It was perhaps destiny that controversy surrounding the first Ferrari should flair up in this, the Fiftieth Anniversary year. It has been suspected for some time that s/n 010I is really 01C, Ferrari's long, lost firstborn, but now, with intriguing new information having come to light, is it maybe time to rewrite early Ferrari history? Dave Maestrejuan pieced together the story. Winston Goodfellow took the photos.
History is a living thing. What keeps it going are new discoveries, new information that breathes life into the past, causing recorded history to grow and develop not unlike the events that made it. As seems to be the case with history in general, Ferrari history was never keenly kept, so it has to be reconstructed. The process must begin with concrete information coming from a variety of reliable sources like the factory records, firsthand observations, and period photos. Where the sources are incomplete or non-existent, one must seek typical or repeated themes. The cars inevitably offer telltale proof, and this proof has to be interpreted by individuals with hands-on experience, an eye for details, and a background in the ways of Ferrari during the firm's formative years.
As time passes, the odds of new information emerging seems less likely, but occasionally something new comes along and forces us to re-think our historical stance. The worst enemy in developing a history of Ferrari is our often blind acceptance of what was printed years ago. When new facts do come to light the work of even the most meticulous historian can suddenly become obsolete.
One such event, it seems, took place late in 1996. Work was being done on s/n 0101, an early cycle-fendered Spyder Corsa. It is a well known example, and many believed that this one had a past that belied its serial number. There was certainly no question about its early racing heritage, and those who came to know the car intimately realized that it was probably one of Ferrari 's very first creations.
The numbers on the block have always appeared a bit indistinct. They look like they have been stamped over a couple of times-a common factory practice with competition cars. They are also spaced oddly, and the "I" is a crude attempt. I have seen the "I" on other Spyder Corsas and they look like the number " 1." Later engines had a small platform for the serial number, while on the first few engines the number was placed on the boss for the starter bolt. where the top had been filed flat enough to hold only a couple of digits. This is the case on 0101
These early Spyder Corsas are few and far between, and even though each is different there are certain features that give them away. Judged by these alone, there is no doubt that the car in question is a very early Ferrari. The sump casting numbers are clear and intact, stating obviously that this was one of the first batches out of the factory. The valve covers are plain, lacking both the logotype and the ridges that they later bore. On this car the valve covers have little button-type handles rather than the ball-type that later became the norm. The carburetors used back then were unique, and the inspection hole for the flywheel was angled off to the side on only the first few blocks. The timing cover for these early racers had a large and curious appendage off to the right side, which actually was a "plates-and-vane" type of oil cleaning system that had the vane rotation linked to the clutch mechanism.
The Spyder Corsas' chassis have several distinguishing features either incorporated into them or attached to them. The honeycomb radiators have a huge top tank, and those very unusual Dubonnet-type shocks certainly predate the Houdailles which replaced the old setup almost immediately.
The same numeric alterations that have been done on 010I's engine can be found on its chassis, except here the numbers are a bit better. The frame around the digits appeared a bit beat-up, and while scratching the paint away around the numbers, the mechanic accidentally popped off a piece of lead that held the numbers. And there, in a hollow in the frame, were the original numbers. Like on the block, they had been compounded enough that the stamper apparently wanted a new surface of impressionable lead to tap onto.
It was a pleasant surprise to everyone in the shop. Imagine discovering the first Ferrari made, and quite by accident. But it appears now that its existence was not a surprise to everyone.
Stan Nowak was one of the first and foremost among Ferrari historians, if only because of the careful records he kept on all the cars he came across. It was he who did much of the original research on the early Spyder Corsas. When s/n 004C was considered to be the earliest example, he found s/n 002C. He labored over photographs and talked to all the concerned parties, and thus helped develop the history chat has since been regarded as gospel.
Although Nowak pioneered this research, others have carried the torch further. Some accounts of history propose that 01C became 002C, that 02C became 0201, and that 3C became 004C. In this scenario, 002C would have been the first Ferrari, and 0201 the second. Other accounts dispute this.
But first: Why the numbering changes? Enzo Ferrari wanted more than anything to win, and| to do this he of course needed money. The first cars. Although advanced in many ways, were also quite primitive, and improvements came quickly. As Ferrari built new cars there was only one logical thing to do with the old ones: sell them. And since high-paying customers would not settle for a used car, it is accepted that Ferrari's routine was to bring in a used racer, put a new body on it, and restamp the number so it appeared to be a new car. It would be easy to physically change 2C to 20 on 0201, and it would be just as easy to change 1C to 10. So it is likely chat 1C became 0101 (and not 002C) by a simple change and addition of a character to bring the numbering current with what was going out the door at the time.
The emergence of a "real" first Ferrari is an exciting event - one tone sure to cause quite a stir-but also a development that, as already mentioned, was not totally unexpected. In addition to all the obvious clues the car offered to its unique heritage, there have been a number of indicators chat lead others to the same conclusion years ago. In 1987, when Giannino Marzotto's book La Ferrari alla Mille Miglia was pubfished, he confirmed that Tazio Nuvolari used Prince Igor Troubetskoy's Spyder Corsa (01C) in the 1948 1000-mile race. Once this was accepted, Ferrari historians were now able to follow the car through its career-thus revising its history. Although this account was published in England, it didn't seem to get a lot of atten tion. Furthermore, in the winter of 1994, Doug Nye's interviews with the prince, Paul Jackman (dine car's longtime owner), and John Wyer regarding 010I-researchthat further cleared the cobwebs-were published in the British Ferrari Owner's Club magazine without causing waves.
One of today's most diligent Ferrari historians on this side of the Atlantic has to be Gerald Roush. His Atlanta-based research library is impressive, and his background as a history professor helps insure chat information he passes along is not based on romantic wishes, dramatic stories, or plain gossip. On the matter of 01C his reaction is somewhat reserved: "Perhaps the reason I'm not too excited over the 'revelation' chat 0101 was built out of 01C is the fact that this is really not news." He refers to page 147 of the Ferrari Tipo 166 (Haynes), published in 1984. Here it states: "Probably the car referred to is the Tipo 125 two-seater racing car with cycle mudguards from 1947, number 01C, which was renumbered 0101 in 1948 and given a new spyder body with the design of that year." Roush continues, "The Italians have known this for years."
So why all the fuss now? Well, with the uncovering of the old number hidden beneath the lead, we can eliminate the probablies and the seem to bes used when describing this car. All the published and private accounts assuming that 010I is indeed the actual first Ferrari (O1C) now have renewed credibility.
What is remarkable is that both O1C and 02C should survive today, 50 years after they rolled through the workshop door. These cars were designed and built to race, and race cars by nature have short lives. It was a miracle that 01 C actually made it to the winter of 1947-48-when it was brought up to 166 specs, rebodied, restamped, and sent back out to the fray. The car was so competitive that its last win is purported to have been the Naples Grand Prix in July 1950-three full years of racing, crashing, recuperating, and winning (see pages 30-33 for its adventures in the 1948 Swedish Grand Prix, where Clemente Biondetti drove it to Ferrari's very first international win). This makes it a remarkable creature in itself, but the fact that this was Enzo's first creation makes its appeal even greater. No one else in the history of racing has made as great an impression as Ferrari-and it all began with this car.
History is a living thing. What keeps it going are new discoveries, new information that breathes life into the past, causing recorded history to grow and develop not unlike the events that made it. As seems to be the case with history in general, Ferrari history was never keenly kept, so it has to be reconstructed. The process must begin with concrete information coming from a variety of reliable sources like the factory records, firsthand observations, and period photos. Where the sources are incomplete or non-existent, one must seek typical or repeated themes. The cars inevitably offer telltale proof, and this proof has to be interpreted by individuals with hands-on experience, an eye for details, and a background in the ways of Ferrari during the firm's formative years.
Although Nowak pioneered this research, others have carried the torch further. Some accounts of history propose that 01C became 002C, that 02C became 0201, and that 3C became 004C. In this scenario, 002C would have been the first Ferrari, and 0201 the second. Other accounts dispute this.
