359 replies to this topic

[f1steveuk]

That's a very cool collection, JF. I particularly like the circular and ovoid air intakes, incidentally.

PS--Any idea why the airboxes never crossed the pond and appeared on Indy cars? Could it be that the top end speeds were so high they would have ripped the airboxes off?

Difficult to see how an air box could get more air into a turbo, which is already forcing more air in. That's assuming your talking about the DFX engined cars of course?

[alansart]

Did they ALL have Frank Lyons on them too?

My my, Frank was a busy boy there......

All 4 are his cars, but he only drove one of them.

Edited by alansart, 13 November 2009 - 19:41.

[Flat Black 84]

Difficult to see how an air box could get more air into a turbo, which is already forcing more air in. That's assuming your talking about the DFX engined cars of course?

I just didn't realize that early- and mid-70s Indy cars were already turbocharged. Which makes me wonder why turbocharging came to F1 so late.

[Macca]

I just didn't realize that early- and mid-70s Indy cars were already turbocharged. Which makes me wonder why turbocharging came to F1 so late.

In USAC in the '60s the engine capacities were 4.2L atmo vs. 2.8L super/turbo, i.e. 1.5 times which was a bit of a different ratio to F1 which was 3.0L/1.5L, i.e. 2.0 times; also the 4.2L Ford and Offy didn't produce as much bhp per litre, so the potential gain was greater.

It took Renault a lot of time and money to get their turbo competitive and reliable.

Paul M

[Formula Once]

Please also note that at the time nobody thought a turbocharged F1 engine would run properly when running on the more or less standard petrol one had to use in F1. Something Renault found out pretty soon and had big trouble solving.

[Formula Once]

I remember, that after the return from the turbocharged engines in 1987/88 the cars ran without airboxes (even in many cases without engine covers at all) and with airboxes again in 1989. But I am not aware of any rule change for that?

In fact atmo-teams started using airboxes again as early as 1987. And pretty ugly ones one could say (the March yes, and the AGS for example). By 1988, cars like the March abnd Tyrrell already had some pretty decent ones integrated into the engine cover.

[f1steveuk]

In fact atmo-teams started using airboxes again as early as 1987. And pretty ugly ones one could say (the March yes, and the AGS for example). By 1988, cars like the March abnd Tyrrell already had some pretty decent ones integrated into the engine cover.

I'm going from memory, always a dangerous thing, but didn't De Angelis have twin airboxes on his Austrian winning DFV engined Lotus 91 in 1982?

[Spitfire]

Difficult to see how an air box could get more air into a turbo, which is already forcing more air in. That's assuming your talking about the DFX engined cars of course?

There's a logic to that, however the Alpine Renaults and Porsche 936 Le Mans cars had huge air boxes. Never understood that myself, but there must have been a reason. . .

As far as regulations, here's a site that claims the following:

1976: Airbox highest point must be 85cm above the lowest part of the sprung car

1977: Airbox highest point must be no more than 95cm above the surface.

http://74.125.93.132...b...=clnk&gl=us

I was always surprised more teams didn't copy the Ferrari front-of-cockpit approach. Visually it seemed to keep a cleaner airflow to the rear wing. Even with the Cossie's added height, there was room to route the air to its velocity stacks.

[Allan Lupton]

Difficult to see how an air box could get more air into a turbo, which is already forcing more air in. That's assuming your talking about the DFX engined cars of course?

Just because you have an air pump doesn't change the basics!
a) dynamic head, suitably harvested, will give a slightly higher starting pressure (and density) which has to be helpful, since it will be multiplied by the pressure ratio of the supercharger.
b) free air, suitably harvested, is usually cooler and therefore denser than air that finds its way in using less straightforward means.
but c) some of the huge airscoops that were used might well have contributed more drag than power . . .

[Twin Window]

I'm pretty sure that whilst I was involved in the photo-research for Nigel Roebuck's book Chasing the Title (published ten years ago) I happened upon a picture or two of a Ferrari equipped with an airbox (or perhaps even a pair) taken - from memory - during the early-to-mid 'sixties.

I shall try to track down a reference, but I know I didn't dream it! In fact I recall being rather surprised at my 'find' as I'd always presumed the airbox phenomenon had begun in 1969 (ish; Brabham, or was it Ferrari? I can't remember ) and really took-off properly in F1 circa the 1971 French GP.

[RStock]

I'm pretty sure that whilst I was involved in the photo-research for Nigel Roebuck's book Chasing the Title (published ten years ago) I happened upon a picture or two of a Ferrari equipped with an airbox (or perhaps even a pair) taken - from memory - during the early-to-mid 'sixties.

I'm sure this isn't what you are refering to , but this photo of the 156P driven by Taffy von Trips at Monza 1960 , could that be considered an "airbox" , or would we just call that a "scoop" ?



photo from www.modelcarstudio.altervista.org

[Formula Once]

I'm going from memory, always a dangerous thing, but didn't De Angelis have twin airboxes on his Austrian winning DFV engined Lotus 91 in 1982?

Yes. As said, when the large, central airboxes were banned in 1976, several teams came up with other solutions on either side of the cockpit, mostly positioned near the drivers head. This continued into the eighties i.e. until everyone used turbo engines. Apart from Lotus, I remember Williams tooo had some sort of twin scoops at some races that year.

Edited by Formula Once, 14 November 2009 - 09:11.

[starlet]

Twinny, sure you saw a pic of Ginther's sharknose during the practices of the 1961 ACF GP.
And at the 1969 British GP, Ferrari had an airbox/wing group, to increase the cooling of the radiator.

[Manfred Cubenoggin]

Slightly O/T:

I'm sure that members will recall the Tyrells of the early 70's for JYS and Francois with their high airboxes over the DFV's. I was always curious as to why the 'finish' on the boxes were of a mat, stippled surface as opposed to just plain smooth fibreglas coachwork. Sorry, don't have an image to hand.

Anyone care to fill in this blank for me? TY.

[f1steveuk]

Slightly O/T:

I'm sure that members will recall the Tyrells of the early 70's for JYS and Francois with their high airboxes over the DFV's. I was always curious as to why the 'finish' on the boxes were of a mat, stippled surface as opposed to just plain smooth fibreglas coachwork. Sorry, don't have an image to hand.

Anyone care to fill in this blank for me? TY.

I asked Derek Gardner about that. The later "Trident" top of the air box (as opposed to the original flatter type) had a textured finish, and was quite seperate to the bodywork that supported it, and sometimes was finished with tape. Anyway Derek's answer was simply "I don't know" !!

[arttidesco]

Top of my ugly list of airboxes has to be the JS5 no matter which way I look at it just looks like a melted teapot

My favourate by far is that on the 1972 Eifeland bodied March 721 :-)

[PeterElleray]

I asked Derek Gardner about that. The later "Trident" top of the air box (as opposed to the original flatter type) had a textured finish, and was quite seperate to the bodywork that supported it, and sometimes was finished with tape. Anyway Derek's answer was simply "I don't know" !!

i 'think' its because the airbox was made over a male tool - in rather a hurry between the cars british gp practice appearence and prior to tests for the austrian gp where stewart raced (and led) with it. it would have saved making a mould aswell as a plug. i think it may just have been 'version 2' at the time it was made, with the possibilty of needing a version 3 until it was tested, so it would have made sense to make it in this way.

if so then we are looking at the bag face of the part, that which would normally be the inside, which explains the matt finish.

when it was painted, in 1973 (for the british gp if i remember correctly) the bag surface would have been rubbed down and filled first.

perhaps somebody out there can confirm that or if not, tell the correct version!

peter

[arttidesco]

I'm going from memory, always a dangerous thing, but didn't De Angelis have twin airboxes on his Austrian winning DFV engined Lotus 91 in 1982?

Both the Lotus 92 (your right living from memory is dangerous among the pedantic but the 92's were built on 91 tubs :-) and Williams FWO8 ran with airboxes in 1983 but interestingly only the de Angelis Lotus was fitted with them in Austria and I have always wondered if that made the winning difference ?

Edited by arttidesco, 22 June 2010 - 19:40.

[kayemod]

i 'think' its because the airbox was made over a male tool...

That could explain the 'matt' or textured finish, but I can't see something that shape being made over a male tool, it would be virtually impossible to release, also the return around the intake just couldn't be done, unless it was all assembled from a number of separate mouldings. I've wondered about the same thing though, and it's just possible that it was an unfinished prototype version, assembled from bits & pieces, in which case there wouldn't have been a mould at all. The original Lotus 72 'anvil' box was done like that, I did some of the work myself, the original was a lovely moulding, but just didn't sit right on the car, whoever did it hadn't understood the principle of vanishing points, it had to follow the lines of the wedge monocoque, but at slightly greater angles, the anvil was cut off and raised at the back, then split and the top half raised a little more still at the rear, a (lucky) perfect result first time, Chapman loved it.

[arttidesco]

The original Lotus 72 'anvil' box was done like that, I did some of the work myself, a (lucky) perfect result first time, Chapman loved it.

Definitely in the icon classification of air boxes, spent many happy hours trying to draw that accurately from pix in Motor Sport probably would have helped if I'd understood the principle of vanishing points :-)

Edited by arttidesco, 22 June 2010 - 20:03.

[jj2728]

I'm pretty sure that whilst I was involved in the photo-research for Nigel Roebuck's book Chasing the Title (published ten years ago) I happened upon a picture or two of a Ferrari equipped with an airbox (or perhaps even a pair) taken - from memory - during the early-to-mid 'sixties.

I shall try to track down a reference, but I know I didn't dream it! In fact I recall being rather surprised at my 'find' as I'd always presumed the airbox phenomenon had begun in 1969 (ish; Brabham, or was it Ferrari? I can't remember ) and really took-off properly in F1 circa the 1971 French GP.

hmmm, well does this qualify?



A fairly rudimentary effort on the '68 Ferrari at The Glen.

[PeterElleray]

That could explain the 'matt' or textured finish, but I can't see something that shape being made over a male tool, it would be virtually impossible to release, also the return around the intake just couldn't be done, unless it was all assembled from a number of separate mouldings. I've wondered about the same thing though, and it's just possible that it was an unfinished prototype version, assembled from bits & pieces, in which case there wouldn't have been a mould at all.

how about if it was made as left and a right side , pulled off the plug and then bonded down the middle? that would work if the nose on the intake was a separate part.

interesting also that where the join is made between the original lower and the big box, the big box seems to fit over the original lower section - as if the original was cut , and a plug then made on it that was flush with the original outer skin. then, when you mould the new part its bigger allround by the skin thickness and has a bit of an overlap to join to.

the only thing that doesnt quite ring true about that is the separate nose - what do you reckon?

peter

ps nice to know that a whole generation of us have been troubled by this for the best part of 40 years btw.. wish i'd asked derek myself a few years back !

[Michael Ferner]

hmmm, well does this qualify?



A fairly rudimentary effort on the '68 Ferrari at The Glen.

How can that be an airbox if the intakes are on the outsides of the cylinder heads?;)

[kayemod]

how about if it was made as left and a right side , pulled off the plug and then bonded down the middle? that would work if the nose on the intake was a separate part.

I can't remember ever having seen one close-up, but I could tell you straight away how it was made if I did. Your left and right theory is feasible, but how can we explain the taped join halfway up? Did it have a taped seam along the centreline? I don't think it did.

[PeterElleray]

In fact I recall being rather surprised at my 'find' as I'd always presumed the airbox phenomenon had begun in 1969 (ish; Brabham, or was it Ferrari? I can't remember ) and really took-off properly in F1 circa the 1971 French GP.

i think it was matra who had the first proper 'over the roll hoop' cold air box, late 1970-definately mexico- and then fitted to amon's car for the first race of 1971 at kyalami - maybe something to do with altitude (mexico, kyalami)? lotus and brabham ran lower , split intakes, not unlike those which reappeared in 1976 earlier in 1970.

peter

[PeterElleray]

How can that be an airbox if the intakes are on the outsides of the cylinder heads?;)

its a cooling duct for the fuel injection or the electrics - isnt it ?!

[PeterElleray]

I can't remember ever having seen one close-up, but I could tell you straight away how it was made if I did. Your left and right theory is feasible, but how can we explain the taped join halfway up? Did it have a taped seam along the centreline? I don't think it did.

http://www.gurneyfla...es/PICT3196.jpg

try the link to gurney flap above. i have a better one on my hard drive but its not mine to post..

the taped join half way up is understandable - thats where the original low airbox 'base' was cut. i think the plug was then made ontop of that, the left and right sections taken off that (with a bit of overlap at the bottom) joined, and then dropped ontop of the cut down base - hence the tape. i think the join at the top might be a lap joint - the airbox looks uneven here, and the top appears to have a small ridge in it.

its the nose section that worries me - can you work anything out from the link - its shiney isnt it, but still appears to be bag face?.

[arttidesco]

I'm pretty sure that whilst I was involved in the photo-research for Nigel Roebuck's book Chasing the Title (published ten years ago) I happened upon a picture or two of a Ferrari equipped with an airbox (or perhaps even a pair) taken - from memory - during the early-to-mid 'sixties.

I shall try to track down a reference, but I know I didn't dream it! In fact I recall being rather surprised at my 'find' as I'd always presumed the airbox phenomenon had begun in 1969 (ish; Brabham, or was it Ferrari? I can't remember ) and really took-off properly in F1 circa the 1971 French GP.

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

A very early air box was on the Alfa T33/2 3 litre V8 sports car dating from 1967.

While the 1968 312 Ferraris certainly made use of a twin airbox arrangement it was not used to feed air into the fuel injectors .

The earliest use I have found of an F1 car using an airbox to feed air into the fuel injectors is on the 1970 Lotus 72 seen here at Brands Hatch perhaps Kayemod Rob can confirm it's purpose ?

The scoop on the back of the 1960 Ferrari 156P should probably be considered an early for runner of the airbox though it's usefulness must have been considered marginal since it took another 10 years for air boxes to gain traction as a viable area for gaining an unfair advantage :-)

[TennisUK]

Perhaps a bit gauche (given that this is TNF), but there were a few interesting interpretation on the airbox in the 80s too, like the Benetton b186/87/88/89, the Ferrari 639/640 (early season only), Coloni Subaru (the arrangement of which echoed the earlier turbos, presumably because of the boxer 12 configuration), and of course this years (2010, for posterity) Merc.

Edited by TennisUK, 22 June 2010 - 22:20.

[kayemod]

http://www.gurneyfla...es/PICT3196.jpg

try the link to gurney flap above. i have a better one on my hard drive but its not mine to post..

the taped join half way up is understandable - thats where the original low airbox 'base' was cut. i think the plug was then made ontop of that, the left and right sections taken off that (with a bit of overlap at the bottom) joined, and then dropped ontop of the cut down base - hence the tape. i think the join at the top might be a lap joint - the airbox looks uneven here, and the top appears to have a small ridge in it.

its the nose section that worries me - can you work anything out from the link - its shiney isnt it, but still appears to be bag face?.

I looked in Autocourse 73, several pics, but too small and indistinct to be much use, though I found something better in Doug's History of the Grand Prix Car. As far as I can tell from a pic on page 78, your FoS pic isn't quite how the car raced, it seems to have been 'tidied-up' a little, with a neater horizontal join, that shiny area around the inlet looks like pigmented resin or gelcoat applied over the rough fibreglass to neaten it. The original version had a taped join, and the whole thing had a uniform matt finish. It's clear from comparing pics of 005 and 006, that the later car had a new larger airbox fitted over a cut down version of the 005 engine cover & airbox. Because it widens in cross-section halfway up, a one piece male mould wouldn't be possible, unless of course they used your two halves idea, but the lengthwise join that would result from this seems to have been smoothed to the point of invisibility. I'll keep searching for pics, we'll get to the bottom of this one!

[Lee Nicolle]

F5000's ran pretty big airboxes as well.

In Australia around 80 or 81 at the end of the 5000 days the cars that ran in the Arco Graphite series were not allowed the airboxes. Initially at least the reports said the cars were having real engine problems by not using them. and to me the cars looked weird.
Though for those cars I do not know how the controlled the mixtures as the 'boost' at 150mph would be more than the slow corners at 40 mph. Modern efi and probably the period F1s had that under control but what was on 5000s of the day did not, and ofcourse still do not.

[Marc Sproule]

Some from Long Beach '76....

Ligier
http://www.flickr.co...57623186790747/

Tyyrell
http://www.flickr.co...57623186790747/
http://www.flickr.co...57623186790747/

March
http://www.flickr.co...57623186790747/

Parnelli
http://www.flickr.co...57623186790747/

Fittipaldi
http://www.flickr.co...57623186790747/

McLaren
http://www.flickr.co...57623186790747/

Ferrari
http://www.flickr.co...57623186790747/

And if you're interested there are a number of others from later years in my F1 set.....

http://www.flickr.co...57623186790747/

[arttidesco]

I remember, that after the return from the turbocharged engines in 1987/88 the cars ran without airboxes (even in many cases without engine covers at all) and with airboxes again in 1989. But I am not aware of any rule change for that?

Here are some 1987/8 turbo cars that did use airboxes :-

Ferrari F1/87

Williams FW11B

McLaren MP4/4


Nice pic of a non shiny Tyrrell air box :-)

[Marc Sproule]

Quite a few from the "new era" in my Can Am set.

http://www.flickr.co...57623311345506/

[Twin Window]

Here are some 1987/8 turbo cars that did use airboxes :-

Ferrari F1/87

Williams FW11B

McLaren MP4/4


Nice pic of a non shiny Tyrrell air box :-)

Are you mad?

[arttidesco]

Are you mad?

Not at all check the side pods of the turbo cars and you will see little air boxes feeding the turbo installations :-)

Not to be confused with the brake ducts next to the rear wheels :-)

Edited by arttidesco, 23 June 2010 - 00:20.

[kayemod]

Nice pic of a non shiny Tyrrell air box :-)

Can't get that one to open.

[PeterElleray]

I looked in Autocourse 73, several pics, but too small and indistinct to be much use, though I found something better in Doug's History of the Grand Prix Car. As far as I can tell from a pic on page 78, your FoS pic isn't quite how the car raced, it seems to have been 'tidied-up' a little, with a neater horizontal join, that shiny area around the inlet looks like pigmented resin or gelcoat applied over the rough fibreglass to neaten it. The original version had a taped join, and the whole thing had a uniform matt finish. It's clear from comparing pics of 005 and 006, that the later car had a new larger airbox fitted over a cut down version of the 005 engine cover & airbox. Because it widens in cross-section halfway up, a one piece male mould wouldn't be possible, unless of course they used your two halves idea, but the lengthwise join that would result from this seems to have been smoothed to the point of invisibility. I'll keep searching for pics, we'll get to the bottom of this one!

hi - yes, im not convinced there is a join across the 'roof' but i cant work out at the moment how else it was done. the restored cars have been tidied up, and i wonder if the 'matt finish' on them is artificial, as it looks like all the cars but 005 were painted in period. i have a shot of amon in 005 at mosport 73 and the airbox is matt - by then the other 006 cars were shiney. btw 005 did have an identical airbox to 006 in period. when it was first launched at ricard in july 72 it had a low box, conventionally moulded and nice and shiney. that scooped up all the hot air from the rad outlet. the tall, big box (or top section) was grafted on, i think in the way i have suggested, between the car's british and austrian gp appearences. when 006 arrived new for cevert in canada in september it too had a grafted on matt airbox, having not been seen in public ar least, with the smaller one. same story for 006/2 when it was introduced for the international trophy in 1973.

tyrrell's did their own grp work didnt they? i think i remember the hut!

yes lets get the bottom of it!

peter

[Tony Matthews]

Not at all check the side pods of the turbo cars and you will see little air boxes feeding the turbo installations :-)

Not to be confused with the brake ducts next to the rear wheels :-)

Williams FW11B 'airbox'.

Dunno if this helps - and when is an airbox not an airbox, but a duct?

[f1steveuk]

I'd have said they were cooling ducts for the intercoolers, but that's an opinion!

Re the Tyrrell, my favourite shot of my favourite car and driver (reproduced with permission,

The box is fixed on, smooth and shiney!!




and it's the wallpaper on my laptop!

Edited by f1steveuk, 23 June 2010 - 08:42.

[kayemod]

tyrrell's did their own grp work didnt they? i think i remember the hut!


peter

That's right, they did all their own, perfectly sound and workmanlike, but slightly less polished than most of the opposition. To me, that unpainted 006 airbox has Ken saying, "I'm not paying for that!" written all over it. Anyone working in F1 today would be amazed at some of the dodges and cost-cutting that went on back in the 70s & 80s, there just wasn't the cash around that there is today, and that goes for every area. I wasn't directly involved with Team at Lotus, but the prototype shop in the main factory where I was based did almost all of their bodywork. You wouldn't believe some of the scraped and tatty nosecones etc that we got back to re-mould and repair, all stuff that would be thrown out without a second thought today, even by quite minor and less well funded teams. After long use and countless repairs, some of those 49 & 72 noses became a bit of a struggle to lift, surprising given Chapman's obsession with lightness, he must have stubbed his toe on one of them at times.

[PeterElleray]

I'd have said they were cooling ducts for the intercoolers, but that's an opinion!

Re the Tyrrell, my favourite shot of my favourite car and driver (reproduced with permission,

The box is fixed on, smooth and shiney!!




and it's the wallpaper on my laptop!

indeed - perhaps francois is asking derek gardner how he managed to get ken to cough up for some filler and paint for the airbox...

btw those mid 80's 'airboxes' on the turbo cars are for the turbo's, not the intercoolers, but their prime function on most of the cars was to feed air to the poorly positioned turbo intakes rather than create a ram effect .

look on most turbocharged lemans cars in 2010 and you will see the same ducts. the ones on the bentley had negligable effect in terms of a head of pressure.

peter

[f1steveuk]

That would make sense. I was always told during my college days that turbo's like a lot of 'still' air rather than having extra forced in.

[Allan Lupton]

That would make sense. I was always told during my college days that turbo's like a lot of 'still' air rather than having extra forced in.

As I wrote in post 109 (in response to one of yours then as now!

Just because you have an air pump doesn't change the basics!
a) dynamic head, suitably harvested, will give a slightly higher starting pressure (and density) which has to be helpful, since it will be multiplied by the pressure ratio of the supercharger.
b) free air, suitably harvested, is usually cooler and therefore denser than air that finds its way in using less straightforward means.
but c) some of the huge airscoops that were used might well have contributed more drag than power . . .

[f1steveuk]

As I wrote in post 109 (in response to one of yours then as now!

Just because you have an air pump doesn't change the basics!
a) dynamic head, suitably harvested, will give a slightly higher starting pressure (and density) which has to be helpful, since it will be multiplied by the pressure ratio of the supercharger.
b) free air, suitably harvested, is usually cooler and therefore denser than air that finds its way in using less straightforward means.
but c) some of the huge airscoops that were used might well have contributed more drag than power . . .

The lecturer at college probably said it more than once as well!

[arttidesco]

Can't get that one to open.

Apologies for bad nice pic of a non shiny Tyrrell air box link hope this one works :-)

[kayemod]

Apologies for bad nice pic of a non shiny Tyrrell air box link hope this one works :-)

Thanks for that, I think we may have solved the mystery. PE's suggestion of two halves made over a male form is probably correct, and I'd say they could have done it without a separate orifice moulding on the front, though there's still a chance that it was made in a slightly rough female mould, but just never finished off properly. There's clearly a smoothed-over joint along the centreline in this pic, though this Tyrrell has been tidied up, it isn't quite as it would have been in period, the bit where it joined the engine cover wasn't like that at all, just taped, though almost certainly glued & rivetted under that. The only thing still unexplained, is why they didn't finish the job, it ran like this for quite a few races didn't it? All it needed was some spray primer, quick rub down, and a blow over with blue gloss, I could easily have done most of that in a day.

[PeterElleray]

As I wrote in post 109 (in response to one of yours then as now!

Just because you have an air pump doesn't change the basics!
a) dynamic head, suitably harvested, will give a slightly higher starting pressure (and density) which has to be helpful, since it will be multiplied by the pressure ratio of the supercharger.
b) free air, suitably harvested, is usually cooler and therefore denser than air that finds its way in using less straightforward means.
but c) some of the huge airscoops that were used might well have contributed more drag than power . . .

yes - but on a turbo the returns are smaller as the amount of dynamic head you can obtain in an area that is close enough to the tubocharger (mounted low down on all the cars i have worked on except for the indycars) is smaller. at lm there is also a restrictor to contend with and this goes sonic fairly early unless you are a diesel, and then the mass flow is fixed. as regards cooler, denser air, yes, that was the main aim - because the inetrcoolers on a racing car seldom have an easy time doing their job in the flow regimes avaliable.

[PeterElleray]

Thanks for that, I think we may have solved the mystery. PE's suggestion of two halves made over a male form is probably correct, and I'd say they could have done it without a separate orifice moulding on the front, though there's still a chance that it was made in a slightly rough female mould, but just never finished off properly. There's clearly a smoothed-over joint along the centreline in this pic, though this Tyrrell has been tidied up, it isn't quite as it would have been in period, the bit where it joined the engine cover wasn't like that at all, just taped, though almost certainly glued & rivetted under that. The only thing still unexplained, is why they didn't finish the job, it ran like this for quite a few races didn't it? All it needed was some spray primer, quick rub down, and a blow over with blue gloss, I could easily have done most of that in a day.

actually thats the picture i had which i couldnt post, so im glad its come up. how do you reckon they got the intake of the male tool from the side then? we only draw the things, and leave stuff like that to you guys!

perhaps that's what francois is asking derek......

peter

[f1steveuk]

I didn't realise that 005 had been ruined with the modified roll hoop as well! To my mind Germany 1973 was when 006 and 006/2 looked the best!