What happened to the 'Texaco Star' Lotus F2 cars?

this has just popped up. Does anyone know what happened to the Texaco Stars? These were the 1973 F2 Lotus cars. Emerson & Ronnie Peterson drove but to no avail, they weren't much cop. What I'd like to know is, what happened to them? I'm presuming Lotus built at least three cars for that season?

According to Taylor's "The Lotus Book" there were only 2 Lotus Texaco Stars [Type 74] built. Doesn't however answer your question as to what happened to Lotus' last F2 cars.....

Weren't they also designated Lotus 74? (Or am I confusing this with something else?). Confusing certainly, as that number was also used for a version of the Europa, I think.
I really got the impression that Lotus's heart was not in F2 by then.

Edit:
Ah, not quick enough on the keys...

sorry cant help . but does anyone have pictures of it . im always searching "good " pictures of that failures .btw does someone know a car done by ralph bellamy who did well?

Originally posted by 2F-001
Confusing certainly, as that number was also used for a version of the Europa, I think.

I seem to remember that the racing version of the Europa was the Type 47 (not 74).
Dislexia rules KO

Originally posted by philippe charuest
does someone know a car done by ralph bellamy who did well?

Lotus 78 perhaps.

The Stars exist in a private collection.

DCN

Originally posted by Rob Ryder


I seem to remember that the racing version of the Europa was the Type 47 (not 74).
Dislexia rules KO

Road version was the 46, first racing version the 47, second racing version the 62.

No, it's not dyslexia Rob: yes, the 47 was the Lotus twin-cam engined derivitive of the 46 in the late sixties; the 74 was an early seventies Europa - I think it might possibly have identified the five-speed version. There were still further Europa model numbers for the S2, an undeveloped evolution model, a federal-bodied version etc.

There were other cases too of unrelated Lotus race and road cars having the same model number.

Ah, you're right there, Tony. I'd forgotten the 74 was a dual number! There's a handy list of all Lotus type numbers here.

Originally posted by Doug Nye
The Stars exist in a private collection.

DCN

The same collection?

I believe so

Incidentally, I also think three cars may have been built. Emmo wrote the first one off in testing, then two were campaigned during 1972. But maybe reports of the write-off were exaggerated, and it was rebuilt. Or - here's another thought - maybe the testing accident was after, not before the racing season

Sheldon says that the 74s had BDA engines, but contemporary reports said that they were Novamotor-modified Lotus 907s. These were said to be 40 bhp down on the opposition and not adequately reliable, which would account for the cars' poor performance. Were they also the only single-seaters powered-by-Lotus?

Originally posted by philippe charuest
sorry cant help . but does anyone have pictures of it . im always searching "good " pictures of that failures .btw does someone know a car done by ralph bellamy who did well?

1973 Ronnie in the Lotus 74 at Nivelles(?)

Like Vitesse2 I remembered the Europa Types 47 and 62, but not as the Type 74.. thanks Tony.
Rob

Originally posted by Vitesse2
Ah, you're right there, Tony. I'd forgotten the 74 was a dual number! There's a handy list of all Lotus type numbers here.

I was always a bit mystified about the Type 69. This was originally the monocoque F2 car in 1970, but suddenly all the new 59s produced at the same time, for F3 or whatever, adopted the 69 bodywork and became known as 69s too, presumably with a few other modifications. Clearly they were different cars. Were the spaceframe 69s really one of the mysterious gaps at around the same time - 66 and 71 - but sold as 69s for marketing reasons?

Originally posted by Rob Ryder


I seem to remember that the racing version of the Europa was the Type 47 (not 74).
Dislexia rules KO

What wrong with being dyslexic. All the smart people are dyslexic (ie).It had who one was Einstein Albert.

Originally posted by Roger Clark
Sheldon says that the 74s had BDA engines, but contemporary reports said that they were Novamotor-modified Lotus 907s.

IIRC they did use the Lotus engine - which was probably why they weren't very successful, despite the massive talent behind the wheel!

As for whether any other Lotus single-seaters had Lotus engines, surely there was a Lotus Twin-Cam fitted to something somewhere? It would be strange if that never happened!

Of course that raises the question of what is a 'Lotus' engine. The Twin Cam was a Ford with a different head and I thought that the 907 series were based on a Vauxhall bottom end. Was there ever a genuine all-Lotus engine? Maybe the much later Lotus V8?

Originally posted by BRG
As for whether any other Lotus single-seaters had Lotus engines, surely there was a Lotus Twin-Cam fitted to something somewhere? It would be strange if that never happened!

Didn't a lot of 1600cc F3 cars run Lotus twin cam engines or am I thinking Formula Atlantic...or both? And didn't Palliser also run a BRM engine in Atlantic (off topic I know....)?

Simon Lewis
Transport Books & Motorsport Photos
www.simonlewis.com/oscart/index.php
Supplying Enthusiasts Around The World Since 1985

The 907, in its early development stages, used the Vauxhall bottom end purely get the thing up and running, but the production engine was as far as I know proper Lotus stuff. Wasn't there some kind of furore over the Vauxhall Chevette 2300 rally car, which (for a while at least) used the Lotus engine, Vauxhall claiming that it was based on their own engine as the rally regulations required an engine from the original manufacturer and not a transplant from elsewhere?

Vern Schuppan's Atlantic Palliser used a BRM-prepared Lotus Twin Cam - his success led him to being appointed a "trainee Grand Prix driver" (love that term) by Big Lou at BRM for the following year. A fat lot of good it did him in F1 terms. And yes, of course there were lots of 1600cc F3 Lotus cars with the TC.

Originally posted by Roger Clark
Sheldon says that the 74s had BDA engines, but contemporary reports said that they were Novamotor-modified Lotus 907s.

The confusion might stem from the previous, 1972 Lotus F2 which ran a "BDF", at least in the off-season Torneio series in Brazil, which was won by Emmerson in a Lotus with just such an engine.


Simon Lewis
Transport Books & Motorsport Photos
www.simonlewis.com/oscart/index.php

Originally posted by ian senior
The 907, in its early development stages, used the Vauxhall bottom end purely get the thing up and running, but the production engine was as far as I know proper Lotus stuff. Wasn't there some kind of furore over the Vauxhall Chevette 2300 rally car, which (for a while at least) used the Lotus engine, Vauxhall claiming that it was based on their own engine as the rally regulations required an engine from the original manufacturer and not a transplant from elsewhere?

That was an odd business. But as I recall, it was only about the cylinder head - Vauxhall were using the Lotus one and had to replace it with a Vauxhall one to satisfy the FIA. It seem to make little difference to the performance though.

A friend of mine had a Chevette HS road car (nice performance & handling, shame about the tartan seat covers). A cambelt failure meant a complete rebuild & we found with some surprise that it used exactly the same block, rods and crankshaft as the Bedford (CF?) van.

Going from memory, the history of this engine is that it was first used in the racing 62s (as a 2-litre?) and then became the basis of the Lotus Esprit/Eclat range as a 2.2-litre. It also appeared in the Jenson-Healey. Later it was used in the Talbot-Lotus Sunbeam saloon (and rally car) again as a 2.2 litre. The Vauxhall version as used in the Chevette HS ansd HSR was always 2.3 litre, as were their SOHC engines. But were Lotus in GM's hands by then, or did that come a bit later?

Doubtless a TNF guru can fill in the very many gaps in my sadly lacking memory!

Yep, sure that's right about Vauxhall just using the Lotus head in the Chevette - when I wrote the first post I couldn't remember exactly what the problem was. And am I right in thinking that when the "Lotus" engine made its first appearance in the 62, it was still using the Vauxhall block, etc?

Thinking about it a bit more, I reckon that the bottom end of this engine, in all its guises, is basically Vauxhall throughout. Lotus took the bottom end, which was initially only 2-litre, and modified it with their 16v DOHC head, taking it out to 2.2 litres. In racing form, they may have used a better crank and rods although this particular engine has always been noted for its strength even in standard form.

Once it became a production engine for the Esprit etc range, maybe Vauxhall cast blocks specially for Lotus? Does anyone have such a car – do they have GM or Lotus casting marks on the block, I wonder?

For the Chevette HS, Vauxhall repatriated the engine, designing their own 16V DOHC head which was used for the production cars but using the later 2.3 litre block etc. When it came to rallying the car in Gp4, I imagine that they decided to cut corners by using the Lotus head which was already well developed for competition (as in for instance the Texaco Stars – phew, back on thread for a moment!). As this head just bolted on, it suggests that the bottom ends remained common throughout.

After the FIA kicked Vauxhall out for this homologation infringement, they had to rapidly work on their own head in order to get back to competitive power. I recall that this didn’t take very long at all - which makes one wonder just how different the two heads really were!

Aren't we missing something here? The Lotus Engine is Alloy block and the Vauxhall is Iron.
Yes the prototypes may have been Vauxhall Bedford, and because the bore centres are the same the crank can be too, as well as the rods (but not always). But back on topic, Yes the Stars did have the engine generically referred to as the 907. I am pretty sure there was a third car also.
Whose collection are they in?

Originally posted by Huw Jadvantich
Whose collection are they in?

Some owners are very secretive, and demand an oath of silence from anyone privy to the contents of their collections
I'm sure if Doug had felt at liberty to disclose anything further he would have done so

Originally posted by Huw Jadvantich
Whose collection are they in?

Some owners are very secretive, and swear to secrecy anyone privy to the contents of their collections
I'm sure if Doug had felt at liberty to disclose anything further he would have done so

Originally posted by Huw Jadvantich
Aren't we missing something here? The Lotus Engine is Alloy block and the Vauxhall is Iron.

I think that's the explanation. A short but useful history of the Lotus engine is at www.lotusespritworld.com. I assume it's accurate. Have a look at the "history" section and you should find it. Yes, there were Vauxhall-based iron block engines early on in the develoment stages, but the proper 907 (including the Jensen Healey engines) were alloy.

Originally posted by ian senior

but the proper 907 (including the Jensen Healey engines) were alloy.

I think the Lotus engine from the Jenson-healey differs from that used in the Sunbeam Talbot. when I was rallying in the early 90s there were several bogus "Lotus Sunbeams" around - Ti's fitted with Jenson-Healey engines. Generally it was believed the Jenson unit produced less power and was less reliable than the "real thing" . I seem to recall they had different type numbers as well.

Simon Lewis
Transport Books & Motorsport Photos
www.simonlewis.com/oscart/index.php

Originally posted by simonlewisbooks


Didn't a lot of 1600cc F3 cars run Lotus twin cam engines or am I thinking Formula Atlantic...or both? And didn't Palliser also run a BRM engine in Atlantic (off topic I know....)?

Simon Lewis
Transport Books & Motorsport Photos
www.simonlewis.com/oscart/index.php
Supplying Enthusiasts Around The World Since 1985

yes in atlantic not in f3 ,but mostly in formula B it was the cheap reliable option for low budget team . the weapon of choice was the BDA.the twincam is still the cheap and reliable option in vintage racing in f2 -fb-f atlantic

Originally posted by Rob Ryder



1973 Ronnie in the Lotus 74 at Nivelles(?)

Like Vitesse2 I remembered the Europa Types 47 and 62, but not as the Type 74.. thanks Tony.
Rob

thanks. i have many pictures but always close-up ,b&w or plain bad one

The 907 used by Jensen was the first application of the engine (and didn't they pay for it! they had huge warranty issues with the Lotus engine). It was only a 2 litre.
The Lotus Sunbeam was a 2.2 litre, tuned more for torque than outright power in road trim and known IMSC as the 911. I had one and it was a shatteringly quick road car, although its handling and brakes were a bit unsophisticated.
The only thing it really lacked was a windscreen wiper on the side windows, because you spent more time looking out of those than you did the screen.
The 'real' Lotus cars subsequent to the Jensen Healey used 2 litres and 2.2s in a totally different state of tune (more peaky) and I assume had another number like 912 etc etc.

Looking at the 74 (particularly the version with separate nose-wings as used at Rouen rather than that nosecone) I'm struck by how uncannily similar it is externally to the Parnelli VPJ4. I know the 74 is credited to Ralph Bellamy and the VPJ4 to Maurice Philippe, who of course was a Lotus man during the 72 era... when did Maurice actually leave?;)

Originally posted by ian senior


I was always a bit mystified about the Type 69. This was originally the monocoque F2 car in 1970, but suddenly all the new 59s produced at the same time, for F3 or whatever, adopted the 69 bodywork and became known as 69s too, presumably with a few other modifications. Clearly they were different cars. Were the spaceframe 69s really one of the mysterious gaps at around the same time - 66 and 71 - but sold as 69s for marketing reasons?

As an aside, do many 59s run in Historic/Vintage races with 59 bodywork?

...and while we're on the subject of Maurice Philippe, I've heard several times that he turned up at Tyrrell with 008 virtually finished -- the implication being that it was an unraced project for another team. An abandoned Parnelli, or was he involved with someone in between?

yes between parnelli and tyrrell he was with copersucar

Originally posted by petefenelon
Looking at the 74 (particularly the version with separate nose-wings as used at Rouen rather than that nosecone) I'm struck by how uncannily similar it is externally to the Parnelli VPJ4. I know the 74 is credited to Ralph Bellamy and the VPJ4 to Maurice Philippe, who of course was a Lotus man during the 72 era... when did Maurice actually leave?;)

One thing about Bellamy that has always puzzled me is trying to spot his "hand" on cars. I know this is a very imprecise thing, and maybe I'm just thrown off by the M19, but unlike other designers there is little about his designs that distinguishes them as being obviously a Bellamy creation.

I know what you mean about the similarity to the VPJ4. There are some design similarities between the T74 and T76 but less than between the 74 and the VPJ4.

Which leads me to idly wonder what would have happened in 1974 had Phillipe stayed at Team and the 76 been, essentially a VPJ4 with a Lotus badge on the nose (no bi-plane rearwing, funny pedal arrangement, small front tyres, weight disadvantage or gearbox issues)???

the parnelli was not exactly a success too so as the tyrrell 008 ( a real tyrrell and a philippe car no doubt). in fact the best car imo of that specific "school" was the 1975-76 Ensign done by dave baldwin an other ex lotus guy

Originally posted by Ruairidh

Which leads me to idly wonder what would have happened in 1974 had Phillipe stayed at Team and the 76 been, essentially a VPJ4 with a Lotus badge on the nose (no bi-plane rearwing, funny pedal arrangement, small front tyres, weight disadvantage or gearbox issues)???

Some interesting possibilities, if you like playing 'alternate history'.

Let's assume the VPJ76 is a decent car and races through '74, remains fully competitive in '75 and is still a moderately good proposition into '76, capable of mixing it with the M23, let's say. The awful fall-off in Lotus competitiveness in '75 doesn't happen, Chapman doesn't feel a crisis coming on, so doesn't start Rudd and Wright's blue-sky R&D programme; Lotus is second-guessed by McLaren or Brabham, both of whom were fiddling with all kinds of air-dams and splitters and so on under their cars through '75-6. The first ground-effects car probably ends up as a fairly crude (but still better than the other Cosworth cars) '77 McLaren (that Alfa flat-12 is not conducive to tunnels, so despite Gordon Murray's prodigious creativity we'll have to exclude him).

Of course, a competitive McLaren ground-effects car probably means Master James stays put a little longer, and probably also prevents the team from falling into its "oh blimey, we'd best knock up a GE car quickly" disaster that produced the M28 and the subsequent fall from grace. So a competitive McLaren doesn't necessarily need the Marlboro-brokered merger with Ron Dennis and John Barnard.... colour '78-'80 as McLaren semi-ground-effects vs Ferrari horsepower.

Opens up a lot of questions... Where do Ronzo and John Barnard end up? What does Patrick Head do after the conventional FW06 (does he take inspiration from the McLarens?) - who's the first person to do a proper 'wing car'? Does Chapman set his bright lads onto it and leapfrog them all, coming out with 'Black Beauty' a year or so late?

Originally posted by petefenelon

Chapman doesn't feel a crisis coming on, so doesn't start Rudd and Wright's blue-sky R&D programme;

That is probably the key to the alternate universe.

Phillipe is also correct that the VPJ, while looking the part, wasn't successful, although I guess you could argue lack of development/funds/experience etc.

But getting back on point, my assumption centered on it being essentially a development of the T72 - perhaps lighter but certainly without the horrible teething problems that plagued the T76. That would have given both Ronnie and Jackie a more consistent steed for '74, maybe even allowing Ronnie a shot at the drivers champ that year.

For 1975 there would have been an evolution, and it is hard to think that the performance would have been worse than the real Team performance that year, so would Colin have sat down and been in the state of mind to write that 27 page document......I dunno but I have to agree it is very possible that he wouldn't have and Colin never seemed real good at following other peoples innovations so I wonder what path Team might have followed.

http://br.msnusers.c...iguras/lotust74