them to straighten the record?

Why would Ferrari not want to get involved in a legal spat with a billionaire Ferrari collector

As for the evidence you show, all it looks like to me is JG "claimed" that chassis number on an owners club website and Ferrari haven't chose (yet) to dispute it.

What have Ferrari to gain from getting into a lengthy dispute about the originality of that chassis? And let's be honest, with the sums of money involved it would be a very lengthy and expensive dispute.

Let's be clear, JG claimed his car is 0846 on a website with very little evidence to support it, registered the car on another continent under that chassis number and has ran with the story ever since. I wonder why the (incredibly) sharp Mr Piper never did? That Ferrari haven't disputed JG's claims matters not. The absence of argument on their part does not legitimise JG's claims.

It certainly doesn't rubbish the OP in this thread's evidence.

[Napolis]

ferrisbueller said:

AIUI it is registered as 0846 in terms of the actual registration of the vehicle for road use and on Ferrari's own database.

Per:

https://www.velocetoday.com/cars/cars_69.php

"All of this information—plus a great deal more-- was then sent to Ferrari via the Owner's Website. Glickenhaus then registered on the site that he was the owner of 1967 Ferrari 330 P4 0846 (the telaio number is required before Ferrari allows you to register a car in "Your Garage") on the Ferrari Owners site. After about a week Ferrari came back and put 330 P4 Rossa Corsa with a date of construction of 1966 (they changed the date as Glickenhaus had entered 1967), and that Glickenhaus had owned it since 2000. The photographs and information are still online and posted for all owners to see. There has not been an attempt made by Ferrari to remove this information from their website."

Per above, Ferrari are st hot on things such as these, a trait which filters all the way down to concours events and the like.

Per above, in the same way JG submitted his evidence to Ferrari, so should any evidence to the contrary to allow Ferrari to consider.

You are quite correct.

In addition during the period of May-July 2016 Ferrari investigated P4 0846 and confirmed that I have owned Ferrari P4 0846 since 2000 and that the car is presently in my possession. They also created dispositive documents reflecting that fact and very interestingly confirmed in another document that they created that the date of Manufacture of The P4 I currently own is chassis 0846 and it's date of manufacture is 1966. There is only one P4 who's date of manufacture is 1966, chassis 0846. In several months I will publish Ferrari's written statements and the dispositive documents they created and additional information which is still in the works and not yet finished.

As for these photos:
All P car engines, suspension etc. require laborious shimming. Using a ruler you can measure a P3 Block and a P4 block and understand what you have to do if you want to fit a P4 engine into a P3 chassis. We can of course fit present day 0846's P4 engine into the car as it is today exactly as it raced at Daytona with it's rear engine mounts directly bolted to the original P3 rear chassis engine mounts but elect to keep the very clever modification that moved the engine forward and down at a later stage in 0846's racing career. This of course improves the F/R balance by pushing the engine forward and lowers the CG by lowering the engine. It also stiffens the entire rear of the car by reducing the polar mass lever distance. This was/is done by removing the shims/spacers between the engine and the rear cockpit bulkhead and making up the difference at the rear chassis engine mounts. Over time most race cars receive many modifications and this was a clever one easily reversed by adding shims at the front and the rear engine/chassis mounting today would then look exactly as it did at Daytona in 1967.