Posts Tagged ‘Formula 1’

Cosworth & Ford

Thursday, January 20th, 2011

Image via Lotus

The legendary Ford Cosworth DFV (Double Four Valve) V8 engine is, by a mile, the most successful F1 racing engine of all time.

Cosworth was founded in 1958 by Mike Costin and Keith Duckworth to build racing engines. They started by making versions of the Ford Kent engine for use in Formula Junior but the DFV story began when new 3-​​litre regula­tions were written for F1 beginning in 1966.

Lotus boss Colin Chapman persuaded Ford’s Walter Hayes to bankroll Cosworth’s V8 devel­opment programme to the tune of £100,000 and the engine made a winning debut at the ’67 Dutch GP at Zandvoort in Jim Clark’s hands. It changed the face of F1 and, said Ken Tyrrell, was the reason the sport developed in the way that it did.

Ken wasn’t involved in F1 in ’67 but was weighing it up and became an instant DFV fan when he was flown out to that Dutch race. “It was clear that the DFV was the only engine in the race,” Tyrrell said. “Everything else was old-​​fashioned rubbish. You had to have one.”

Chapman fought tooth and nail to retain Cosworth’s exclusive use for Lotus but that, of course, made no commercial sense to Cosworth, or Ford, and it was a battle Chapman lost. The engine was made available to anyone who happened to drive to Cosworth’s Northampton base with a cheque for £7500 in his pocket.

You could come away with an engine that would win you the next Grand Prix in the right hands, which was fantastic,” said Tyrrell.

The engine was intro­duced too late in 1967 to stop Denny Hulme winning the champi­onship with his Brabham-​​Repco but from 1968 to 1982 inclusive, the DFV would be responsible for 12 of the next 15 world champions! From Clark’s Zandvoort win until 1983, when Michele Alboreto’s Tyrrell scored the DFV’s last success in Detroit, the engine won 155 grands prix.

The champi­onship success story over those 15 years reads like a roll call of the great and the good of the sport. Graham Hill (’68), Jackie Stewart (’69) Jochen Rindt, posthum­ously (’70), Stewart (’71), Emerson Fittipaldi (’72), Stewart (’73), Fittipaldi (’74), James Hunt (’76), Mario Andretti (’78), Alan Jones (’80), Nelson Piquet (’81), Keke Rosberg (’82).

Fascinating BBC footage of a DFV assembly below

YouTube Preview Image

As for the constructors, in order, they were: Lotus, Matra, Lotus, Tyrrell, Lotus, Tyrrell, McLaren, McLaren, Lotus, Williams, Brabham, Williams. The only engine to spoil the party and avert a clean sweep of the entire 15 years was Ferrari’ flat-​​12 that took Niki Lauda to world titles in 1975 – 7 and Jody Scheckter to the crown in 1979.

Many times the doom mongers forecast the end of the road for the DFV. For some, it was as early as 1970 when Jacky Ickx’s Ferrari proved quicker than Rindt’s Lotus at certain venues. Lauda’s success in the mid seventies, which would have been a hat-​​trick but for his fiery shunt at Nurburgring in ’76, again had so-​​called experts stating that a 12-​​cylinder was de rigueur.


Image via Ford

They might have been right had it not been for Lotus pioneering the use of ground effect. To maximise impressive downforce generated by venturi tunnels in each sidepod, you needed a narrow engine and suddenly the 90-​​degree Ford Cosworth V8 was a much better bet than the wider flat-​​12 Ferrari.

Scheckter’s ’79 triumph for Ferrari was, as much as anything, the result of a strong start, a strange best four from each half of the season champi­onship scoring system that year and the late intro­duction of the superb Williams FW07, which exploited the ground effects phenomenon even better than Chapman’s Lotuses.

Renault, meanwhile, had arrived in F1 in 1977 with a turbocharged 1.5-litre V6, the equivalency formula back then. Duckworth was scathing about turbos, not consid­ering them ‘proper’ engines but the writing was on the wall and in 1983, the year Alboreto scored that last DFV win, Nelson Piquet won the first turbocharged world title with a Brabham-​​BMW, pipping Alain Prost’s Renault at
the very last race.

When Cosworth started his company, he said: “We thought it must be possible to make an inter­esting living messing about with racing cars and engines…” With Ford’s support, he certainly wasn’t wrong!

Super Mario!

Thursday, December 16th, 2010

If ever there was a 24 carat hall of famer, it’s Mario Andretti. Pulled over in the UK, it’s, “who do you think you are, Stirling Moss?” But for the Smokies in the USA, it’s always Mario.

On the US scene, NASCAR is King, more so now than ever. Thundering stock cars on ovals with constant contact, drafting, passing and re-​​passing, is what American audiences seem to want. In days gone by, Indycar racing was almost as strong and the Indy 500 drew crowds of 400,000. Road racing never caught on to the same extent. Whatever it was didn’t matter to Mario. If it had wheels, he’d race it.

Andretti is renowned as the most versatile driver there has ever been. He arrived in the USA in the fifties, the teenage son of Italian immigrant parents with two hundred and fifty bucks to their name. Inspired by watching Alberto Ascari in the Mille Miglia, he soon discovered a dirt oval close to home in Nazareth, Pennsylvania, and started racing.

He had Ferrari in his blood. “While I was driving my jalopy stock cars I was thinking about Ferrari,” he says. And even in ’63 when, as a 23-​​year-​​old, he won three sprint car feature races on the same day, he was thinking about Dan Gurney in F1.

Mario met Lotus boss Colin Chapman at Indianapolis, mentioned F1 and when he was given a Lotus 49 for the ’68 US GP at Watkins Glen, he put it on pole. In his first Grand Prix for Ferrari, in 1971, he won the South African GP.

A racer with a name like Mario had but one destiny

Andretti won in F1, Indycars, the World Sportscar Championship and NASCAR. He took four Indycar titles and won the F1 world champi­onship in 1978 in Chapman’s fabulous ground effect Lotus 79. He claimed the Indy 500 in 1969.

Amazingly, when Andretti scored his last Indycar win in 1993, it meant that he had won Indy races in four different decades, finishing up with 52 wins and 66 pole positions from 407 starts!

But it was Andretti’s person­ality, aura and eminent quotab­ility that made him such a star. As the last American to win a grand prix, at Zandvoort in ’78, it was a year earlier, after a collision trying to overtake reigning champion James Hunt, that Mario memorably vented his feelings.

He says you don’t overtake on the outside in F1? Well I got news for him. If he blocks me on the inside, I’m gonna try the outside. James Hunt is champion of the world, right? Problem is, he thinks he’s King of the goddam world as well… What’s he want me to do – pick my nose and follow the King?” No F1 corporate speak back then…

Watch Andretti sweep round the outside in his signature move around 2’40″
YouTube Preview Image

After three difficult F1 seasons with Lotus and Alfa Romeo following his champi­onship success, Andretti returned to the USA to run a full Indycar programme in 1982. But when Ferrari drivers Gilles Villeneuve and Didier Pironi suffered fatal/​career-​​ending accidents respect­ively that same year, Andretti got the call to race for Old Man Ferrari once again, at Monza.

You don’t turn it down, do you?” he said and, at the age of 42, put the car on pole and finished third. He still speaks with awe of the power of those turbos with quali­fying boost – well over 1000bhp. “Like sitting on top of dynamite,” he remembers. “Man, I had wheelspin in fifth between the Lesmos…”

Once a racer, always a racer. But has there been a racer like Mario?

Jackie Stewart's 1969: Annus Mirabilis

Thursday, November 11th, 2010

Jackie Stewart shot to prominence when he won the 1969 world champi­onship in a French-​​built Matra MS80 run by Ken Tyrrell.

Stewart, with his long hair, corduroy cap and shades, was more Beatle than racing driver and became an icon as the Swinging Sixties morphed into the seventies.

Stewart had lost a three-​​way final round ’68 title shoot-​​out in Mexico but there was no stopping him in ‘69. The champi­onship was played out over just 11 rounds back then and Jackie started with a win at Kyalami in South Africa.

After a two month gap he was fortunate to win Spain, which was notable for spectacular accidents to Lotus drivers Graham Hill and Jochen Rindt when the high aerofoil rear wings that were starting to prolif­erate in F1, broke under load. They were banned from the next race on, in Monte Carlo. Stewart led Monaco from pole position and set fastest lap, but the Matra retired and Hill won.

Stewart made himself all but unbeatable when he scored a hat-​​trick of wins at the Dutch, French and British Grands Prix. He got a fright at Silverstone, however, when a bit of loose kerbing at Woodcote corner punctured a tyre and put him off at 150mph in practice. He took over team mate Jean-​​Pierre Beltoise’s car for the race, while the Frenchman was shunted across into the recal­citrant four-​​wheel-​​drive Matra MS84 spare car. Later that season in Canada, the car became the only 4WD to score an F1 champi­onship point, albeit six laps down in Johnny Servoz-Gavin’s hands in Canada!

Stewart fought an epic Silverstone battle with friend and chief foe Rindt, until the Austrian was slowed by a car problem. At Monza in September, Stewart took his sixth win of the season and clinched his first world title in what is still the closest four-​​car blanket finish in F1 history.

Pre-​​chicane Monza was famous for its slipstreaming battles and Stewart delib­er­ately took a long fourth gear ratio so that he did not have to change gear between the exit of Parabolica and the finish line on the last lap. He came out of Parabolica second to Rindt’s Lotus but was ahead by eight hundredths as they flashed across the line, with less than 0.2s covering Stewart, Rindt, Jean-​​Pierre Beltoise and Bruce McLaren.

Shaky footage below of an incredible last few corners at Monza

YouTube Preview Image

Already, Stewart was active on the safety front which, as well as his then-​​record 27 victories and three world titles, would be one of the enduring legacies he left behind when he retired in ‘73. Trapped in a BRM leaking fuel at Spa in ’66, Stewart was appalled by the lack of marshalling profes­sion­alism and then the makeshift medical facil­ities with cigarette butts all over the floor.

That ’69 season saw Spa boycotted after a circuit inspection by Stewart. New Armco barriers would be installed before the race, one of the most dangerous on the calendar, returned in 1970. At the time, Jackie’s safety stand opened him to ridicule although, quietly, all his contem­por­aries were behind him. That first world title in ’69 increased his worldwide profile massively and gave him the platform from which he became one of the sport’s most influ­ential figures.

Great home movie footage below of the British GP of that amazing season

YouTube Preview Image

Grand Prix, 1966

Thursday, November 11th, 2010

There’s been a lot of stuff written about Le Mans, Steve McQueen’s 1971 classic portrayal of endurance racing. Sure, it was a brilliantly gritty portrayal of the scene and featured the Coolest Man in the World. But for us, Jon Frankenheimer’s 1966 feature Grand Prix does all the things that Le Mans does, but slightly better and with an under­stated style.

YouTube Preview Image

With a budget of around nine million dollars and some of the most incredible action photo­graphy ever shot: the film’s look and feel was augmented by maestro of the title sequence Saul Bass. And though the plot line and the acting, even from non-​​professional driving stars like James Garner is funda­mentally hokey — it matters little.

Because what you’re really watching this movie for three other things: the brilliant titles and graphic montages; the power and the glory of the action sequences; and last but no means least, the beautiful, ear-​​splitting sound.

YouTube Preview Image

Though Bass failed to be rewarded for his title sequences, the movie did pick up the Oscar gongs for Best Film Editing, Best Sound and Best Sound Effects. But curiously, despite its widespread success and obvious visual and aural quality, it remains a relat­ively obscure classic.

Featuring many of the leading drivers of the year’s GP roster, including Graham Hill, Phil Hill, Jim Clark and John Surtees, what the film manages to capture is the grease thick danger and adrenalin of Formula 1 during this era.

And the sequence that features the Spa-​​Francorchamps circuit (below), is the greatest I have ever seen. This sort of quality footage would be almost impossible to achieve with all the digital tech available today.

Enjoy and marvel at how this was achieved. In glorious celluloid.

YouTube Preview Image

Turbo Redux

Friday, September 17th, 2010

In 1966, 3-​​litre normally aspirated engine regula­tions were intro­duced to F1 with a 1.5-litre equivalency formula for anyone wanting to run a turbo instead. Nobody did. Until, that is, a decade later.

The British Grand Prix of 1977 saw two highly signi­ficant debuts. One was Gilles Villeneuve in a McLaren, and the second was the 1.5-litre V6 turbo Renault with Jean-​​Pierre Jabouille at the wheel.
At first, nobody took the Renault too seriously. It blew up a lot and because brewing up could be more or less be relied upon, it earned itself a nickname of ‘The Teapot.’ Or, some said, ‘Teapot 2’ because the original Teapot had been a Ligier with a partic­u­larly tall and distinctive airbox.

By the time a couple of seasons had gone by, the Renault was being taken very seriously indeed. Jabouille scored the first turbocharged win by an F1 car, fittingly enough in the French GP at Dijon in ‘79. But even that race was better known for its epic tussle for second place between Gilles Villeneuve’s Ferrari and Rene Arnoux aboard the second Renault turbo.

Arnoux was using the better top speed of the Renault and Villeneuve the better drivab­ility of the naturally-​​aspirated flat-​​12 Ferrari. They banged wheel repeatedly and went off every­where until Villeneuve crossed the line ahead.

Irresponsible!” bellowed the Puritans. “Nothing to worry about, just a couple of young lions clawing each other…” reckoned laconic ’78 world champ Mario Andretti.

Running more boost in quali­fying, the Renaults were always at the front of the grid and when they started to develop reliab­ility too, the writing was on the wall. The oppos­ition realised that turbos were the only way to go and it effect­ively spelled the end of the road for the legendary Ford Cosworth DFV (below).

It wasn’t Renault, though, who claimed the first world champi­onship success for a turbocharged car. That honour fell to Bernie Ecclestone’s Brabham team with its four cylinder BMW turbo, which snatched the champi­onship from under Alain Prost nose at the very last race of 1983 in South Africa.

Turbos dominated F1 for the next five years with Niki Lauda and Alain Prost claiming a hat-​​trick of titles for McLaren with a TAG-​​Porsche V6 between 1984 – 6. Prost won that ’86 title in dramatic fashion when Nigel Mansell suffered a dramatic tyre blowout just 18 laps short of winning the title with his Williams-​​Honda in Adelaide.
Nelson Piquet made amends the following season for Williams-​​Honda before Ayrton Senna took the first of his three world titles in a McLaren-​​Honda in ‘88.

By the mid eighties turbo engine devel­opment saw strato­spheric horsepower figures derived from the 1.5-litre motors – as much as 1500bhp in quali­fying trim, where every gearshift sounded like a deton­ating grenade and produced a dark haze behind each car. Costs were spiralling out of control and for ’89 the FIA banned turbos and intro­duced a new engine class for 3.5-litre normally aspirated power units.

Today’s F1 engines are 2.4-litre V8s but the governing body is busy drafting regula­tions for a new small capacity turbo formula to be intro­duced in 2013 along with more powerful regen­er­ative systems.

The thinking behind it is threefold; being seen to be green, capping spending as much as possible and having more direct relevance to the motor industry.

Cosworth Group’s chief executive Tim Routsis has been part of the ongoing discus­sions and says: “The big difference this time will be the amount of fuel we can pour into the engine over a race. In terms of efficiency, the differ­ences have to be marked. We are looking at using somewhere between 35 and 50% less fuel than we are using today for a car that’s got to do funda­mentally the same sort of lap time and distance, so it’s a big change.”
There’s concern about a couple of things: preventing a financial arms race and, in terms of fan appeal, making sure the turbos still sound good.

As regards the spending, one route is to constrain areas where we know you can spend a great deal of money for very little gain and just keep the devel­opment focused on areas which are relevant to the future,” Routsis says. “The other is to look at the amount of resource that each engine manufac­turer deploys on the job. It’s very much work in progress but everyone is committed to finding an answer.

As for the sound, a turbocharged engine will always be a little quieter than a naturally aspirated one running open pipes. But I’ve never seen a really good racing engine that sounded bad. I think we’re going to find the old story that if it goes fast, it’ll sound great. There are things we can do as well. Playing around with firing order does actually make a remarkable difference but if we are going to have less cylinders the amount that you can actually play with that is reduced. But I don’t think they’ll sound bad. They’re still going to be pretty high-​​revving by any normal standards.”

So there you have it. Coming soon, to a circuit near you – Turbos 2!

Formula For (Environmental) Disaster?

Thursday, April 15th, 2010

When it comes to envir­on­mental issues Formula 1 is not exactly ‘on message.’ A Grand Prix car is a high-​​revving, incredibly noisy projectile and its sole purpose is to go quickly. Not, as yet, to go quickly econom­ically. It’s a wholly anti-​​social animal if that’s the way you want to see it.

Life changes and with even Australians lamenting the ‘Nanny state’, is Formula 1 at risk of falling victim to an argument that, like boxing, it belongs to a bygone age? Is it harmful, socially unacceptable and ultimately heading for a ban?

As Frank Williams said recently, while discussing the reintro­duction of KERS (Kinetic Energy Recovery Systems), “F1 needs a totem. KERS is a very meaningful thing for emissions control, it does save power. It’s expensive, it’s difficult technology and a big swallow, but sooner or later F1 is going to get aggro from one of these bodies that causes aggro…”

That is something that former FIA president Max Mosley concluded some time ago. He realised the need for F1 to be seen to be as green as possible, which is why he wanted to introduce KERS, reduce engine capacities and curb spending which, across F1’s manufac­turers, had reached a billion dollars annually.

Suddenly, instead of being a global advert­ising platform irres­istible to companies such as Honda, Toyota and Renault as well as premium brands like Ferrari, Mercedes and BMW, F1 found all the rats deserting a sinking ship. In quick succession, Honda, Toyota and BMW all left and Renault, you suspect, might have followed suit had it not been for its involvement in the Singapore ‘Crashgate’ saga. Instead, it sold 75% of the share­holding in its F1 operation.

The driving force behind this was not the envir­onment itself, so much as the financial envir­onment — the credit crunch. With sales figures catastrophic and redund­ancies and reduced working weeks a reality, it became ever more polit­ically difficult for manufac­turers to justify money spent on an F1 programme. And it wasn’t just car manufac­turers. Bookings for F1’s Paddock Club (where corporate guests are enter­tained lavishly at consid­erable expense) nosedived too. Suddenly it wasn’t very PC for the likes of RBS to be seen to be glad-​​handing lavishly while worldwide economies went bust.

But what the credit crunch has also done is accel­erate a change in advert­ising emphasis. Look at car advert­ising now, even for the likes of BMW, and it’s not performance oriented anymore. It’s all about frugality and pleasant exper­i­ences. Drives in the country, things like that.

Look at the tyre manufac­turers too. Bridgestone has used F1 to great effect as a brand building exercise but recently announced its withdrawal. Why? Not, whatever it might say, because of cost. It’s F1 spend relative to its profit is insig­ni­ficant. It’s because the head honcho is behind a ‘green’ marketing strategy and has a problem squaring that with Formula 1.

Michelin has recently signalled interest in a return to the F1 arena it left in 2006. But, signi­fic­antly, it wants to be able to demon­strate the energy efficiency of its tyres. Only recently, leading Autosport F1 journ­alist Mark Hughes has been writing about the possib­ility of linking a tyre’s rolling resistance with permitted fuel density. His suggestion is, the lower the rolling resistance of your tyres, the denser your fuel is allowed to be, allowing you to carry more fuel energy for less weight and go quicker. He advocates getting the tyre and fuel companies working hand-​​in-​​glove to improve efficiency across the board.

Thus far, F1 and eco-​​friendliness have been no more than nodding acquaint­ances. It was deeply ironic that having intro­duced KERS, F1 failed to make it compulsory. The likes of Ferrari, McLaren and Renault spent serious money devel­oping KERS systems for 2009 (McLaren-​​Mercedes is reckoned to have spent £50 million) only to see Red Bull and Brawn decide that the effects of a KERS system on chassis bulk outweighed its advantages, and blow them into the weeds!

Frank Williams is probably right. Sooner or later F1 will flag up on someone’s radar and it’s ‘need to be green’ may have to be more than a token gesture.

We're on Board with Jim Clark

Thursday, January 28th, 2010

Jim Clark

There’s many that are claimed to be the greatest British driver who ever lived. It’s a tough competition.

Jackie Stewart might have been the most pugna­cious whilst Sir Sterling Moss might have been the most preter­nat­urally talented. Nigel Mansell could well have been the most tenacious and workmanlike. James Hunt, on the other hand might have been the most playboy-​​like and fragrant. Lewis Hamilton, however, might turn out to be the most successful.

We know who was the most stylish. Jim Clark.

Superb vintage onboard footage below with the great Raymond Baxter comment­ating, and a fine repres­ent­ation of his sculpted features above.

Who is your favourite Brit driving legend?