Tojeiro Butterworth
#1
Posted 30 August 2011 - 15:29
Advertisement
#2
Posted 30 August 2011 - 18:52
The engine, by the way, is poppet-valved, not swing-valved as will be, I believe, Richard Parnell's ex-Archie B., single-seat Cooper-AJB, presently in restoration.
DCN
#3
Posted 31 August 2011 - 07:29
Not in period, so far as we know. But, unusually, it does appear to have solid provenance, as catalogued.
The engine, by the way, is poppet-valved, not swing-valved as will be, I believe, Richard Parnell's ex-Archie B., single-seat Cooper-AJB, presently in restoration.
DCN
Thanks very much for the reply, Doug.
Would the car qualify for the Goodwood Revival, or would the lack of period race history count against it?
#4
Posted 31 August 2011 - 08:30
DCN
Edited by Doug Nye, 31 August 2011 - 08:33.
#5
Posted 31 August 2011 - 11:35
.
The engine, by the way, is poppet-valved, not swing-valved as will be, I believe, Richard Parnell's ex-Archie B., single-seat Cooper-AJB, presently in restoration.
DCN
Is the latter car you refer to an Aston-Butterworth or is it something else?
#6
Posted 31 August 2011 - 12:18
Which really comes back to the question of whether the Aston-Butterworth used a [modified] Cooper-Bristol chassis, a "Cooper-copy" made by someone else or something in between.Is the latter car you refer to an Aston-Butterworth or is it something else?
#7
Posted 31 August 2011 - 14:04
Which really comes back to the question of whether the Aston-Butterworth used a [modified] Cooper-Bristol chassis, a "Cooper-copy" made by someone else or something in between.
Aston had a lot of experience with Cooper's and used this when constructing his own chassis, which used box section side members and tubular cross members, with leaf spring, swing axle suspension at the rear and leaf spring, wishbones at the front. The Butterworth engine was a flat four, air cooled of 1986cc. using a single Amal carburettor for each cylinder. A second car was built for Montgomery-Charrington.
Edited by Bauble, 31 August 2011 - 14:05.
#8
Posted 31 August 2011 - 14:35
The Kieft V8 has been accepted and that never even appeared in period as an entirety. We are always happy to consider the weird and wonderful - within reason. Acceptance depends very much on pressure of space. No reason why it should not be attractive- indeed quite the reverse - I believe many enthusiasts would just love to hear that air-cooled AJB flat-four at (near) peak revs... Goodwood achieves a better show than most by not limiting itself to inflexible rules. It has seemed to work out pretty well. When a mistake has been made it is not normally repeated...
DCN
Thanks again Doug, all interesting information. I'll be interested to see what the car sells for at Goodwood, and hopefully we'll see it at the Revival in future years!
#9
Posted 31 August 2011 - 16:17
Sorry for the plug but I have the story of the Tojeiro-Butterworth in my book "Toj" and as Doug says it is not the flap valve engine. I still have 47,500 copies of the book left.....................at least it seems so!!!
#10
Posted 01 September 2011 - 00:01
PJGD
#11
Posted 01 September 2011 - 21:16
Is the latter car you refer to an Aston-Butterworth or is it something else?
Something else - a rear-engined 1957/58-type F2 Cooper frame modified to accept the flat-4 engine, five years younger than the front-engined Aston-Butterworth duo.
DCN
Edited by Doug Nye, 01 September 2011 - 21:17.
#12
Posted 01 September 2011 - 21:45
#13
Posted 01 September 2011 - 23:41
Something else - a rear-engined 1957/58-type F2 Cooper frame modified to accept the flat-4 engine, five years younger than the front-engined Aston-Butterworth duo.
DCN
This talks about the front engined Aston Butterworth which had a copy of a Mark 1 Cooper Bristol chassis
http://www.forix.com/8w/aston.html
Didn't Kieft also have a go with the Butterworh engine?
#14
Posted 02 September 2011 - 05:21
Yes, in a sportscar, which AFAIK never raced, and an F3 car which thereby became and F2 carDidn't Kieft also have a go with the Butterworh engine?
#15
Posted 02 September 2011 - 08:35
Totally agree - the unusual always appear at Goodwood and it is one ot the things that set The Revival apart from other historic festivals, however I am intrigued by the last part and wonder if Mr Nye would be sufficiently indiscrete as to share with us some of the mistakes...Goodwood achieves a better show than most by not limiting itself to inflexible rules. It has seemed to work out pretty well. When a mistake has been made it is not normally repeated...
DCN
#16
Posted 02 September 2011 - 09:09
#17
Posted 02 September 2011 - 10:36
...one ot the things that set The Revival apart from other historic festivals..... if Mr Nye would be sufficiently indiscrete as to share with us some of the mistakes...
Simon, I imagine DCN's discretion and loyalty to Goodwood and others matches the unfettered optimism
which you display in your post. It is not hard to recall cars which made only one or two appearances, for whatever reasons...., even though regulars elsewhere, and similarly drivers who might not drive at the Revival every year. It might be a case of a surfeit of worthy drivers from whom to choose the invited ones rather than a process of positive de-selection. It might be that some are not just not invited, but specifically UN-invited.
Roger Lund
#18
Posted 02 September 2011 - 19:10
As the Aston Butterworth made it's first appearance at the Goodwood Easter meeting at the same time as the brand new Mk 1 Cooper Bristol, it is highly unlikely that Aston used a copy of the chassis. He used his experience with Cooper JAP 1100's when designing his car.
I know how pedantic some of you'se guys are.
#19
Posted 05 September 2011 - 11:46
["This talks about the front engined Aston Butterworth which had a copy of a Mark 1 Cooper Bristol chassis"
As the Aston Butterworth made it's first appearance at the Goodwood Easter meeting at the same time as the brand new Mk 1 Cooper Bristol, it is highly unlikely that Aston used a copy of the chassis. He used his experience with Cooper JAP 1100's when designing his car.
I know how pedantic some of you'se guys are.
Bauble, your pedantry is to be commended
Advertisement
#20
Posted 05 September 2011 - 13:50
Bauble, your pedantry is to be commended
What's the difference between 'pendant' and 'pedantry'?
Nothing, they both hang round your neck!
Anyway Dutchy; What's wrong with getting things right? Surely we should not accuse Bill of plaigarism?
bauble
#21
Posted 05 September 2011 - 14:28
#22
Posted 05 September 2011 - 18:37
I am in complete agreement with you, in case you thought I was being facetious.
Dear Dutchy,
Not for one moment did I think your reply was anything but complete agreement with my dissertation on Tojeiro Butterworth design features, as one who has frequently been misjudged in the past, on this and other forums, I always believe the best of people!
Like yourself I see it as my mission in life to make sure that history faithfully recalls the precise specification and design process of 1950's British Formula 2 cars.
Love to Z,
bauble.
#23
Posted 06 September 2011 - 13:42
I shall pass on your regards