Jump to content


Photo

S.E. Asian motor racing mystery 1


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#1 skyphantom

skyphantom
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 08 June 2014 - 06:29

Expatriate H.K. racer John MacDonald dominated the Malaysian races in 1974 and 1975 with first a Brabham BT40 and then a Ralt RT1, powered by a Camlex engine. The ruling engine regs at that time were1.6 litre, 4 cyl, 2 valve per cyl.

 

Does anyone know the story about the Camlex engine?



Advertisement

#2 275 GTB-4

275 GTB-4
  • Member

  • 6,939 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 08 June 2014 - 06:42

You could ask John himself...he is on LinkedIn...


John Macdonald's Summary

Auto "Certificate of Engineering Apprenticeship" from Coventry City:
4 year auto industry training in service/management laboratory and experimental work.
Committee member (tech/MAO) for Vincent HRD Owners club (International)
4 yrs Lieutenant Royal Signals (Mons OCS, Germany, and Africa secondment)
OIC in charge of military communications for what is now Zambia.
6 months full time Police Inspector training at Aberdeen PTS.
Group Service Manager Hutchison Motor Group, FIAT, Renault, Hino, Dodge, Chevrolet, Cadillac, Holden agencies (and all other makes independently)
Prolific race winner incl. 18 Asia Grand Prix. /Check Macau GP and Malysia GP sites etc.
Owner Camlex Motors and Camlex Engineering
CEO True Cathay Investment Ltd (holding above)
Builder of Camlex Racing Engines (Won all races entered)
Cathay Pacific Airways Racing Team Chief (5 years)
Service rep or repair agent for Aston Martin (Also Ferrari Lamborghini at times).
Service/sales for Lucas Girling and CAV (Camlex Motors
Independent consultant for manufacturers and/or their agents: Toyota, Renault, Holden (GM)
Rover, Triumph and others, plus Yamaha.

Thorough or intimate knowledge of Most Lotus (road and race) Most Cosworth (road and race) Jaguar (Haynes and V 12) Vincent HRD motorcycles. Toyota, Ferrari GTC Boxer and Daytona and Dinos, Hewland, Lucas Girling, Early Porsches Nissan 370Z, Brabham customer cars, RALT,...etc
...if it has 2 or 4 wheels.....

2003 VIP invitation by the Macau GP committee: and prepared and raced a Supercharged Mini.
2006 prepared a car and co-drove with the Philippines famous Jose "Pocholo" Ramirez in a long-distance race.
2013 Part finished preparation of a Brabham BT 10 FVA from 1965...and sold it.
2010-2013 extensive and complex Nissan project..see "Projects".

#3 skyphantom

skyphantom
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 08 June 2014 - 07:24

Thanks 275. I didn't realise that "JohnnyMac" was/is Camlex. One problem is that, due to my distrust of social/professional networks, I'm not in LinkedIn.

You seem to know him well?



#4 Allen Brown

Allen Brown
  • Member

  • 4,885 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 08 June 2014 - 08:49

I have his engine recorded as a Hart BDA.  I suspect Camlex refers to his company having prepared the BDA.



#5 275 GTB-4

275 GTB-4
  • Member

  • 6,939 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 08 June 2014 - 09:03

Thanks 275. I didn't realise that "JohnnyMac" was/is Camlex. One problem is that, due to my distrust of social/professional networks, I'm not in LinkedIn.
You seem to know him well?


au contraire SP...I have probably an even healthier distrust of social media than thee...I do however let Google look over my shoulder every now and then :rolleyes:



#6 skyphantom

skyphantom
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 08 June 2014 - 11:40

Hi Allen Brown,

 

JohnnyMac used Hart 416B twin cams before the local newspapers  started reporting Camlex engines. Remember that the ruling engine formula was for 2 valves per cylinder - aren't BDAs 4 valves per cylinder?



#7 Allen Brown

Allen Brown
  • Member

  • 4,885 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 08 June 2014 - 12:12

That's right - almost.  In 1971 and 1972, there was a 2-valve rule so the FVAs became illegal and everyone started running Ford twin cams such as the Hart 416B.  Then in 1973, there was a move to Formula Atlantic rules for South East Asian racing so Ford BDAs were allowed from Batu Tiga April 1973 onwards.  At Batu Tiga, MacDonald, Poon and Brian Robertson all had Brabham BT40s with Hart BDAs, Lawrence had a Hart BDA in his Surtees and Rajah had one in his March 73B.

 

At some point between then and 1976 the name "Formula Pacific" started to be applied but the jury's still out on when that term was first used in this context. 



#8 fivestar

fivestar
  • Member

  • 291 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 08 June 2014 - 22:45

You could send a PM to Angus Lamont. he is a fountain of information regarding John Macdonald's Hong Kong racing activities.

I competed against him in various HK Hill Climbs and remember even with one arm in a sling he still got FTD on one occassion.

 

rgds 5*



#9 skyphantom

skyphantom
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 09 June 2014 - 06:17

Hi Allen,

 

During early Jan this year, we were visiting Singapore and I took the opportunity to visit the New Straits Times archives in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. It's amazing how strenuous reading microfiche over 2 days can be. According to the archived newspaper reports, the 1.6 litre 4 cyl 2 valve regs came into force in 1971. The 1.6 litre 4 cyl 4 valve regs only came into force in 1976.Hence my belief that the Camlex was a 2 valver. In 1978, the same rules applied but fuel injection was banned. Of course the newspapers could be wrong!

 

Anybody know John MacDonald (last heard living in Andorra, I think) well enough to just ask him?

 

 

Hi Fivestar,

 

What's a PM? I'm a newbie on this Forum, I'm afraid.

Update -OK know what it is - have done as you suggested.


Edited by skyphantom, 11 June 2014 - 12:37.


#10 tsrwright

tsrwright
  • Member

  • 390 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 10 June 2014 - 07:53

As far as I can recall the Straights Times is all online via the Singapore National Library website



#11 Allen Brown

Allen Brown
  • Member

  • 4,885 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 10 June 2014 - 12:04

... According to the archived newspaper reports, the 1.6 litre 4 cyl 2 valve regs came into force in 1971. The 1.6 litre 4 cyl 4 valve regs only came into force in 1976 ...

 

Do you have the exact reference for this?  I have never been able to find anything in the Straights Times that gave the engine rules.  My believe that BDAs arrived in 1973 comes from the Autosport report on that event.  Motoring News didn't do a report.



#12 skyphantom

skyphantom
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 10 June 2014 - 13:41

Do you have the exact reference for this?  I have never been able to find anything in the Straights Times that gave the engine rules.  My believe that BDAs arrived in 1973 comes from the Autosport report on that event.  Motoring News didn't do a report.

 

I spent  hours trawling through the online material of the Straits Times (the Singapore newspaper). They mainly reported on the original Singapore GP. After the last one was held in 1973, they seemed to totally lose interest in the Malaysian races that carried on till 1983. This is what spurred me on to to do a serious archival search at the New Straits Times (the Malaysian newspaper) mentioned previously. I'm afraid that, given the huge amount of microfiche material I went through (from 1968 - 1980), I didn't think it important to note down the dates of the various newspaper articles, including the ones that mentioned the rule changes.

 

I also managed to get in touch with the Malaysian Motor Sports Club (MMSC), but was told that due to many shifts of premises and changes of committee members, no records of the period could be found. So, unless someone out there has kept records, the newspaper reports are the only evidence we have to go on.



#13 Allen Brown

Allen Brown
  • Member

  • 4,885 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 10 June 2014 - 14:17

We have more sources than that.  We have Autosport, for whom Richard Feast wrote a two-page report; we have Racing Cars News, who would have sent a reporter along with the significant Australian contingent; and we have Snakes & Devils of course.

 

I've gone back and re-read the Autosport report and I've also read the chapter about the 1973 race in Snakes & Devils and neither actually say twin-cam or BDA.  But if there had been a change to BDAs for 1973, then I would expect it to have been mentioned.

 

So I believe you are right, and the BDAs came later than 1973.

 

But I'd still like to see an actual report.  



#14 skyphantom

skyphantom
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 18 June 2014 - 09:33

We have more sources than that.  We have Autosport, for whom Richard Feast wrote a two-page report; we have Racing Cars News, who would have sent a reporter along with the significant Australian contingent; and we have Snakes & Devils of course.

 

I've gone back and re-read the Autosport report and I've also read the chapter about the 1973 race in Snakes & Devils and neither actually say twin-cam or BDA.  But if there had been a change to BDAs for 1973, then I would expect it to have been mentioned.

 

So I believe you are right, and the BDAs came later than 1973.

 

But I'd still like to see an actual report.  

 

I decided that the best way to confirm this was to go to a driver  whose racing career in SE Asia spans from 1969 to 1983 - Kiwi Graeme Lawrence. His victories include 3 Singapore GPs, 5 Selangor GPs, 3 Malaysian GPs and 4 Penang GPs. Graeme remembers using twin cams until the end of 1974. He returned in 1976 with a  BDA in the back of his car. Given the fact that it was almost 40 years ago, he feels  that the BDAs were allowed at either the end of 1975 or early 1976. This more or less fits the newspaper report that 4 valvers  were allowed from the 1976 year.

 

I've actually written a feature on Graeme for the Singaporean motoring quarterly REWIND, published by Eli Solomon (author of "Snakes and Devils" - the illustrated history of the original, non-F1 Singapore GP).



#15 fivestar

fivestar
  • Member

  • 291 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 19 June 2014 - 04:42

That's right - almost.  In 1971 and 1972, there was a 2-valve rule so the FVAs became illegal and everyone started running Ford twin cams such as the Hart 416B.  Then in 1973, there was a move to Formula Atlantic rules for South East Asian racing so Ford BDAs were allowed from Batu Tiga April 1973 onwards.  At Batu Tiga, MacDonald, Poon and Brian Robertson all had Brabham BT40s with Hart BDAs, Lawrence had a Hart BDA in his Surtees and Rajah had one in his March 73B.

 

At some point between then and 1976 the name "Formula Pacific" started to be applied but the jury's still out on when that term was first used in this context. 

From my scattered knowledge having attended the Macau GP in the late 60s onwards,

up until 1969 the Tasman Rules applied so we had Repco 2.5L V8s etc.

In 1970 full European F2 regs applied.

1971 to 1974 it was 1600cc, two valve engines.

1975 to 1978 Formula Atlantic

1979 to 1982 Formula Pacific, which was essentially Formula Atlantic engine wise but slightly different chassis/wing rules.

1983 onwards F3 regulations.

cheers - michael



#16 skyphantom

skyphantom
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 19 June 2014 - 11:04

I decided that the best way to confirm this was to go to a driver  whose racing career in SE Asia spans from 1969 to 1983 - Kiwi Graeme Lawrence. His victories include 3 Singapore GPs, 5 Selangor GPs, 3 Malaysian GPs and 4 Penang GPs. Graeme remembers using twin cams until the end of 1974. He returned in 1976 with a  BDA in the back of his car. Given the fact that it was almost 40 years ago, he feels  that the BDAs were allowed at either the end of 1975 or early 1976. This more or less fits the newspaper report that 4 valvers  were allowed from the 1976 year.

 

I've actually written a feature on Graeme for the Singaporean motoring quarterly REWIND, published by Eli Solomon (author of "Snakes and Devils" - the illustrated history of the original, non-F1 Singapore GP).

 

For more evidence, one has only to refer to Philip Newsome's "Colour and Noise : 40 years of the Macau Grand Prix". For the 1971 race, he describes a new engine limit of "1600 cc with no more than 2 valves per cylinder". Then for the 1976 race, he describes the "dropping of the two valves per cylinder limitation on engines". If my memory serves me correctly, the engine regulations were common to Malaysia and Macau.

 

This would strongly suggest that the newspaper reports were correct and the Camlex engine (which was what started this thread - remember?) was most probably a 2 valver.


Edited by skyphantom, 19 June 2014 - 11:53.


#17 Allen Brown

Allen Brown
  • Member

  • 4,885 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 19 June 2014 - 14:46

I did not have that book.  I have just bought a copy.



#18 skyphantom

skyphantom
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 20 June 2014 - 11:40

I did not have that book.  I have just bought a copy.

Which version of Newsome's book did you get?

 

C & N 40 years - white cover (I've got this one)

C & N 40 years - black cover

Macau 50 years - blue cover

Macau 60 years - just come out

 

Newsome is also the author of the recent book on Teddy Yip.



#19 Allen Brown

Allen Brown
  • Member

  • 4,885 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 20 June 2014 - 15:24

I bought "Colour and Noise 40 Years of the Macau Grand Prix".  I'll tell you the cover colour when it arrives.  As I know nothing about the 1974 or 1975 races, this purchase was overdue.



Advertisement

#20 fivestar

fivestar
  • Member

  • 291 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 21 June 2014 - 09:55

Which version of Newsome's book did you get?

 

C & N 40 years - white cover (I've got this one)

C & N 40 years - black cover

Macau 50 years - blue cover

Macau 60 years - just come out

 

Newsome is also the author of the recent book on Teddy Yip.

I have C & N white cover. What additional information is there in Macau 50 or 60 years? Are they basically C & N updated?

thanks



#21 skyphantom

skyphantom
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 21 June 2014 - 22:22

I have C & N white cover. What additional information is there in Macau 50 or 60 years? Are they basically C & N updated?

thanks

I suspect that Macau 50 and 60 years are C & N updated for the subsequent F3 races . However, Eli Solomon ( author : Snakes and Devils) has told me that a few mistakes/omissions in the white C & N were found and corrected in later editions (which at the time could have been either the C & N black cover or the blue Macau 50 years). Look up Blue Flag press for new stock availability or AddALL.com for "pre-loved" copies.


Edited by skyphantom, 21 June 2014 - 22:25.


#22 Allen Brown

Allen Brown
  • Member

  • 4,885 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 23 June 2014 - 10:37

It has a white cover.  On page 111, it says a 2-litre rule was in place for 1970, then on p116, it says a 1600cc 2-valve limit had been imposed for 1971 and on p132, it says Macau introduced F/Atlantic rules for 1975.  The 1970 rules would have been nearly, but not quite F2, which was then stock block, but the same as Japanese rules in 1971 and 1972.

 

Of course this still doesn't tell us when the Malaysian races moved to the same rules.  As Macau moved to 1600 2v "following the discontent of the previous year", when BMW had turned up with a 2000cc version of their F2 car and blown everyone away, it doesn't mean the Malaysians were in step.  There had been 2.5-litre cars at the April 1970 Selangor GP so they weren't in line with the 2000cc limit, but I have just found the relevant paragraph in Snakes and Devils (p201) where it says a 1600cc 2v limit was imposed at the Singapore, Selangore and Penang GPs in 1971. 



#23 skyphantom

skyphantom
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 24 June 2014 - 08:03

It has a white cover.  On page 111, it says a 2-litre rule was in place for 1970, then on p116, it says a 1600cc 2-valve limit had been imposed for 1971 and on p132, it says Macau introduced F/Atlantic rules for 1975.  The 1970 rules would have been nearly, but not quite F2, which was then stock block, but the same as Japanese rules in 1971 and 1972.

 

Of course this still doesn't tell us when the Malaysian races moved to the same rules.  As Macau moved to 1600 2v "following the discontent of the previous year", when BMW had turned up with a 2000cc version of their F2 car and blown everyone away, it doesn't mean the Malaysians were in step.  There had been 2.5-litre cars at the April 1970 Selangor GP so they weren't in line with the 2000cc limit, but I have just found the relevant paragraph in Snakes and Devils (p201) where it says a 1600cc 2v limit was imposed at the Singapore, Selangore and Penang GPs in 1971. 

 

And if you go on to page 136 (the 1976 race), the book mentions "the dropping of the two valve per cylinder limitation on engines" as "more than anything" the reason why lap times were expected to tumble.

 

So, it would seem that the ruling Macau engine regs were 2 valvers from 1971 and 4 valvers from 1976 - which matches the Malaysian newspaper reports.

 

Remember, in 1976, Rothmans initiated a six-round regional c'ship for the Rothmans Intl GP Trophy.There were 2 races at Shah Alam (Malaysia), 1 at Penang (Malaysia), 1 in Ancol (outside Jakarta. Indonesia), 1 in the Philippines and Macau. It was Kiwi Graeme Lawrence, in a Rothmans March 76B who wrapped up the series. The series would have had standard engine regs, which, I suggest from our foregoing discussions, would have been 1600cc, 4 valvers.



#24 Allen Brown

Allen Brown
  • Member

  • 4,885 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 25 June 2014 - 20:06

I agree that all these races were on F/Atlantic rules for 1976 but p132 makes it pretty clear that Macau at least adopted F/Atlantic for 1975.  The two new Ralts at the 1975 race would surely have had BDAs, not twin cams, as would the Yip/Schuppan/Stewart March 722 as it had come straight from the US, and surely also would Purley's Modus as he had borrowed it from the works Modus team.  

 

Earlier in 1975 it's less clear.  Poon bought a brand new Chevron B29 for the 30 March Malaysia GP but might have ordered it with a twin cam.  MacDonald had his usual BT40 and Lawrence was second in Poon's usual BT40 - so probably both twin cams.  Steve Millen had his Chevron B20 but that had previously been fitted with a FVC for Tasman. 

 

There's a really good picture of the rear of MacDonald's car on p133.  Surely somebody can tell whether that's a twin cam or a BDA.



#25 skyphantom

skyphantom
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 26 June 2014 - 10:28

I agree that all these races were on F/Atlantic rules for 1976 but p132 makes it pretty clear that Macau at least adopted F/Atlantic for 1975.  The two new Ralts at the 1975 race would surely have had BDAs, not twin cams, as would the Yip/Schuppan/Stewart March 722 as it had come straight from the US, and surely also would Purley's Modus as he had borrowed it from the works Modus team.  

 

Earlier in 1975 it's less clear.  Poon bought a brand new Chevron B29 for the 30 March Malaysia GP but might have ordered it with a twin cam.  MacDonald had his usual BT40 and Lawrence was second in Poon's usual BT40 - so probably both twin cams.  Steve Millen had his Chevron B20 but that had previously been fitted with a FVC for Tasman. 

 

There's a really good picture of the rear of MacDonald's car on p133.  Surely somebody can tell whether that's a twin cam or a BDA.

 

Great investigative work here! But getting back to the point of this thread - JohnnyMac's Camlex engines used to dominate the Malaysian races in '74 and '75 - 2 valves or 4 valves ?

 

For those who are interested, the Malaysian '74 & '75 races that MacDonald reportedly won with Camlex engines were:

 

Sept 1974   Penang GP     Brabham BT40

Sept 1974   Selangor GP   Brabham BT40

April 1975   Malaysian GP  Brabham BT40

Sept 1975   Penang GP     Ralt RT1

Sept 1975   Selangor GP   Ralt RT1


Edited by skyphantom, 26 June 2014 - 10:42.


#26 Allen Brown

Allen Brown
  • Member

  • 4,885 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 26 June 2014 - 19:47

I still don't think there was any such thing as a Camlex engine.  It was either a Ford twin cam or a BDA and Camlex was just the name of the engine builder.



#27 skyphantom

skyphantom
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 27 June 2014 - 05:47

I still don't think there was any such thing as a Camlex engine.  It was either a Ford twin cam or a BDA and Camlex was just the name of the engine builder.

 

Quite possible, which is why I asked the question in the first place. I suppose only John MacDonald or a former Camlex employee would be able to clarify the issue.

 

On the other hand, it could actually be a different design like the Aussie Waggott TC4V was - 1600cc and 1850cc Cortina block or 2000cc Waggot block - used in late '60s/early '70s by Kevin Bartlett, Max Stewart et al.


Edited by skyphantom, 27 June 2014 - 08:37.


#28 fivestar

fivestar
  • Member

  • 291 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 27 June 2014 - 23:46

@skyphantom,  did you manage to get any response from Angus lamont?, I believe he is still in contact with John MacDonald.

A bit of trivia, but years ago in the mid 1970s I lived about 5 minutes walk from John MacDonald's workshop in Kowloon City.



#29 skyphantom

skyphantom
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 28 June 2014 - 02:26

@skyphantom,  did you manage to get any response from Angus lamont?, I believe he is still in contact with John MacDonald.

A bit of trivia, but years ago in the mid 1970s I lived about 5 minutes walk from John MacDonald's workshop in Kowloon City.

 

Hey fivestar, tried a PM to Angus, but haven't yet got a reply. If he replied to the PM, how would I know?



#30 fivestar

fivestar
  • Member

  • 291 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 28 June 2014 - 05:50

@sp, at the top right you have a messenger and notification button. I have also set my settings so that any messages also go to my email address.



#31 skyphantom

skyphantom
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 28 June 2014 - 11:26

@sp, at the top right you have a messenger and notification button. I have also set my settings so that any messages also go to my email address.

 

Thanks 5star. Checked - there is no reply from Mr Lamont yet. Slowly getting to know my way around the Forum's layout.



#32 fivestar

fivestar
  • Member

  • 291 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 29 June 2014 - 08:53

The following may be academic interest. Camelex Motors was sold in 1984 to become Auto italia who are currently the Hong Kong agents for ferrari and maserati. 1970 - Golden Hill (HK)  John MacDonald        Brabham-Cosworth FVA BT10    35.20s (FTD)

1970 - Wong Nai Chong (HK)  John MacDonald        Brabham-Cosworth FVA BT10    29.??s (FTD)

MacDonald was the 1970 Hong Kong Hillclimb Champion.

1971 - Brick Hill (HK)  John MacDonald        TVR Griffith            (FTD)

Adamczyk was the 1971 Hong Kong Hillclimb Champion - John MacDonald broke his arm
and couldn't compete in all rounds.


10th December 1972 - Lye Yue Mun (HK)

John MacDonald        Brabham-Hart Twin Cam BT36    27.95s (FTD)
John MacDonald        TVR Griffith            32.05s

MacDonald was the 1972 Hong Kong Hillclimb Champion.

8th January 1973 - Lye Yue Mun (HK)

John MacDonald        TVR Griffith            31.64s (FTD)

MacDonald was the 1973 Hong Kong Hillclimb Champion.

1974 - Lye Yue Mun (HK)

John MacDonald        Brabham-Camlex Twin-Cam BT40    27.66s (FTD)

MacDonald was the 1974 Hong Kong Hillclimb Champion.
 



#33 Michael Ferner

Michael Ferner
  • Member

  • 2,211 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 29 June 2014 - 09:25

I still don't think there was any such thing as a Camlex engine.  It was either a Ford twin cam or a BDA and Camlex was just the name of the engine builder.

 

I would offer the opinion that it has much to do with personal preference. Is a Hart 416S not really just a Ford, or a Novamotor 2T-G a Toyota? But a Repco-Brabham 620 is no longer an Oldsmobile, is it? Where do we draw the line? Personally, I go with the head design, in which case the Camlex is still a Ford... wait a minute: is a TC Ford not really a Lotus, or a Lotus-Ford at best???



#34 Allen Brown

Allen Brown
  • Member

  • 4,885 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 29 June 2014 - 15:40

I would offer the opinion that it has much to do with personal preference. Is a Hart 416S not really just a Ford, or a Novamotor 2T-G a Toyota? But a Repco-Brabham 620 is no longer an Oldsmobile, is it? Where do we draw the line? Personally, I go with the head design, in which case the Camlex is still a Ford... wait a minute: is a TC Ford not really a Lotus, or a Lotus-Ford at best???

 

I am guided by whether it is a stock block formula.   Formula B, Formula Atlantic, Formula Pacific and Formula Mondial all had limits on the type of engine you could use and the two key engines across them all were the Ford twin cam and the Ford BDA.  They had to be Fords because it was Ford that had built them in sufficient numbers for them to be homologated.  The twin cam was invented by Lotus and perfected by Cosworth but the only reason it was eligible was because it was standard equipment in many thousands of Ford cars.  Similarly the BDA was initially a Cosworth project but it was only allowed into Formula Atlantic because Ford had homologated it in their cars. 

 

So they are both Fords.  Similarly a post-74 F3 Novamotor has to be a Toyota first and foremost.

 

In a 2-valve free formula or a 4-valve free formula, such as the post-76 FIA Formula 2 or early 1970s ANF2, then you can do your own thing and produce a Waggott or a Hart.  Similarly Repco can start with an Oldsmobile but change whatever they want and the result can be a Repco.



#35 skyphantom

skyphantom
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 30 June 2014 - 08:21

I am guided by whether it is a stock block formula.   Formula B, Formula Atlantic, Formula Pacific and Formula Mondial all had limits on the type of engine you could use and the two key engines across them all were the Ford twin cam and the Ford BDA.  They had to be Fords because it was Ford that had built them in sufficient numbers for them to be homologated.  The twin cam was invented by Lotus and perfected by Cosworth but the only reason it was eligible was because it was standard equipment in many thousands of Ford cars.  Similarly the BDA was initially a Cosworth project but it was only allowed into Formula Atlantic because Ford had homologated it in their cars. 

 

So they are both Fords.  Similarly a post-74 F3 Novamotor has to be a Toyota first and foremost.

 

In a 2-valve free formula or a 4-valve free formula, such as the post-76 FIA Formula 2 or early 1970s ANF2, then you can do your own thing and produce a Waggott or a Hart.  Similarly Repco can start with an Oldsmobile but change whatever they want and the result can be a Repco.

 

 

I would offer the opinion that it has much to do with personal preference. Is a Hart 416S not really just a Ford, or a Novamotor 2T-G a Toyota? But a Repco-Brabham 620 is no longer an Oldsmobile, is it? Where do we draw the line? Personally, I go with the head design, in which case the Camlex is still a Ford... wait a minute: is a TC Ford not really a Lotus, or a Lotus-Ford at best???

 

What excellent alternative points of view! Here's my ha'penny's worth;

 

Ford acquired the rights to the Lotus (Mundy - designed) twin cam , which is why we've always called the twink a Ford. Repco used the Buick block to develop the engine for itself, which is why we call their engines Repcos. The same goes for the Waggots.

 

If you only finesse'd the engine (eg the Ford twin cam or the BDA family) - eg by Vegantune, Hart ,Holbay, Richardson,  Swindon, Nicholson etc - than the engine is still considered a Ford.

 

It gets blurry when cylinder heads get redesigned. I suppose it eventually comes down to how much of the original total engine design still survives after "development" has been completed. 

 

Strangely enough, the Americans never seemed to worry about this. A Ford V8 with Gurney-Westlake heads was always a Ford. No matter who developed a Chevy V8 (eg Traco, Bartz, Bolthoff etc), they were still Chevys. BTW, for those of you who are into American racing V8s, I'd recommend "Race Man : Jim Travers and the TRACO dynasty" and "Al Bartz - Engine Man"


Edited by skyphantom, 01 July 2014 - 08:53.


#36 Allen Brown

Allen Brown
  • Member

  • 4,885 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 30 June 2014 - 09:45

Strangely enough, the Americans never seemed to worry about this. A Ford V8 with Gurney-Westlake heads was always a Ford. No matter who developed a Chevy V8 (eg Traco, Bartz. Bolthoff etc), they were still Chevys. BTW, for those of you who are into American racing V8s, I'd recommend "Race Man : Jim Travers and the TRACO dynasty" and "Al Bartz - Engine Man"

 

In both those case, they were stock block formulae.  Indy allowed 320 ci (initially 302 ci) stock block engines so no matter who was playing with the head, the block had to be standard so Ford, Plymouth or Chevy got the naming honours.  Likewise in F5000, the smallblock Chevy or Boss or Cleveland Ford was the basis so that's what typically got reported.  The more specialist the press, the more likely they were to recognise the role of the head designer or engine builder.



#37 Michael Ferner

Michael Ferner
  • Member

  • 2,211 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 30 June 2014 - 17:47

Re the US (I still can't do quotes...), that is not exactly correct: the Gurney-Weslake-Ford was pretty much always refered to as that, or GWF or GW-Ford, and the Chevies stayed Chevies as long as the head design wasn't altered; even when the cast iron block was substituted by an aluminium one, the engine stayed a Chevy. There was, however, once (in the mid 70s) a DOHC version of the small-block Chevy, called (quite properly) a Moser!

 

Going back even further, there were dozens of different engine designs based on Model T, A and B Fords, called Frontenacs, Roofs, Rajos, Dreyers, Hals, Cragars and what not. Also Ardun, Grancor, Offenhauser etc. redesigns of the V8.


Edited by Michael Ferner, 30 June 2014 - 17:49.


#38 skyphantom

skyphantom
  • New Member

  • 27 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 08 July 2014 - 12:07

What excellent alternative points of view! Here's my ha'penny's worth;

 

Ford acquired the rights to the Lotus (Mundy - designed) twin cam , which is why we've always called the twink a Ford. Repco used the Buick block to develop the engine for itself, which is why we call their engines Repcos. The same goes for the Waggots.

 

If you only finesse'd the engine (eg the Ford twin cam or the BDA family) - eg by Vegantune, Hart ,Holbay, Richardson,  Swindon, Nicholson etc - than the engine is still considered a Ford.

 

It gets blurry when cylinder heads get redesigned. I suppose it eventually comes down to how much of the original total engine design still survives after "development" has been completed. 

 

Strangely enough, the Americans never seemed to worry about this. A Ford V8 with Gurney-Westlake heads was always a Ford. No matter who developed a Chevy V8 (eg Traco, Bartz, Bolthoff etc), they were still Chevys. BTW, for those of you who are into American racing V8s, I'd recommend "Race Man : Jim Travers and the TRACO dynasty" and "Al Bartz - Engine Man"

 

Talking about Hart twin cams and BDAs, does anyone have more details of the book "Hart Power : The full Story" by Brian Hart and Alan Henry - published in 2000(?)


Edited by skyphantom, 08 July 2014 - 12:47.