Phil Hill questions

I have always found Phil Hill to be an intrigueing charactor. He DID win the WDC and that alone makes him remarkable. Looking at '61, he may not have been the best driver, I think possibly Trips was better that year. However, what he was able to accomplish in '60, driving a clearly outdated car certainly was remarkable.

The questions I have had regarding Hill concered 2 specific periods of his career:

1962, what really went wrong- by mid season is seemed as if he did not care any more. Can anyone shed light on this ? By 1964, was Cooper really the "only" F-1 seat available to him or were other factors at work ?

1967-68, why did he retire when he did ? By late 1967,when Chapparal stopped participating in long distance racing, I would have thought that Hill could have easily moved over to Porsche, who were expanding their long distance program or to Mirage, who could have greatly benefited from his experpience as they made their run at the WSC. Any insight ?

Best,

Ross

Hmmmmmmmm, I guess everyone is scared to discuss Phil Hill now, so having nothing to lose, I will.

The 1962 season for Ferrari and Hill was one that which doubltessly had the latter pause for a few long moments wondering just what was going on and why was her there, I would imagine. In the wake of the walkout at Ferrari, which Hill managed to not participate in because he was both in America and he was focused on other things -- and he had already signed for another season. He did not give up at mid-season, the team did. Despite some excellent early season performances, it was very clear that Ferrari was not going to have an easy time of it that season. And they didn't.

When Chiti and the others set up ATS and then Hill and Baghetti joined up, no one expected them to be competitive right out of the box, but so many things simply went wrong for so many reasons and it was pretty much a disaster for all involved. Keep in mind, however, that Hill is also driving for Shelby American on occasion this season and helping the Cobra program.

In 1964, he went to Cooper and as has been recounted elsewhere, was the victim of a mechanic's idiocy which left his engine habitually down on power and despite wringing everything out of it that he could, simply could not get the Cooper to perform. Not until the following season did the reason for Hill's apparent lack of performance become known, but by then it was too late. Once again, however, his performance in the sports car world proved he still had it.

His "retirement," as he has related it to myself and several others, just sort of happened. He was involved in other things away from the track, the Chaparral effort was reduced and then this and that and soon he was a retired racing driver by default. Just a most unusual situation. I have no doubts that had Porsche or Wyer brought him on board that further successes would have happened.

Just a little note.
I don't know if Ferrari really quit in 1962. In Spa, Ricardo Rodríguez was ahead of Phil during a very tense battle for ages and only through team orders at the very end, was Ricardo forced to give up his third place to the reigning champion. He was absolutely furious, crying later even, and the reason they told him to give up third was that Phil was fighting for the championship still and Ricardo was a long term project.
And if Phil couldn't pass Ricardo, maybe he was the one who didn't have all the mind put into retaining his championship, or maybe he knew they could both would be killed if he tried it since Ricardo would not concede lightly and was driving at his very top form (;) .
Phil was great as a driver, both Rodriguez counted him among their inspiration in the track, but I sense he gave up when he saw the Lotus and BRMs in 62 and his 156 was not up to the challenge of retaining the title.
Hope nobody feels I am insulting him, or I am trying to put him down to put Ricardo up. Just a different perspective.
Carlos Jalife

Or may be, Phil's car was a bit slower than that of Ricardo and he could not coax any more out of it. On a track like Spa where you are flat out most of the time, the machine counts for something.

T54

Carlos,

I think that you are reading a bit too much into things. The Dino 156/62 was a real dog compared to its British rivals. After Spa, there was little doubt that the handwriting was on the wall for Ferrari stating very clearly that they had completely missed the boat -- even if Old Man Ferrari refused to accept that fact of life. Hill did not throw in the towel for the season because he was unable to pass Rodgriguez. They were both quick, fast drivers and Hill excelled on the circuits such as Spa. Hill gave it his best shot -- but neither was he going to do anything dumb. There was, it was thought at the time, more opportunities in the season ahead to make up any lost ground. However, as Ferrari prone to do when things were not going well, the team sat out a few races and used shouting matches to fill the off time.

When it was obvious that the 156/62 was dead meat at Spa -- keep in mind Hill's performance there in 1960, this did not bode well for a team already dealing with some very serious morale problems. As usual, OMF blamed Hill and others for the problems that year in the GP arena. So, in modern parlance, Hill went from Hero to Zero with OMF and those lurking about in the shadows of the throne room. Once someone's interests or reputation was poisoned at Ferrari, except nothing good to come from it.

Keep in mind, as much as it causes many of those here to writhe in agony as they grit their teeth and have the veins in their necks budge, until Le Mans was out of the way, the GP effort was secondary. In 1962, it was pretty much apparent that Ferrari really didn't get that "bounce" once the main effort returned to the GP series. Indeed, it was anything but that, going downhill and into oblivion.

There is a tendency these days for many to forget just how often Ferrari would be an also-ran in those days. Or how it so often snatched defeat from the jaws of victory time and again with self-inflicted wounds. At least it was fascinating and the stuff of great soap opera rather the bland, lifeless orchestrated sort of thing that would follow in later years. Win or lose or irrelevant, Ferrari was always good entertainment.

So, Phil Hill ended up being relegated to the GP wilderness and being a non-person in the eyes of many -- if not most -- today, despite still turning in many excellent drives in sports cars. Such is the nature of our world.

To emphasise Don's points, the Ferraris were generally slower in 1962 than they had been on the same circuits in 1961. This was despite having some young chargers in the team who would be sure to give their best whatever the circumstances. Hill was usually as fast as the chargers, so there is absolutely no reason to think that he gave less than his best at any time.

However, I always thought that he would have been more at home in the Grand Prix racing of five or so years earlier. His style and his enthusiasm seemed somehow more in tune with larger engines (mounted in front) and longer races than became common in the 1960s.

In particular, I believe he was not comfortable with the reclined driving position that most had adopted. The ATS had an upright seat and in 1964 Hill always looked to be sitting more upright than McLaren.

Don, where can I read about what happened to Phil with Cooper?

I think his position at Cooper was fairly well covered, in a race-by-race account, as you read both the reports themselves and the 'Reflections' columns by Jenks... particularly the Austrian GP...

That aside, if we return to Spa in 1962 we find Wild Willy out there haring along with the best of them, dicing for the lead wasn't he?

Perhaps it was largely a matter of being caught up in that slipstreaming battling order at the head of the pack, but from memory he was miles in front of Rodriguez and Hill.

I'd agree that Phil had reconciled to making up for this later in the season, as Don suggests, as his performance at Monaco showed he still had plenty of fire.

Originally posted by dbltop
Don, where can I read about what happened to Phil with Cooper?

At Monaco in 1965 Rindt's throttle cable was installed incorrectly, preventing him from achieving full throttle opening. It was later suspected that the same problem occurred the previous year with Hill's car. I assume this is what don was referring to.

however, I don't recall this having been mentioned in 1964 race reports.

From my understanding, the mechanic in question, Hill's the season before, would tape or clamp the throttle cable to a chassis tube while monkeying about with the engine and would , apparently, forget to undo the tape prior to the race. As I went through the reports of the 1964 season -- lots and lots of them...., this problem seemed to fit with the odd behavior at times of the engines in the Cooper team, as well as the poor performance of Hill and the team. A minor problem in some instances, but with very limited bhp available, every little pony counted. Such minor, insignificant things often have larger consequences. Same as the Colotti folks simply missing the boat with the lubrication of the gearbox that was used on the Walker Cooper that Moss drove in 1959.... Once they realized what it was, it was a relatively straight-forward fix, however it was too late by then, the damage was done...

Originally posted by dbltop
[...], where can I read about what happened to Phil with Cooper?

I can certainly suggest Doug Nye's Cooper Cars (Motorbooks International, 2003, Second Edition, ISBN 0-7603-1709-7)

During a face-to-face conversation in Aug 04, I asked Phil if OMF was vindictive.

His response? "It was his middle name."

Thanks for the info guys, sounds like that mechanic was out of a job!

Yes, team manager Salvadori sacked him on the spot (it was to make his own job easier when installing fuel tanks IIRC that he had cut off the stop on the throttle cable), and paid Rindt the money he would have got for starting to placate him.

And Phil said one reason he stopped driving GPs after 1964 was his "hateful mechanic" at Cooper.


Paul M

Originally posted by HDonaldCapps
From my understanding, the mechanic in question, Hill's the season before, would tape or clamp the throttle cable to a chassis tube while monkeying about with the engine and would , apparently, forget to undo the tape prior to the race. As I went through the reports of the 1964 season -- lots and lots of them...., this problem seemed to fit with the odd behavior at times of the engines in the Cooper team, as well as the poor performance of Hill and the team. A minor problem in some instances, but with very limited bhp available, every little pony counted. Such minor, insignificant things often have larger consequences. Same as the Colotti folks simply missing the boat with the lubrication of the gearbox that was used on the Walker Cooper that Moss drove in 1959.... Once they realized what it was, it was a relatively straight-forward fix, however it was too late by then, the damage was done...

I think the problem was not that the mechanic forgot to undo the tape, but that the cable was not fixed rigidly to the chassis. A rigid fixing was required for the cable to work properly.

I also thought that the problem with the 1959 Colotti gearbox was in the machining of the gear, not in the lubrication.

That's right Roger, the drawings had been misread and the gears cut incorrectly...

"Looking at '61, he may not have been the best driver, I think possibly Trips was better that year"

Hi Ross. Thanks for starting this thread but I'd also be interested in your reasons for the above judgment. I've often thought this was a bias passed around in the European press at the time which seemed to overlook the number of Phil's poles, fastest laps and podiums that year including his qualifying pace at the Nurburgring and the win at Spa. I would have thought at least the equal if not better? Thanks, Bob

Hi Ross. Thanks for starting this thread but I'd also be interested in your reasons for the above judgment. I've often thought this was a bias passed around in the European press at the time which seemed to overlook the qualifying and race pace at the Nurburgring as well as the win at Spa. I would have thought at least the equal? Thanks, Bob

While I have the utmost respect for von Trips's performances, I second that. One has to look at the results of the year to see that if anything, Hill equalled or bettered von Trips results.
Was anti-Americanism already prevalent then? I recall that it sure was where I lived. Even the bad weather was their fault already... and there was no treaty to sign then.

T54

I had lots of trouble with my Colotti type 21 transaxle in my Cooper Monaco. I believe Ford GT40s at Le Mans had trouble also.

In addition to Le Mans, all three GT-40s had Colotti problems in the 1964 Reims 12 Hours as well.

By the way, does anybody remember which of the co-drivers took the midnight start in the #4 Ford GT-40: Bruce McLaren or Phil Hill? Phil hated racing at Reims in the dark.

WINO

This is from Louis Stanley's "GRAND PRIX - WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP 1962", page 152.

What "tempting driving proposition" did Phil turn down? BRM?


.
.
.
.