Jump to content


Photo

Lotus 49 R2 crunched at Monaco


  • Please log in to reply
124 replies to this topic

#101 PeterElleray

PeterElleray
  • Member

  • 1,120 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 22 May 2014 - 19:49

Having seen the Lotus 49 at the Monaco Historique a couple of weeks ago and reading this thread, I remembered that I had an old book by David Hodges gathering dust on a bookshelf.

 

This was published in 1970 and gives a very detailed history of the Lotus 49 and is quite interesting in the information it has on 49/2. According to Hodges, 49/2 was converted to B specification and became 49B/10. It was then converted to C specification in 1970

 

The following is a quotation from the book:  "49C/10 which had also survived accidents, had the distinction of being the oldest Grand Prix car raced in 1970 - it was originally 49/2…..although just how much of the original car remained was questionable"

 

Incidentally, the Pete Lovely car (49B/11 ) is described as originally being 49/5 which was converted to B specification and driven to Monaco victory by G Hill in 1968 before being refurbished as 49B/11

I expect Mike Oliver will respond to this...

 

It was Mike's exhaustive research for  his own 49 book that finally laid this misinformation to rest in the late 1990's - and proved beyond reasonable doubt that 49-2 morphed into 49B-11, whilst 49-5 was replated as 49B-10.

 

Peter



Advertisement

#102 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 11,524 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 23 May 2014 - 21:30

It's typical of these internet discussions that there's always going to be a conflict of understanding (or lack of it) between the shades-of-grey school of those who have had to think deeply about these things for donkey's years - and the black-or-white brigade who probably don't want to think about matters too deeply if it might threaten their preconceptions.

 

I think that over my 50 years - and six months - in and around the racing world I can probably count the deeply thoughtful practitioners whom I have encountered there without running out of fingers and toes.  Goes with the territory mate, goes with the territory...

 

 ;) 

 

DCN



#103 TecnoRacing

TecnoRacing
  • Member

  • 1,796 posts
  • Joined: September 01

Posted 24 May 2014 - 22:42

Just curious Doug...what do you envision as the ideal, as far as the current 'life' for a car such as this? (say you were gifted ownership of the car...)



#104 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 11,524 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 25 May 2014 - 19:11

Understanding and sympathetic conservation, regular running, and thoughtful demo use when worthwhile in which the car is not put at risk of being tee-boned on track by some mere wannabe in a lump of relative junk "built last Tuesday...".  

 

Next question?

 

DCN



#105 john ruston

john ruston
  • Member

  • 1,019 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 25 May 2014 - 19:37

Good answer!

No questions.

#106 PCC

PCC
  • Member

  • 1,062 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 25 May 2014 - 19:40

Understanding and sympathetic conservation, regular running, and thoughtful demo use when worthwhile in which the car is not put at risk of being tee-boned on track by some mere wannabe in a lump of relative junk "built last Tuesday...".  

Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. There will be those, I expect, who would argue that a 'racing car' that isn't 'raced' isn't worth preserving. To me, that's like saying we might as well demolish the Hagia Sophia, since it's no longer a working church...



#107 Derwent Motorsport

Derwent Motorsport
  • Member

  • 858 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 25 May 2014 - 20:51

Perhaps we should consider how much of a particular car is actually what it was when it was current and how much has been replaced. How much of the 49 was actually there when raced by JC and how much has been reapired and replaced over the years?

Take ERAs for example which had a very long racing history before "historic racing" came about. Most were well modified and chopped about over the years so they are a bit like the woodman's axe. Perhaps only Romulus is truly authentic and it has been raced only rarely in the last 70 years.



#108 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 11,524 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 25 May 2014 - 21:37

Romulus?  Mmmm - 'perhaps' indeed...

 

DCN



#109 elansprint72

elansprint72
  • Member

  • 4,027 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 25 May 2014 - 23:25

Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. There will be those, I expect, who would argue that a 'racing car' that isn't 'raced' isn't worth preserving. To me, that's like saying we might as well demolish the Hagia Sophia, since it's no longer a working church...

The point I made, rather badly, in post # 94. Maybe?  :rolleyes:



#110 Charlieman

Charlieman
  • Member

  • 2,542 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 25 May 2014 - 23:28

Understanding and sympathetic conservation, regular running, and thoughtful demo use when worthwhile in which the car is not put at risk of being tee-boned on track by some mere wannabe in a lump of relative junk "built last Tuesday...".  

That model applies to some of the cars owned by Mercedes-Benz. Other cars owned by MB are static pieces to such an extent that they can't move. MB didn't pass on its GP cars to private teams so the ones that are demonstrated are special in a particular way: they haven't been messed around with by unapproved engineers.

 

Bernie Ecclestone, to his credit, possesses some cars from his ownership of Brabham F1 which might be considered in the same way. Perhaps we might say that they don't appear in public often enough. McLaren and Williams maintain collections of heritage F1 cars -- some of which passed through private hands -- and a few get a healthy airing.

 

So I have to ask whether the sale of cars retained by BRM, Vanwall and Aston Martin -- factory cars which were not raced in period by privateers -- might now be regarded as a "mistake"?



#111 PCC

PCC
  • Member

  • 1,062 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 25 May 2014 - 23:58

The point I made, rather badly, in post # 94. Maybe?  :rolleyes:

I thought you made the point rather well, and was just trying to reinforce it.



#112 john ruston

john ruston
  • Member

  • 1,019 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 26 May 2014 - 10:17

How many cars at Monaco came into Doug's category?

Probably 20 max and most had already been messed around with by prepers for the weekend warriors.

Tom Wheatcroft had many in his museum doing precisely what Doug envisions but then the management changed hands and most went to drivers the majority who wanted them to be developed so that it would make up for their lack of natural ability.

Can't see that any ERA is like it was in the day and I am sure Jim Clark spent most of his time driving 200 bhp Cortina ( or was it 160bhp ) considering the amount advertised as driven by Jim Clark.

Cars are not what they seem!

#113 willy.henderickx

willy.henderickx
  • Member

  • 46 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 26 May 2014 - 12:32

Gents,

 

As for the 49R2 crash at high speed, the disc brake broke exactly in two equal part which caused the loss of control. I had the opportunity to visually examine the fracture and didn't find neither trace of corrosion on the surface nor a fatigue fracture pattern.

 

Willy Henderickx



#114 john ruston

john ruston
  • Member

  • 1,019 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 26 May 2014 - 13:32

So there would probably been an incident even it was doing a display run?

#115 Allan Lupton

Allan Lupton
  • Member

  • 4,051 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 26 May 2014 - 13:37

If you are referring to the accident shown in the second photo of the first post of this thread, there seems to be a complete brake disc clearly visible.

 

#116 willy.henderickx

willy.henderickx
  • Member

  • 46 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 26 May 2014 - 13:44

First, I haven't seen the accident. I only saw the broken disc. I have been told that the disc broke during the race before the crash. I can only add that the two fragments of the disc were not distorted.

 

That'all.

 

Willy.



#117 Charlieman

Charlieman
  • Member

  • 2,542 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 26 May 2014 - 14:08

Tom Wheatcroft had many in his museum doing precisely what Doug envisions but then the management changed hands and most went to drivers the majority who wanted them to be developed so that it would make up for their lack of natural ability.

Those words about natural ability may be a little harsh. If most of the other cars have compromised heritage -- racing history with privateers in period or in historics -- it's going to be tough for any driver to be competitive in an authentic car. Any car that passes through a modern preparation workshop will emerge faster than before, and cars that need significant repair work will be faster than that -- even when the workshop plays by the spirit of the rules. It might be the case that an authentic car running to the best of its capability might be safer in a pack of racers than one of lesser performance.

 

Tom W had the luxury of owning lots of cars. He drove a few of them himself for personal pleasure and was generous enough to loan them to journalists, and consequently accidents occurred. To eliminate risk absolutely, it would be necessary to park them in a geographically and climate safe location in a meteor shelter, which nobody seeks to the best of my understanding. 

 

I should clarify my argument about the fetishisation of cars. There are some -- a handful of authentic cars from every decade -- which have sufficient driver or race heritage that it is impertinent to mess around with them or to impose excess risk beyond demonstration. I'd toss in a few other cars which display craft/engineering skill that is best understood by looking at the original, by looking at the brush strokes rather than a facsimile of the work. Not many, alas.

 

With regard to the word "authentic", I've tried to stick to my recollection of DSJ's definition, noting that "original" can be applied to very few.



#118 willy.henderickx

willy.henderickx
  • Member

  • 46 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 26 May 2014 - 14:22

It is very clear on the second picture that the disc is not broken.  As I haven't seen the car after the accident, I am not in a position to tell if the front or the rear left disc broke.

 

Willy



#119 mfd

mfd
  • Member

  • 2,987 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 26 May 2014 - 15:04

Surely the disc visible & intact is on the right, not left? 



Advertisement

#120 willy.henderickx

willy.henderickx
  • Member

  • 46 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 26 May 2014 - 15:09

Affirmative. That 's the reason that I understand that one of the left one broke.

 

Willy



#121 Charlieman

Charlieman
  • Member

  • 2,542 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 26 May 2014 - 16:52

I had the opportunity to visually examine the fracture and didn't find neither trace of corrosion on the surface nor a fatigue fracture pattern.

Absence of corrosion on a rubbing surface confirms what we all expected, which is that nobody sent the car out on rusty looking disc brakes. As a BSc (Mech Eng) but non-practicing, I had to refresh myself on fatigue fracture patterns, and I am unclear why fatigue might be suggested to cause a disc to split into two halves. Fatigue describes how the properties of a material change under varying load, so that a component might fail under less than its ultimate strength. 

 

As an engineering student, I saw examples of UTS break *happening*, but the demonstrators could only show a few static fatigue pieces that had stretched a bit (non-broken). I would not have known enough to determine between UTS break and fatigue break without an independent guide. 



#122 kps

kps
  • New Member

  • 1 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 28 May 2014 - 19:43

It is very clear on the second picture that the disc is not broken.  As I haven't seen the car after the accident, I am not in a position to tell if the front or the rear left disc broke.

 

Willy

 

Not sure where this info come from but No disc brakes broke on 49R2,

all the disc brakes are complete still.



#123 willy.henderickx

willy.henderickx
  • Member

  • 46 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 28 May 2014 - 19:51

Thanks for the info. I have seen a fractured disc reportedly coming from a Lotus. Must then be from another one.

 

Willy



#124 Michael Oliver

Michael Oliver
  • Member

  • 1,070 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 29 May 2014 - 12:32

Perhaps we should consider how much of a particular car is actually what it was when it was current and how much has been replaced. How much of the 49 was actually there when raced by JC and how much has been reapired and replaced over the years?

Take ERAs for example which had a very long racing history before "historic racing" came about. Most were well modified and chopped about over the years so they are a bit like the woodman's axe. Perhaps only Romulus is truly authentic and it has been raced only rarely in the last 70 years.

 

Well, in terms of the tub, as far as I am aware (and I'm doing this from memory, so bear with me!) it was never seriously crashed, so all the panels are essentially the same ones that were on the car when Jim drove it. It was converted to 49B spec in period (involving adding cut-outs for the lower rear radius-arm mounts) and the current owner saw fit to undo this work and return it to 49 Mark 1 spec. But apart from that, I can't think of any significant work that has been done to the car because it was very original still, Pete Lovely having bought it in 1969 and owned it until a few years ago, selling it to Bob Baker, who sold it to the current owner, Chris MacAllister.

 

This was the reason that Allan McCall, Jim's mechanic in 1967, could still recognise work he'd done on the car to the upper rear radius rod mountings when he saw the car some 30 years on from when he had worked on it.


Edited by Michael Oliver, 29 May 2014 - 12:33.


#125 Supersox

Supersox
  • Member

  • 105 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 29 May 2014 - 17:14

Well, in terms of the tub, as far as I am aware (and I'm doing this from memory, so bear with me!) it was never seriously crashed, so all the panels are essentially the same ones that were on the car when Jim drove it. It was converted to 49B spec in period (involving adding cut-outs for the lower rear radius-arm mounts) and the current owner saw fit to undo this work and return it to 49 Mark 1 spec. But apart from that, I can't think of any significant work that has been done to the car because it was very original still, Pete Lovely having bought it in 1969 and owned it until a few years ago, selling it to Bob Baker, who sold it to the current owner, Chris MacAllister.

 

This was the reason that Allan McCall, Jim's mechanic in 1967, could still recognise work he'd done on the car to the upper rear radius rod mountings when he saw the car some 30 years on from when he had worked on it.

Criticallty the tub could not be put back to its original 49 specification and today it is a sort of limbo with the 49B cut outs still in place.In fact because of this it was initially turned down for an HTP as it now is no car that ever ran.However in its infinite wisdom the FIA Histroic Motor Sport Commission overode its own rules to accomodate this car