Jump to content


Photo

The Surtees-Dragoni controversy


  • Please log in to reply
51 replies to this topic

#51 nexfast

nexfast
  • Member

  • 984 posts
  • Joined: August 12

Posted 04 October 2013 - 20:41

After reading all the contributions and the other thread Tim Murray was kind enough to dig out of the archives, a few thoughts. As Roger Lund underlines, Ferrari was happy to let John drive the Can-Am Lola and willing to allow him to use the insurance policy he had as a Ferrari driver. But curiously enough, Forghieri adds that after the accident it was a different Surtees that came to Ferrari, more introvert and distant ("scorbutico"), with any banal event a cause for distress and controversy. If he passed secrets to Lola or not is irrelevant (and there is no real evidence that could have been the case), what is important is that Ferrari started suspecting so - as Tim Murray judiciously points out. Dragoni might have invented the story, not necessarily because he wanted Bandini as number one driver, here again no strong evidence about it as RStock underlines, but perhaps because his own relationship with Surtees was deteriorating fast? Interesting, though, that Ferrari instructed Gozzi to confirm the version and he didn't seem to counter it to the point where he was instructed to fire the driver at Spa but the victory in the GP postponed the occasion. So, my conclusion is that for one reason or another, Ferrari decided to part company with the driver, let Dragoni take advantage of Surtees temperament to cause a row (and take the blame) and kept himself in the backstage to the point where he even had a friendly conversation or a lunch with John afterwards. Regrets? Who knows, maybe this was the reason why John came back later but here just an educated guess. Again, pity no Italian TNF member decided to join the discussion to possibly shed more light on this story.


Edited by nexfast, 04 October 2013 - 21:12.


Advertisement

#52 Parkesi

Parkesi
  • Member

  • 243 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 04 October 2013 - 22:19

I have no desire to get into the who said what, knew what, might have done what scenario, but ISTR that it was in Simon Taylor's Lunch with.... Article that John Surtees explained how Enzo Ferrari had not only paid the costs of all the medical needs etc for JS but had told his insurers that Il Grande was in fact doing test and research work for the Scuderia when he had his Can Am crash in the Lola, so no relationship problems there, I suspect. Facts not conjecture.
One day the rank and file will realise just what a talent Surtees was and remains, I suspect, or hope. BTW his views of Michael Parkes are a matter of record, I believe. qv DCN comments on the Michael Parkes thread.
Roger Lund

Regarding Surtees / Ferrari 1970; Mike Parkes contacted Dan Gurney to offer a drive for Le Mans and on the 18th May 1970 there was an answer via Telefax:

"Thanks for offer STOP sorry, can`t drive Le Mans STOP date conflicts with Mosport Can-Am race. Regards, Dan Gurney". Gurney (with Parsons) drove a Ferrari 512

for N.A.R.T. in January 1970 / Daytona 24h while Parkes (with Posey) drove a Ferrari 312 P for Chinetti. The Telefax was addressed to Mike Parkes c/o Ferrari Co. Modena Italy

which indicates that Parkes acted on behalf of the Scuderia. The denial came after Monza 1000km (25.April 1970) and Spa 1000km (17.May 1970).

Surtees did Monza / Spa plus the Nürburgring 1000km for the Scuderia Ferrari together with Schetty, Ickx and Vaccarella.

Was Gurney`s expertise (first class driver/designer/team entrant and Le Mans winner in 1967) also sought in order to improve the Ferrari 512?

Regarding Surtees/Parkes 1966: countless contemporaries of Mike Parkes were extremely helpful and supportive when I asked for their recollections for my Parkes biography.

The ONLY one who rejected all my requests was John Surtees. "I prefer not to contribute" via e-mail and a rather abrupt reaction to my second attempt on the telephone in September 2011.

Sadly a lost opportunity because a lot of aficionados are still interested to learn more and to understand what provoked the divorzio all`italiana.

It shows that even after 45 years John Surtees seems to feel VERY bitter about what happened in June 1966.

I am not pro Parkes or anti Surtees - I admire both of them. Just some details to add more facets to this never-ending story. Andreas