Chaps:
A thread to explore inexplicably poor performances by otherwise fine, top-flight drivers in good equipment.
We all have our days when we're 'on' and consequently, 'off'. Do we have instances where drivers just didn't have it on a given day? For reasons more unapparent than otherwise.
The instances could cover seeming uncompetitiveness as well as a distinct propensity to leave the road with repeated vigour.
I do recall reading ages ago the Jimmy Clark had a nasty road accident preceding an F2 race where he did poorly so he could be forgiven for this.
Any other woeful performances of note?
(And I do realize that this might be a very short-lived thread)
Off the boil?
Started by
Manfred Cubenoggin
, Dec 16 2005 19:34
40 replies to this topic
Advertisement
#2
stevewf1
-
- 3,259 posts
- Joined: December 05
Member
Posted 16 December 2005 - 19:43
I would think that Jarno Trulli would be a candidate.
On second thought, maybe he should be nominated for an "on the boil" post...
On second thought, maybe he should be nominated for an "on the boil" post...
#3
Tim Murray
-
- 24,608 posts
- Joined: May 02
Moderator
Posted 16 December 2005 - 19:52
Surely the classic example must be Reutemann at Las Vegas 1981. A stunning lap in qualifying to take pole; all he has to do to become World Champion is finish ahead of Piquet. And then . . . ?????
#4
Richard Jenkins
-
- 7,216 posts
- Joined: November 00
Member
Posted 16 December 2005 - 20:02
Two excellent examples up there but add Stefano Modena. He was so talented at times, it hurt, yet it seemed to hurt him to try. On the boil, like at Monaco one year (91 from memory?), fantastic, off it.. run of the mill
#5
David Birchall
-
- 3,291 posts
- Joined: March 03
Member
Posted 16 December 2005 - 20:08
And then there is Jaques Villeneuve..... 
#6
WINO
-
- 622 posts
- Joined: April 04
Member
Posted 16 December 2005 - 20:11
Jack Brabham in the 1958 Nurburgring 1000 KM?
WINO
WINO
#7
theunions
-
- 638 posts
- Joined: October 02
Member
Posted 17 December 2005 - 00:05
Dale Earnhardt the year he fell asleep during the parade lap of the Southern 500?
#8
Manfred Cubenoggin
-
- 978 posts
- Joined: October 02
Member
Posted 17 December 2005 - 04:13
WINO:
Could you expand a little on the Brabham note at the Ring? You have insights?
Could you expand a little on the Brabham note at the Ring? You have insights?
#9
Gary Davies
-
- 6,460 posts
- Joined: April 01
Member
Posted 17 December 2005 - 06:02
Sorry to butt in, and this is very much OTOH (I'm in the middle of garden fatigues under close orders of the CO right now).Originally posted by Manfred Cubenoggin
WINO:
Could you expand a little on the Brabham note at the Ring? You have insights?
I believe it was Brabhams's first run in the Aston and he was still somewhat inexperienced at the complex Nürburgring track in 1958 (Might his entry in the 1957 German GP meeting in the F2 Cooper have been his only previous experience at the track?)
Moss was terrifically fast in the car and so the comparison between the two of them would have appeared extreme.
Yes he lost the lead Moss has built up but he kept it on the island and I believe he was significantly faster during his second stint.
He didn't look wonderful that day but given his relative lack of experience at the track and in the car, I tend to think that 'Off the boil' is perhaps a bit on the harsh side.
Back to the shed!
#10
ensign14
-
- 62,013 posts
- Joined: December 01
Member
Posted 17 December 2005 - 08:45
Fangio at Monaco 1956, tho' the man himself thought it was one of his better performances. Despite the fact that he seemed to be channeling the spirit of De Cesaris. Very uncharacteristic performance in a year where he was fastest in every other race.
#11
WINO
-
- 622 posts
- Joined: April 04
Member
Posted 17 December 2005 - 15:15
Fangio's 250F ride in the British GP at Aintree in 1957 is also mentioned often, although one never knows what problems a driver may have had with a car on raceday.
As for Brabham's performance in the 1958 Nurburgring 1000 KM, the difference between him and Moss was huge. Considering the facts that Jack became World Champion one year later and that the DBR1 was ideally suited to the Ring [as Brooks and the relatively inexperienced Cunningham-Reid had shown a year earlier], it makes you wonder if Brabham had just an off day or if he had problems with front-engined cars in general.
WINO
As for Brabham's performance in the 1958 Nurburgring 1000 KM, the difference between him and Moss was huge. Considering the facts that Jack became World Champion one year later and that the DBR1 was ideally suited to the Ring [as Brooks and the relatively inexperienced Cunningham-Reid had shown a year earlier], it makes you wonder if Brabham had just an off day or if he had problems with front-engined cars in general.
WINO
#12
David McKinney
-
- 14,156 posts
- Joined: November 00
Member
Posted 17 December 2005 - 15:25
Can't have been the latter - not many people could drive a Cooper-Bristol the way he did 
#13
WINO
-
- 622 posts
- Joined: April 04
Member
Posted 17 December 2005 - 15:44
David,
Was wondering when YOU would chip in! I meant to say, after Brabham got so used to the rear-engined Coopers, his steady staple by then.
WINO
Was wondering when YOU would chip in! I meant to say, after Brabham got so used to the rear-engined Coopers, his steady staple by then.
WINO
#14
David McKinney
-
- 14,156 posts
- Joined: November 00
Member
Posted 17 December 2005 - 18:22
Actually Wino I tend to agree
His performances in the 250F Maserati in 1956 weren't outstanding, nor those in Tojeiro and Ferrari sportscars in 1957, though I seem to remember he went quite well at Riverside in 1960 in the Jaguar E2A
His performances in the 250F Maserati in 1956 weren't outstanding, nor those in Tojeiro and Ferrari sportscars in 1957, though I seem to remember he went quite well at Riverside in 1960 in the Jaguar E2A
#15
WINO
-
- 622 posts
- Joined: April 04
Member
Posted 17 December 2005 - 18:35
David,
Even Brabham's one-off ride in the Jaguar E2A at Riverside was unremarkable. Jack's practice time was too slow to qualify. To the relief of the organizers, who had paid the World Champion substantial appearance money, he made the field with a second place finish in one of the two consolation races. In the Times GP itself Brabham finished a distant 10th overall.
However, in this case the car rather than the driver may have been the reason for the lackluster performance. Bruce McLaren couldn't do much with the E2A either, at Laguna Seca one week later. The car was never raced again.
WINO
Even Brabham's one-off ride in the Jaguar E2A at Riverside was unremarkable. Jack's practice time was too slow to qualify. To the relief of the organizers, who had paid the World Champion substantial appearance money, he made the field with a second place finish in one of the two consolation races. In the Times GP itself Brabham finished a distant 10th overall.
However, in this case the car rather than the driver may have been the reason for the lackluster performance. Bruce McLaren couldn't do much with the E2A either, at Laguna Seca one week later. The car was never raced again.
WINO
#16
David McKinney
-
- 14,156 posts
- Joined: November 00
Member
Posted 17 December 2005 - 19:50
True, but as I understand it, at one stage in the GP only two Lotus 19s, two Birdcage Masers and Hill’s 250TR Ferrari were ahead. If that info is correct, that was a pretty good showing by the Jag (and its driver)
#17
WINO
-
- 622 posts
- Joined: April 04
Member
Posted 17 December 2005 - 20:49
I doubt that the Jaguar E2A ever got that high up any time during the race.
In practice Brabham's best time was 2:10.20, only 21st fastest. Of the faster cars, 19 were over-2-liter cars, one under-2-liter. Ahead of him were two Lotus 19s, a Cooper Monaco, a Scarab, a Sting Ray, a Kurtis, two Ferraris, a Ferrari/Maserati, an Old Yaller, three Listers and seven Maseratis.
Since only the first 16 over-2-liter entries went straight into the Times GP grid, Jack was forced to qualify in the top three of one of the consolation races. He did so in the first one, but still finished behind Don Hulette's Lister/Chevy [who had qualified 19th with 2:09.60]. As with all six consolation qualifiers, this meant the E2A was placed at the back of the grid, behind a number of Porsches that qualified slower, but earned their grid positions based on their under-2-liter class.
As a results early race photos are not a good indication of how well the E2A did within the field. Undoubtedly it passed a number of Porsches, but did it pass any over-2-liter cars?
Helped by the attrition rate, Brabham moved up obviously, but looking at the final results of the nine cars finishing ahead of him, only one made a pitstop and all of them were faster in practice: Krause [T61], Drake [Old Yeller], Pabst [Scarab], Jeffords [T61], Shelby [T61], Salvadori [Monaco], Hill [Testa Rossa], Hansgen [T60] and Hall [570S, the only one to pit]. Brabham did not pit either.
WINO
In practice Brabham's best time was 2:10.20, only 21st fastest. Of the faster cars, 19 were over-2-liter cars, one under-2-liter. Ahead of him were two Lotus 19s, a Cooper Monaco, a Scarab, a Sting Ray, a Kurtis, two Ferraris, a Ferrari/Maserati, an Old Yaller, three Listers and seven Maseratis.
Since only the first 16 over-2-liter entries went straight into the Times GP grid, Jack was forced to qualify in the top three of one of the consolation races. He did so in the first one, but still finished behind Don Hulette's Lister/Chevy [who had qualified 19th with 2:09.60]. As with all six consolation qualifiers, this meant the E2A was placed at the back of the grid, behind a number of Porsches that qualified slower, but earned their grid positions based on their under-2-liter class.
As a results early race photos are not a good indication of how well the E2A did within the field. Undoubtedly it passed a number of Porsches, but did it pass any over-2-liter cars?
Helped by the attrition rate, Brabham moved up obviously, but looking at the final results of the nine cars finishing ahead of him, only one made a pitstop and all of them were faster in practice: Krause [T61], Drake [Old Yeller], Pabst [Scarab], Jeffords [T61], Shelby [T61], Salvadori [Monaco], Hill [Testa Rossa], Hansgen [T60] and Hall [570S, the only one to pit]. Brabham did not pit either.
WINO
#18
Doug Nye
-
- 11,535 posts
- Joined: February 02
Member
Posted 17 December 2005 - 21:45
I'm not writing this as an apologist for Blackie, he's never needed one, but just to add a little perspective to some of the inferences appearing above:
Re ADAC 1,000Kms 1958 - I think Jack's still a bit sensitive about how his drive looked that day.
Suffice to say that his job was absolutely to keep the car in pristine order and to return it to SM in the state in which he had been given it, and MERELY to do the requisite number of laps to give the Maestro a breather.
I would be confident he can neither be considered to have had 'an off day', nor to have shown 'lack of experience in a front-engined car', nor really to have shown abject ignorance of the circuit.
He was merely driving the car that day in the janitorial role specified by his employer's representative - John Wyer. The big thing really was that Jack - as Wyer later pointed out - never really liked sports car racing that much, he preferred (as did Moss) "a right old tear up" as in shorter-distance GP racing. Another point which is relative to Jack's single-seat Cooper experience at that time is that the Aston felt like a great gormless lump - a beautiful one regardless - and its gearchange was simply terrible. Above all, therefore, he was singularly careful on every gearchange, not to damage either the transmission or the engine - Wyer had told him to "bring it back as Stirling gives it to you". He did precisely that and no more - he drew his pay, and his trade bonuses - and banked them.
Where the Jaguar E2A is concerned, the all-independently suspended, narrow-track car not only felt like a jelly on springs round Riverside but it was also incredibly heavy and underpowered compared to its opposition.
Jaguar E2A versus Lotus 19s, Cooper Monaco, Scarab and even Lister is absolutely no contest - while the hefty Chevrolet Sting Ray also utterly overwhelmed it on horsepower. Running that prototype Le Mans car in that race was a complete mismatch, regardless of driver.
Finally, don't read too much into Jack's 1956 performances in his 250F either - he was paying every cent of every repair bill for that car himself, and after an early mechanical misadventure there was NO way he could afford even to use full throttle without risking his entire future financially - had he broken the engine or gearbox a second time he would have been unable to stay in England, and continue building his racing career.
Not every runner on a race grid starts out equal, you know - and many factors affect performance, not least the degree of exposure of an owner/driver's wallet!
If you're trying to assess historic performances such a factor MUST be taken into account.
In Brabham's case his virtually unrivalled level of mechanical understanding and sympathy also often diminished his pace on track - unless the prize money was REALLY attractive. And nobody ever spent more time polishing his coins than Black Jack.
DCN
Re ADAC 1,000Kms 1958 - I think Jack's still a bit sensitive about how his drive looked that day.
Suffice to say that his job was absolutely to keep the car in pristine order and to return it to SM in the state in which he had been given it, and MERELY to do the requisite number of laps to give the Maestro a breather.
I would be confident he can neither be considered to have had 'an off day', nor to have shown 'lack of experience in a front-engined car', nor really to have shown abject ignorance of the circuit.
He was merely driving the car that day in the janitorial role specified by his employer's representative - John Wyer. The big thing really was that Jack - as Wyer later pointed out - never really liked sports car racing that much, he preferred (as did Moss) "a right old tear up" as in shorter-distance GP racing. Another point which is relative to Jack's single-seat Cooper experience at that time is that the Aston felt like a great gormless lump - a beautiful one regardless - and its gearchange was simply terrible. Above all, therefore, he was singularly careful on every gearchange, not to damage either the transmission or the engine - Wyer had told him to "bring it back as Stirling gives it to you". He did precisely that and no more - he drew his pay, and his trade bonuses - and banked them.
Where the Jaguar E2A is concerned, the all-independently suspended, narrow-track car not only felt like a jelly on springs round Riverside but it was also incredibly heavy and underpowered compared to its opposition.
Jaguar E2A versus Lotus 19s, Cooper Monaco, Scarab and even Lister is absolutely no contest - while the hefty Chevrolet Sting Ray also utterly overwhelmed it on horsepower. Running that prototype Le Mans car in that race was a complete mismatch, regardless of driver.
Finally, don't read too much into Jack's 1956 performances in his 250F either - he was paying every cent of every repair bill for that car himself, and after an early mechanical misadventure there was NO way he could afford even to use full throttle without risking his entire future financially - had he broken the engine or gearbox a second time he would have been unable to stay in England, and continue building his racing career.
Not every runner on a race grid starts out equal, you know - and many factors affect performance, not least the degree of exposure of an owner/driver's wallet!
If you're trying to assess historic performances such a factor MUST be taken into account.
In Brabham's case his virtually unrivalled level of mechanical understanding and sympathy also often diminished his pace on track - unless the prize money was REALLY attractive. And nobody ever spent more time polishing his coins than Black Jack.
DCN
#19
WINO
-
- 622 posts
- Joined: April 04
Member
Posted 17 December 2005 - 22:48
Brabham may have had a "janitorial" role at the Nurburgring in 1958 and I realize that, having to pay every cent of every repair bill, induced him to be -- let's say-- conservative in his driving of the 250F, but there comes a point where the racer's instinct takes over from the accountant's mind in the various parts of the brain, especially if racing is your profession.
According to Doug, losing a lead of almost a minute in two laps to Hawthorn's Ferrari was apparently all part of the plan. No stimulation whatsoever of that part of Brabham's brain. He had a healthy car, better suited to the track than Enzo's product, but was only instructed to keep it in one piece. I can see Doug's point if Jack had just maintained the lead created by Moss, or at least part of it. As it is, what the heck did go through Jack's mind when he was passed. " Oh dear, better not put in too much drive, let's keep it at 7/10th or I won't be able collect my money at the end of the race?"
Personally I don't think that Brabham thought that way. But I agree that he was uncomfortable racing a sportscar and it showed.
As for the E2A the disadvantage was essentially the road holding. How the Jaguar people messed up the suspension set-up after the car's excellent performance in the 1960 Le Mans practice weekend, we may never find out. At Riverside the winning Birdcage had 280 bhp. The E2A came with a 3.8 liter engine producing 310 bhp by then. In both combinations brakes were Girling discs, but of course, the Jag had the weight disadvantage. On the other hand, it had the streamlining advantage. What always struck me was that Brabham's teammate Chuck Daigh was faster in practice with a two-year old knobbly Lister with the same engine: 2:09.81 versus 2:10.20 for the Jag. It had to be the suspension design.
One year later Brabham had plenty of reason to polish his coins, winning the Times GP in somebody else's Cooper Monaco.
WINO
According to Doug, losing a lead of almost a minute in two laps to Hawthorn's Ferrari was apparently all part of the plan. No stimulation whatsoever of that part of Brabham's brain. He had a healthy car, better suited to the track than Enzo's product, but was only instructed to keep it in one piece. I can see Doug's point if Jack had just maintained the lead created by Moss, or at least part of it. As it is, what the heck did go through Jack's mind when he was passed. " Oh dear, better not put in too much drive, let's keep it at 7/10th or I won't be able collect my money at the end of the race?"
Personally I don't think that Brabham thought that way. But I agree that he was uncomfortable racing a sportscar and it showed.
As for the E2A the disadvantage was essentially the road holding. How the Jaguar people messed up the suspension set-up after the car's excellent performance in the 1960 Le Mans practice weekend, we may never find out. At Riverside the winning Birdcage had 280 bhp. The E2A came with a 3.8 liter engine producing 310 bhp by then. In both combinations brakes were Girling discs, but of course, the Jag had the weight disadvantage. On the other hand, it had the streamlining advantage. What always struck me was that Brabham's teammate Chuck Daigh was faster in practice with a two-year old knobbly Lister with the same engine: 2:09.81 versus 2:10.20 for the Jag. It had to be the suspension design.
One year later Brabham had plenty of reason to polish his coins, winning the Times GP in somebody else's Cooper Monaco.
WINO
Advertisement
#20
275 GTB-4
-
- 8,274 posts
- Joined: February 03
Member
Posted 17 December 2005 - 23:42
Originally posted by WINO
Brabham may have had a "janitorial" role at the Nurburgring in 1958 and I realize that, having to pay every cent of every repair bill, induced him to be -- let's say-- conservative in his driving of the 250F, but there comes a point where the racer's instinct takes over from the accountant's mind in the various parts of the brain, especially if racing is your profession.
According to Doug, losing a lead of almost a minute in two laps to Hawthorn's Ferrari was apparently all part of the plan. No stimulation whatsoever of that part of Brabham's brain. He had a healthy car, better suited to the track than Enzo's product, but was only instructed to keep it in one piece. I can see Doug's point if Jack had just maintained the lead created by Moss, or at least part of it. As it is, what the heck did go through Jack's mind when he was passed. " Oh dear, better not put in too much drive, let's keep it at 7/10th or I won't be able collect my money at the end of the race?"
Personally I don't think that Brabham thought that way. But I agree that he was uncomfortable racing a sportscar and it showed.
As for the E2A the disadvantage was essentially the road holding. How the Jaguar people messed up the suspension set-up after the car's excellent performance in the 1960 Le Mans practice weekend, we may never find out. At Riverside the winning Birdcage had 280 bhp. The E2A came with a 3.8 liter engine producing 310 bhp by then. In both combinations brakes were Girling discs, but of course, the Jag had the weight disadvantage. On the other hand, it had the streamlining advantage. What always struck me was that Brabham's teammate Chuck Daigh was faster in practice with a two-year old knobbly Lister with the same engine: 2:09.81 versus 2:10.20 for the Jag. It had to be the suspension design.
One year later Brabham had plenty of reason to polish his coins, winning the Times GP in somebody else's Cooper Monaco.
WINO
Isn't all this discussion a tad academic....does anyone really know what JB was thinking? what sort of a run he had through traffic? the true health of his machine?? etc etc ad nauseum....
Personally, I love this one to put things in perspactive some times.....
"even the Great Caruso had to clear his throat!"
#21
D-Type
-
- 9,706 posts
- Joined: February 03
Member
Posted 17 December 2005 - 23:55
I forget what he said, but DSJ wrote very favourably about Jack Brabham's drive at the 1958 1000km. Remember it was his first race in the DBR1.
#22
Doug Nye
-
- 11,535 posts
- Joined: February 02
Member
Posted 18 December 2005 - 11:11
Indeed - Jenks was never sympathetic to professional racing drivers he thought had turned in a poor job. This is what he reported of Brabham's drive in the 1958 ADAC 1,000Kms:
"Poor Brabham, in his first race with an Aston Martin works car, had an impossible task ahead of him for he had only been allowed three practice laps in the DBR1/300, and the 3.7-litre practice car had been so tired that it taught him little. He now had to learn the circuit and the car while the horde of Ferraris driven by experienced Nurburgring drivers bore down on him. A lesser man would have stopped by the roadside and wept! By the end of the next lap Hawthorn had caught the Aston Martin and as they passed the pits the Ferrari went into the lead..."
Not even veiled criticism there.
As for E2A - the car was far better suited to Le Mans than to Riverside - and entrant Briggs Cunningham explained how the organisers had "...already paid Jack. I think they'd sent him a cheque for $5,000 for his expenses...somehow the organisers had to get him into the main race, so I guess they fixed it with the other guys to make sure he did OK in the second qualifying race. Poor Jack was obliged to put on a good show and the car just wasn't up to it...". E2A ran a 3.8 carburetted engine at Riverside, not the fuel-injected unit employed by the works at Le Mans. On the other hand it had been man enough in the indomitable hands of Walt Hansgen to beat feeble opposition at Bridgehampton and to take a second place at Elkhart Lake so it certainly had performed better on those winding circuits than one might have expected. E2A, however, weighed-in at more than a ton, much heavier than even an agricultural Lister-Jaguar or Lister-Chevrolet.
DCN
"Poor Brabham, in his first race with an Aston Martin works car, had an impossible task ahead of him for he had only been allowed three practice laps in the DBR1/300, and the 3.7-litre practice car had been so tired that it taught him little. He now had to learn the circuit and the car while the horde of Ferraris driven by experienced Nurburgring drivers bore down on him. A lesser man would have stopped by the roadside and wept! By the end of the next lap Hawthorn had caught the Aston Martin and as they passed the pits the Ferrari went into the lead..."
Not even veiled criticism there.
As for E2A - the car was far better suited to Le Mans than to Riverside - and entrant Briggs Cunningham explained how the organisers had "...already paid Jack. I think they'd sent him a cheque for $5,000 for his expenses...somehow the organisers had to get him into the main race, so I guess they fixed it with the other guys to make sure he did OK in the second qualifying race. Poor Jack was obliged to put on a good show and the car just wasn't up to it...". E2A ran a 3.8 carburetted engine at Riverside, not the fuel-injected unit employed by the works at Le Mans. On the other hand it had been man enough in the indomitable hands of Walt Hansgen to beat feeble opposition at Bridgehampton and to take a second place at Elkhart Lake so it certainly had performed better on those winding circuits than one might have expected. E2A, however, weighed-in at more than a ton, much heavier than even an agricultural Lister-Jaguar or Lister-Chevrolet.
DCN
#23
Huw Jadvantich
-
- 602 posts
- Joined: July 04
Member
Posted 18 December 2005 - 12:08
I thought E2A ran a 3 litre XK
#24
WINO
-
- 622 posts
- Joined: April 04
Member
Posted 18 December 2005 - 15:07
Claiming that Brabham "never shone" in sportscar racing, John Wyer may have contributed to this opinion by allowing the driver only three practice laps at the Nurburgring.
The Jaguar factory claimed a curb weight of 875 kg for the E2A. However, at Le Mans the car weighed in at 930 kg, still lighter than the Ecurie Ecosse D-type [955 kg]. With the Birdcages at 685 -707 kg, the disadvantage is clear.
In addition, after Le Mans the experimental alloy 3-liter engine was dropped for the cast-iron 3.8-liter version. This made the car even heavier, although to my knowledge the exact number has never been published.
Based on the Jag's LM characteristics, Cunningham raced it at high-speed U.S. tracks, the only ones available being Bridgehampton, Road America and Riverside. Hansgen was King of the Bridge and won a minor Regional race there. But the only real opposition came from two team cars: a knobbly Lister [Grossman] and a Tipo 60 [Kimberly]. Good publicity for Briggs' Jaguar agency may have been a factor too.
Competition was much stronger at Road America, but it was still an amateur race. The E2A finished second, the length of the race [over six hours] working in its favor: a high drop-out rate and its large LM fuel tank allowing a one-stop race. Hansgen drove solo but never led the 500.
The professional Riverside and Laguna Seca events opened all eyes. Competition was world-class and the E2A showed all its difficiencies. But I digress...
Considering the circumstances, perhaps I was too harsh on Brabham's Nurburgring performance. I do remember I was mightily disappointed when he became World Champion in 1959, with more to come. I always felt that he did not step to the plate in the 1000 KM, as any driver of [future] Champion caliber should have done in my teenage eyes of 1958.
WINO
The Jaguar factory claimed a curb weight of 875 kg for the E2A. However, at Le Mans the car weighed in at 930 kg, still lighter than the Ecurie Ecosse D-type [955 kg]. With the Birdcages at 685 -707 kg, the disadvantage is clear.
In addition, after Le Mans the experimental alloy 3-liter engine was dropped for the cast-iron 3.8-liter version. This made the car even heavier, although to my knowledge the exact number has never been published.
Based on the Jag's LM characteristics, Cunningham raced it at high-speed U.S. tracks, the only ones available being Bridgehampton, Road America and Riverside. Hansgen was King of the Bridge and won a minor Regional race there. But the only real opposition came from two team cars: a knobbly Lister [Grossman] and a Tipo 60 [Kimberly]. Good publicity for Briggs' Jaguar agency may have been a factor too.
Competition was much stronger at Road America, but it was still an amateur race. The E2A finished second, the length of the race [over six hours] working in its favor: a high drop-out rate and its large LM fuel tank allowing a one-stop race. Hansgen drove solo but never led the 500.
The professional Riverside and Laguna Seca events opened all eyes. Competition was world-class and the E2A showed all its difficiencies. But I digress...
Considering the circumstances, perhaps I was too harsh on Brabham's Nurburgring performance. I do remember I was mightily disappointed when he became World Champion in 1959, with more to come. I always felt that he did not step to the plate in the 1000 KM, as any driver of [future] Champion caliber should have done in my teenage eyes of 1958.
WINO
#25
Roger Clark
-
- 7,509 posts
- Joined: February 00
Member
Posted 18 December 2005 - 15:49
Surely the reason that Brabham never shone in sportscars was that he wasn't interested in them. Apart from the Matra drives in his last year, I don't think he ever drove sportscars regularly. There was no market for MRD. There was some criticism in 1960 for not putting his abilities to the test in sportscars, but many drivers followed him in this. I have no doubt that he would have been successful if he had chosen to take sportscars seriously. How many Grand Prix drivers of his calibre have tried and failed?
#26
Macca
-
- 3,728 posts
- Joined: January 03
Member
Posted 18 December 2005 - 16:27
Returning briefly on-topic from the Brabham saga...
Even SCM had one off-day - at Spa in 1961. He himself recorded it only briefly in his diary as "Car fair, SM fair". After 1960 it's not surprising he didn't want to lean too hard on the Lotus.
Paul M
Even SCM had one off-day - at Spa in 1961. He himself recorded it only briefly in his diary as "Car fair, SM fair". After 1960 it's not surprising he didn't want to lean too hard on the Lotus.
Paul M
#27
Collombin
-
- 8,659 posts
- Joined: March 05
Member
Posted 19 December 2005 - 00:32
Jim Clark's F1 off day was probably at Rouen 1962, as he himself admitted.
Put into perspective though, I suspect many of his rivals would wish that their "on days" were as good as his "off days".
Put into perspective though, I suspect many of his rivals would wish that their "on days" were as good as his "off days".
#28
FLB
-
- 29,931 posts
- Joined: February 01
Member
Posted 19 December 2005 - 01:27
Alain Prost, 1988 British Grand Prix.
Admittedly Hockenheim 1982 was on his mind, but Senna simply blew him into the weeds. Prost didn't like to race in the rain, but at least he'd been competitive in the past (EX: Monaco 1984, Portugal 1985). Arguably, Silverstone was the first time Senna looked more like the probable World Champion than him.
DSJ was very hard on his case afterwards.
Admittedly Hockenheim 1982 was on his mind, but Senna simply blew him into the weeds. Prost didn't like to race in the rain, but at least he'd been competitive in the past (EX: Monaco 1984, Portugal 1985). Arguably, Silverstone was the first time Senna looked more like the probable World Champion than him.
DSJ was very hard on his case afterwards.
#29
David Hyland
-
- 289 posts
- Joined: December 02
Member
Posted 19 December 2005 - 01:34
I've read reports that Prost's car had a (front wing?) setup problem that day, which made it "undriveable". But as an erstwhile Prost fan, it was still pretty devastating to watch.Originally posted by FLB
Alain Prost, 1988 British Grand Prix.
Admittedly Hockenheim 1982 was on his mind, but Senna simply blew him into the weeds. Prost didn't like to race in the rain, but at least he'd been competitive in the past (EX: Monaco 1984, Portugal 1985). Arguably, Silverstone was the first time Senna looked more like the probable World Champion than him.
#30
David Hyland
-
- 289 posts
- Joined: December 02
Member
Posted 19 December 2005 - 01:44
Michael Schumacher, 2003 Japanese Grand Prix: 2 collisions and 8th place, on a day when his team-mate won the race.
#31
canon1753
-
- 619 posts
- Joined: March 03
Member
Posted 19 December 2005 - 03:34
Originally posted by David Hyland
I've read reports that Prost's car had a (front wing?) setup problem that day, which made it "undriveable". But as an erstwhile Prost fan, it was still pretty devastating to watch.
I thought that a bulkhead had collapsed or the chassis was flexing when it should not have which made the car undriveable. As a Prost fan, that was not a great day...
#32
Roger Clark
-
- 7,509 posts
- Joined: February 00
Member
Posted 19 December 2005 - 07:22
How do you know whether a driver had a poor day or a poor car?
#33
angst
-
- 7,135 posts
- Joined: December 03
Member
Posted 19 December 2005 - 07:58
Originally posted by Roger Clark
How do you know whether a driver had a poor day or a poor car?
That's simple. If you like them it's always the car that lets them down. If you don't like them it's always because they are shite, and any success they have is down to them lucking into a great car.
RC rules, of course.
#34
BRG
-
- 25,951 posts
- Joined: September 99
Member
Posted 19 December 2005 - 10:24
I remember Senna, in his Lotus days, having a terrible time at Adelaide. It seemed that everytime you saw him he was spinning or going off. Most unSennaesque. The only time I can recall him being off the boil?
#35
ensign14
-
- 62,013 posts
- Joined: December 01
Member
Posted 19 December 2005 - 10:58
Ah yes, dicing with the Eurobrun. Prost also spun off on a warm-up lap at San Marino (1991?) in the wet.Originally posted by FLB
Alain Prost, 1988 British Grand Prix.
#36
WINO
-
- 622 posts
- Joined: April 04
Member
Posted 19 December 2005 - 15:24
Slightly off topic, but before it starts to live a life of its own.....
I was just reminded by Walt Hansgen's biographer Michael Argetsinger [the Hansgen book will be launched in March] that the E2A finished third overall in the 1960 Road America 500, not second. Of course he did, but due to a generous intake of Cognac I failed to catch the error. First and second were Dave Causey/Luke Stear [Tipo 61] and Augie Pabst/Bill Wuesthoff [Testa Rossa].
WINO
I was just reminded by Walt Hansgen's biographer Michael Argetsinger [the Hansgen book will be launched in March] that the E2A finished third overall in the 1960 Road America 500, not second. Of course he did, but due to a generous intake of Cognac I failed to catch the error. First and second were Dave Causey/Luke Stear [Tipo 61] and Augie Pabst/Bill Wuesthoff [Testa Rossa].
WINO
#37
Doug Nye
-
- 11,535 posts
- Joined: February 02
Member
Posted 19 December 2005 - 16:29
That would be my fault, WINO - sorry.... 
I think the notion of Moss having performed uncharacteristically poorly certainly applies for the 1961 Belgian GP at Spa - his diary entry that day throws no light upon the race, which itself speaks volumes...
Fangio was uncharacteristically untidy at Monaco in 1956 and seemed to spend much the day throwing his Lancia-Ferraris at the scenery - when I asked him about that he didn't want to talk about it either. Jackie Stewart - 1965 British GP - pretty much the same, but he is very willing to talk about it - admitting he just didn't hit his straps that day, but remaining pretty mystified about why that was so...
I think the Gods know when they've been merely mortal.
DCN
I think the notion of Moss having performed uncharacteristically poorly certainly applies for the 1961 Belgian GP at Spa - his diary entry that day throws no light upon the race, which itself speaks volumes...
Fangio was uncharacteristically untidy at Monaco in 1956 and seemed to spend much the day throwing his Lancia-Ferraris at the scenery - when I asked him about that he didn't want to talk about it either. Jackie Stewart - 1965 British GP - pretty much the same, but he is very willing to talk about it - admitting he just didn't hit his straps that day, but remaining pretty mystified about why that was so...
I think the Gods know when they've been merely mortal.
DCN
#38
Wolf
-
- 7,883 posts
- Joined: June 00
Member
Posted 19 December 2005 - 17:08
Originally posted by Doug Nye
...
I think the Gods know when they've been merely mortal.
I remember reading Moss's comment, how it was pretty much impossible not to have an off-day, but it was 'crucial' to recognize one was having it (and adjust the driving accordingly). I have never raced myself, but I can pretty much recognize when I'm having an off-day (and will make sure I don't go driving on a trip on that day)- my reations are a fraction slower, &c. In a world of GP racing it makes a world of difference, I'd guess...
P.S. I even have a PC program that can show that...
#39
bigears
-
- 973 posts
- Joined: January 04
Member
Posted 19 December 2005 - 17:50
Originally posted by David Hyland
Michael Schumacher, 2003 Japanese Grand Prix: 2 collisions and 8th place, on a day when his team-mate won the race.
But then he was crowned the 2003 F1 world champion!
Advertisement
#40
David Hyland
-
- 289 posts
- Joined: December 02
Member
Posted 20 December 2005 - 00:16
Indeed! Which just goes to show that sometimes you can have an off day and still get away with it...Originally posted by bigears
But then he was crowned the 2003 F1 world champion!
#41
Manfred Cubenoggin
-
- 978 posts
- Joined: October 02
Member
Posted 20 December 2005 - 00:18
Well, I've picked up about 35 more posts to date than I thought this thread might raise. Good show on all constributors thus far.
In my lead, I mentioned Jimmy Clark having a road shunt and a somewhat dismal F2 outing subsequently. Is there any concrete evidence of this, lads?
Have yet to hear of any USAC/Indy tales. Where's Buford when you need him?
In my lead, I mentioned Jimmy Clark having a road shunt and a somewhat dismal F2 outing subsequently. Is there any concrete evidence of this, lads?
Have yet to hear of any USAC/Indy tales. Where's Buford when you need him?
