Jump to content


Photo

Cosworth - a quick history


  • Please log in to reply
89 replies to this topic

#51 SJ Lambert

SJ Lambert
  • Member

  • 5,326 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 08 September 2017 - 22:46

I'm putting my mk16 motor back together after a freshen up. I have noticed that "period ground" L1 cams (as fitted to my motor) have a 304 degree duration whilst "modern" figures quote a 306 degree duration. 

 

Interestingly , period timing advice by Cosworth is MOP 106 Inlet / 98 Exhaust

 That's on valve timing of 46/78 & 70/54

 

 

These days I'd have expected something more like 106/106!



Advertisement

#52 bradbury west

bradbury west
  • Member

  • 6,096 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 27 May 2018 - 10:35

Bump.

Looking for something else, but connected, I happened upon this old thread so I thought I would bump it for info purposes for all.
Cosworth celebrated their foundation 2 weeks ago with a reception at their HQ, so Mike Costin told me a few days prior.
Roger Lund.

#53 HistoryFan

HistoryFan
  • Member

  • 7,813 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 25 February 2019 - 11:00

were there never attempts to copy the system of Cosworth DFV from other engine builders?

And how many Cosworth DFV engines were built?



#54 Peter Morley

Peter Morley
  • Member

  • 2,263 posts
  • Joined: October 02

Posted 25 February 2019 - 11:10

were there never attempts to copy the system of Cosworth DFV from other engine builders?

And how many Cosworth DFV engines were built?

 

The first Ilmor engine was apparently very similar to the DFX that they had previously been working on at Cosworth and that was based on a DFV.

 

I understand that some of the other engine builders made their own pumps and possibly bits like cylinder heads but not the whole engine, of course these days people make them all.

 

In 1985/6 they celebrated selling DFV no. 400 to Mario Hytten for his F3000.

So Cosworth probably made around 450 of them?



#55 AAGR

AAGR
  • Member

  • 397 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 25 February 2019 - 12:00

As something of an unofficial historian of all things Cosworth, I have often been asked the question about 'how many DFVs' - but the truth of the matter is that Cosworth has never sat back and taken the trouble to count them all in detail.

 

The round figure answer, and that, by the way, is very 'round', is that Cosworth hold individual build records for significantly more than 1,000 engines of the DFV family - a figure which includes more than 500 of the classic 3-litre DFV itself, followed by all the famous offshoots including the Indycar racing DFX (444 engines), DFWs, DFYs, DFLs, DFZs (80 of them), DFRs (about 100 of those)  and DFSs. Many new-old-style DFVs were later built for F3000 racing in the 1980s, and many 'classic' or newly manufactured DFVs were eventually up-rated, modified, or converted into  - say - DFZs .

 

My good friends at Cosworth assure me that they retain build records for every last one, but have never diverted resources to count them, individually. Because of the use of DFVs and derivatives in today's classic F1 races, some engines are treated to major rebuilds. Major castings - such as cylinder blocks - are occasionally newly manufactured, and I can personally vouch for this, having seen a pristine DFV cylinder block, straight from the machine shop, on a recent visit to Northampton.

 

  'Were there ever attempts to copy the system of Cosworth DFV from other engine builders ..?.'

 

  The origin of the original Ilmor engines for Indycar racing in the USA is well known, but several other companies have also used the basis of DFV engines for their own purposes (think of Austin-Rover and TWR's vee-6 engines, for instance, which used much straight-off-the-self top end hardware ) . I cannot possibly know all of them, but Yamaha certainly built their own cylinder head/top ends for such engines to be raced in Japan, Aston-Martin-Tickford dabbled with five-valve head versions here in the UK, and some of Brian Hart's development exercises on DFRs were about as far away from standard as was possible. 

 

 The fact is, however, that once what some of us call 'the DFV breathing/valve gear/ layout' had become well-known, rival designers all round the world copied what they saw, sometimes not with the same results, but sometimes improving on the original.


Edited by AAGR, 25 February 2019 - 12:39.


#56 paulstevens56

paulstevens56
  • Member

  • 91 posts
  • Joined: January 19

Posted 25 February 2019 - 13:24

I think a few people in motorcycles used what was tantamount to a single or twin cylinder DFV head for the top end of their engines, Quantel being one.



#57 AAGR

AAGR
  • Member

  • 397 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 25 February 2019 - 14:08

The engine used in the Quantel that you have in mind was designed and built by .... Cosworth, who modeled the cylinder head on the DFV's architecture.



#58 HistoryFan

HistoryFan
  • Member

  • 7,813 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 25 February 2019 - 14:48

Climax was selling a lot of engines to teams before. Wonder why they didn't the same Cosworth did in the 70s. Of course they were owned by Jaguar back then. But I think it could have been easy to be a second Cosworth in the grid...



#59 AAGR

AAGR
  • Member

  • 397 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 25 February 2019 - 15:01

Coventry Climax and Jaguar ? Eeerrr - no, not really. Coventry Climax was an independent company which had been supplying successful race engines to customers (including F1 teams) since 1954, but it was nine years later (in 1963) that Jaguar took over the business. One of the first decisions Jaguar then made was to run down the race engine side of their new acquisition, cancelling the proposed flat-16 F1 engine in 1965, and commissioning no new-type race engines after that.

 

  It was surely not coincidental that Coventry-Climax's withdrawal led to an engine supply crisis in the British F1 industry - and immediately led to Cosworth designing the original DFV.



Advertisement

#60 D-Type

D-Type
  • Member

  • 9,698 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 25 February 2019 - 16:43

were there never attempts to copy the system of Cosworth DFV from other engine builders?

And how many Cosworth DFV engines were built?

Did the Judd engine have any similarities to the DFV?  After all, as a recognised rebuilder, John Judd and Engine Developments Ltd would have known the DFV inside out.



#61 john aston

john aston
  • Member

  • 2,676 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 26 February 2019 - 07:31

I suspect the real; reason  that few, if any , bothered was that F1 , for a long time - 67- 82 - was about chassis and aero development, which were producing huge increases in speed . And the rivals to the DFV that existed - Ferrari . Matra, BRM. Alfa  (ok , I'll give Tecno a mention as it doesn't get much love) weren't better.   They sometimes had more power, the BRM tending to do so after Louis Stanley had had a good lunch at the Dorchester , but they cost more and weighed more. DFV was widely available , affordable , a good aero package was worth more than a few extra bhp so why bother ?   It was a period I loved but in hindsight the DFV hegemony was becoming tedious- and once I'd seen what a 1000bhp BMW or Honda could do the DFV became a memory of simpler times   



#62 Michael Ferner

Michael Ferner
  • Member

  • 7,125 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 26 February 2019 - 08:26

How "easy" can it be "to be a second Cosworth in the grid..."?? Just pour a little metal into a casting form (we'll graciously gloss over the need to make the patterns - or to design anything at all, for that matter!), forge some crankshaft, machine a few gears and camshafts, assemble the whole lot and add a few auxiliary devices, and hey presto, here you are with an engine capable of winning 150 Grands Prix!

Nuffin to it.

#63 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 79,958 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 26 February 2019 - 10:41

As long as you understood the reasons for various things to be as they were...

Cosworth battled harmonics early on, there must have been myriad problems cropped up in early dyno testing, and again later when further developments pushed revolutions and power upwards.

#64 Charlieman

Charlieman
  • Member

  • 2,538 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 26 February 2019 - 11:14

Just pour a little metal into a casting form (we'll graciously gloss over the need to make the patterns - or to design anything at all, for that matter!), forge some crankshaft, machine a few gears and camshafts, assemble the whole lot and add a few auxiliary devices, and hey presto, here you are with an engine capable of winning 150 Grands Prix!

If only it was that easy. Who is going to cast your pattern parts and forge your crank? There aren't all that many companies who can work to motorsport time scales and it's quite likely that they are busy making parts for Cosworth. If you want valve springs, slightly different ones every week, make sure that you have a friendly relationship with your supplier. You need to find an instrumentation engineer and borrow expertise from a friendly oil company, from ignition and fuel injection specialists. With backing from British motor and aircraft companies, BRM in the early years showed how not to do it.

 

In retrospect, the Tecno F1 engine was a remarkable achievement. The next serious independently designed F1 engine would be Brian Hart's 1.5 litre turbo, I guess.



#65 paulstevens56

paulstevens56
  • Member

  • 91 posts
  • Joined: January 19

Posted 26 February 2019 - 12:04

Cosworth don;t always get it right, their superbly documented failure to build an effective turbo engine was a great example. 



#66 Michael Ferner

Michael Ferner
  • Member

  • 7,125 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 26 February 2019 - 12:38

On the copy theme, wasn't the Berta V8 from the Argentine a pretty close copy of the DFV?

#67 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 25,883 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 26 February 2019 - 19:51

How "easy" can it be "to be a second Cosworth in the grid..."?? Just pour a little metal into a casting form (we'll graciously gloss over the need to make the patterns - or to design anything at all, for that matter!), forge some crankshaft, machine a few gears and camshafts, assemble the whole lot and add a few auxiliary devices, and hey presto, here you are with an engine capable of winning 150 Grands Prix!

Nuffin to it.

Actually, it probably wasn't so hard at the level of technology of the time. 

 

As an example, Millington Engines have developed an engine largely used for rallying.  Admittedly it started life as the Sierra Cosworth lump, but they took it, made it n/a, then gradually developed their own head, block and crank etc so that the engine now has few if any common parts with the original.  Casting and forging do not seem to have been a problem.

 

A 2.5 litre model gives well over 300 bhp and is why there are so many Ford Escorts still competing successfully against all the modern 4WD and turbo'ed rally cars.  All this was done in a large shed at the family farm with a workforce in single figures.  I am sure that Millington - if transported back in  time - could have conjured up a F1 unit, especially if they got someone like Ford to fund it.



#68 paulstevens56

paulstevens56
  • Member

  • 91 posts
  • Joined: January 19

Posted 26 February 2019 - 22:25

Yet most of the top guys now run an engine called a Smith and jones!  Not many in England at least as I have seen run Millingtons anymore, maybe this other firm just tune them.And the Escorts they use them in are basically a similarity, mega light, utterly bespoke suspension, flappy paddle boxes, huge wheel, carbon everything.  Far easier to win in that than a Gp4 1800 I would think!



#69 Charlieman

Charlieman
  • Member

  • 2,538 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 27 February 2019 - 14:40

Actually, it probably wasn't so hard at the level of technology of the time. 

 

As an example, Millington Engines have developed an engine largely used for rallying. 

The story of the Millington Diamond has much in common with that of the Hart 420R -- develop a Ford-branded engine which had been worked on by Cosworth, and progressively turn it into something new and better. That's a bit different from a clean sheet of paper design like the DFV. The clean sheet design concept is always a bit scuffed around the edges -- Cosworth tested ideas with the stock block FVA and Brian Hart's 1.5 litre F1 turbo was developed from the 420R.

 

Millington Engines also had the fortune that the motor sport industry was much larger when their project started than in the 1970s when anyone building a DFV competitor might have started. And Millington and Hart built four cylinder engines in their early days.



#70 Spaceframe7

Spaceframe7
  • Member

  • 48 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 03 December 2019 - 18:45

In the Early Lotus sales outlets in Australia thread there is a post about Lotus Seven and a twin cam engine being supplied to Geoghegan in the mid sixties. 

 

I was interested in the Cosworth Mk XVI: 81mm version of Mk XIII, mainly for New Zealand and Australia in the original post in this topic.  The Mk XIII was itself a modified version of the Mk XII, a dry-sump twin cam. 

 

Was there a particular class in Australia at the time where a 1498 cc twin cam would have been particularly appropriate, not necessarily in a Lotus Seven?

 

I wondered whether the engine was supplied with the car (not necessarily fitted) as a tax efficient method of getting the motor out to the customer who then fitted it in an appropriate car...

Hello Charles. I have been looking back on some old posts, and found your question from 2015.  After I posted on this forum regarding the Lotus factory record of a twin cam engine being fitted into a mid '60s Lotus Seven, a Mr. Ed Holly in Australia posted a story (2019) of his Seven that supposedly had the twin cam fitted - SB1938.  Mr. Holly advises on the SimpleSevens.org site that the Seven was shipped to the Geoghegans' without a radiator, and that the twin cam 'almost straightaway went into Glen Scott's Lotus 27'.  Scott's car had a Cosworth 1475 c.c. pushrod fitted, and this engine went into a Lotus 15.  Marc Schagen - a noted Lotus historian in Australia, has extensive records of the cars and provided the information to Mr. Holly. (Ed provides details of the Seven and his other cars on the Australian Club Lotus site: clublotus.com.au under 'Lotus Stories Ed Holly').  Unfortunately the mystery of how this twin cam arrived with the Seven is still unsolved.  It is not known if the engine was actually installed in the engine bay of the car, or just accompanied the chassis on its journey to the Geoghegans in the same crate.  For Lotus to go to the bother of installing it in the chassis, it would require the engine mounting brackets along with some support for the rear of the engine in the chassis (sans gearbox?).  Just why a radiator was not fitted is also a bit of a mystery. Ed's theory is that the car was raced as a Lotus Super Seven, so it would have been to Cosworth 1500c.c. specifications. When I spoke to Leo Geoghegan by phone, he could not remember the story, but did confirm that no Seven was either fitted or raced with a twin cam engine installed in Australia. Cheers, Bill 



#71 bradbury west

bradbury west
  • Member

  • 6,096 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 03 December 2019 - 22:12

As long as you understood the reasons for various things to be as they were...Cosworth battled harmonics early on, there must have been myriad problems cropped up in early dyno testing, and again later when further developments pushed revolutions and power upwards.


I always understood there were also very serious harmonic problems when they went out to the 4 Ltd DFL.
Roger Lund

#72 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 79,958 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 04 December 2019 - 01:03

I'm sure there were, Roger...

The additional weight involved would have changed the harmonic damping requirements.

On the subject of the twink in the Seven, as far as I know all Lotus 7s exported by the factory to Australia came in pieces, so the engine wouldn't need to be fitted up at all.

Likely the intended buyer for this car bought it with a used engine the Geoghegans had on hand. A radiator could come from anywhere.

#73 Spaceframe7

Spaceframe7
  • Member

  • 48 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 05 December 2019 - 19:18

I'm sure there were, Roger...

The additional weight involved would have changed the harmonic damping requirements.

On the subject of the twink in the Seven, as far as I know all Lotus 7s exported by the factory to Australia came in pieces, so the engine wouldn't need to be fitted up at all.

Likely the intended buyer for this car bought it with a used engine the Geoghegans had on hand. A radiator could come from anywhere.

Hello Ray.  Thank you for the information about Lotus 7s exported to Australia.  I recall that Lotus Sevens destined for the U.S. and Canada were fully assembled for export to these locations at the Lotus factory in the U.K. Of course there may be exceptions to this? The Lotus Seven Series 3s (that I have a list of) for sale in Canada, came as fully finished cars.  You may be right about a radiator coming from anywhere, but I remember Caterham searching for a replacement for the original and only finding the Marina rad. suitable for size and capacity to fit the front of the car.  The original Redline Components company in the 90s changed back to a radiator that was identical to the Lotus sourced original fitted in Series 2 and 3 cars.  Very good quality and assembly, and when shipped, really well protected from damage.  (I have 2 just in case). Bill



#74 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 79,958 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 06 December 2019 - 00:02

Probably to work around more severe import duties and sales taxes, Bill...

With reduced shipping costs and the Australia assembly cost helping to keep the ultimate price down.

No doubt the radiator in the original cars was from something readily available in the fifties.

#75 cooper997

cooper997
  • Member

  • 3,850 posts
  • Joined: December 08

Posted 27 March 2022 - 08:00

Harry Mundy's early Cosworth related feature from 29/7/60 The Autocar

 

1960-Autocar-Cosworth-TNF.jpg

 

 

Stephen



#76 hatrat

hatrat
  • Member

  • 339 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 28 March 2022 - 10:31

Harry Mundy's early Cosworth related feature from 29/7/60 The Autocar

Interesting to compare the "staggering" period performance of the FJ engines with what is now extracted from the Ford, BMC and Fiat FJ engines - which are of course to period specifications .........



#77 Tom Glowacki

Tom Glowacki
  • Member

  • 522 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 28 March 2022 - 16:30

Interesting to compare the "staggering" period performance of the FJ engines with what is now extracted from the Ford, BMC and Fiat FJ engines - which are of course to period specifications .........

Better lubrication! :|



#78 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 79,958 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 28 March 2022 - 22:03

Closer machining tolerances!

 

Better quality piston rings - and much narrower for less drag!

 

But, mostly, flow benches...



#79 hatrat

hatrat
  • Member

  • 339 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 28 March 2022 - 23:28

Closer machining tolerances!

 

Better quality piston rings - and much narrower for less drag!

 

But, mostly, flow benches...

 

Time moves on and some of the improvements have been significant - the ultimate period Cosworth FJ engine (1963 1098cc Mk XI) was stated to produce between 100 - 110 bhp at 7,800 rpm. The current version of the same engine (to purportedly the same specs) would be producing 135 bhp at over 9,500 rpm.



Advertisement

#80 10kDA

10kDA
  • Member

  • 970 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 29 March 2022 - 03:05

I have to wonder if the "period" F Jr engines were being run with the hope, if not intention, of lasting a whole season if at all possible, while these days the typical vintage racer has an incomparably greater budget. Turning an engine faster accelerates wear and if the owner can afford to have the engine freshened on a regular basis, that factor may come into play. I remember telling a friend about a VW Beetle engine I was building up to use in one of my airplane projects and he replied "Nice! I hear you can get 180 HP out of those things!" Now, this guy was a certificated Airframe & Powerplant Technician and acquiring that certification takes a great degree of sharpness. In terms familiar to him, I said "Maybe you can. But TBO (Time Before Overhaul) would be 180 seconds." I thought he would have figured it out.



#81 john aston

john aston
  • Member

  • 2,676 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 29 March 2022 - 06:38

Interesting to compare the "staggering" period performance of the FJ engines with what is now extracted from the Ford, BMC and Fiat FJ engines - which are of course to period specifications .........

I know the very successful FJ , driver , Jon Milocevic , who has raced  a Cooper T59 in recent years. Even he was surprised when I told him he was lapping Silverstone GP faster than a 1.5 lire F1 car , and about the same time as Adrian Newey's GT40 . 



#82 Charlieman

Charlieman
  • Member

  • 2,538 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 31 March 2022 - 10:49

Time moves on and some of the improvements have been significant - the ultimate period Cosworth FJ engine (1963 1098cc Mk XI) was stated to produce between 100 - 110 bhp at 7,800 rpm. The current version of the same engine (to purportedly the same specs) would be producing 135 bhp at over 9,500 rpm.

That's a 25-30% power increase, depending on how easily it can be kept in tune. Or 9% faster in a straight line.

 

I know the very successful FJ , driver , Jon Milocevic , who has raced  a Cooper T59 in recent years. Even he was surprised when I told him he was lapping Silverstone GP faster than a 1.5 lire F1 car , and about the same time as Adrian Newey's GT40 . 

When growing up I appreciated FJs to be lower price miniature F1 cars; the basic Lola, Lotus or Cooper design could be scaled up or down accordingly. Much of the lower price was achieved by using cheaper bearings, smaller brakes and tyres etc and performance was achieved by lower weight (eg smaller diameter tubes).

 

Hmm, if an FJ can lap at times comparable with a period 1.5 litre F1 car, some of that is attributable to the extra maximum speed and some to tighter suspension, better tyres, basic optimisation. But it means that the FJ structural elements are being pushed much harder than in period. For once, I'm rather happy about replacement chassis and improved fabrication techniques.



#83 Lee Nicolle

Lee Nicolle
  • Member

  • 11,036 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 05 April 2022 - 03:33

I know the very successful FJ , driver , Jon Milocevic , who has raced  a Cooper T59 in recent years. Even he was surprised when I told him he was lapping Silverstone GP faster than a 1.5 lire F1 car , and about the same time as Adrian Newey's GT40 . 

Tracks are generally much faster these days. Paved smoother, corners streamlined and sometimes widened as well.

The cars have better tyres, better brake material and yes the engines are generally better as well.

With engines these days with the parts available [at least pre Covid] you can make them run a lot harder and yet more reliable. 



#84 john aston

john aston
  • Member

  • 2,676 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 05 April 2022 - 06:07

Of course - but apart from Jon being a brilliant driver(and he is ) you would expect a similar decrease in lap time from 1.5 litre F1 cars. There may have been one , but not as much a leap as FJ cars seem to have made . 



#85 GregThomas

GregThomas
  • Member

  • 236 posts
  • Joined: January 22

Posted 05 April 2022 - 08:03

Arguably, the 1.5 F1 engines were at a peak of development when in period. I'd surmise that a very few may be better than new, now, but the incentive I'd have thought is to keep them together now. They're not plentiful or cheap. 

The FJ's on the other hand can be cheerfully stressed higher than in period due to improvements in piston and rod materials. Cam profiles have developed along with valve springs.

The relatively few outings per season helps too. Components can be lifed quite accurately now.



#86 bradbury west

bradbury west
  • Member

  • 6,096 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 05 April 2022 - 10:37

Perish the thought that we have the temerity to use the words”cylinder heads”. Hatrat knows what I mean.

I am out of touch a little these days, but do they all still use forged cranks, or  steel billet items in FJ cars?

Seeing the FJ cars at the Revival some seem to almost drag their bellies on the track, and they all?  seem to use multi adjustable dampers and  2.5”  springs as opposed to the original non adjustable fixed items and 1.75” springs. Yes, I know they say they were all later but in period mods. My own still unrestored 20, trial rebuilt,  owned since 1990 after being dry stored , in Salt Lake City, since 1969 season end, and full provenance researched with previous owners, still has those springs and dampers, albeit rebuilt by Leda in 1993.  For info, the engine was rebuilt, Nick Stagg,  to period spec using my Holbay unit, Hollesley Bay plate 1163/167, out of my G4, as it came with a Renault gearbox.

 

Historic Racing is what it is, as we have discussed before, so let us not try and pretend it is what it was unless a pure period spec is  drawn up for every car racing. That would rain on too many people’s parades and that would never do…..

 

On the subject of new chassis, a replacement chassis car should carry the enforceable designation  “type” after its  designation. Why, not?  When a Mini, TR, Spridget, XK etc has been restored using a new body/chassis unit it is advertised as a key selling point, but clearly cannot claim  any sort of  period history  as it must be a replica, which opens up another can. IMHO Classic Car Insurers should cotton into this.  Consider the fine art world as a comparator.

 There appears to be a new category of historic class race car,  namely the FIA Continuation type, a new build from scratch car to a specific period spec,  they say , (let us not talk about  power outputs or components….) which receives an FIA Passport which makes no claim to certify provenance or originality. It gets dafter  by the minute the more you look into it.

 

I suspect the  1500cc F 1  engines would be too expensive for a development programme for such a niche market, before worrying about who picks up the cost. I have seen figures of £75k  and more for these types. There was a lot of  concerned debate a while back when revised engine capacities 2500cc vs 1500cc  were proposed for some races, and the entries reduced accordingly because of the cost of mods.  I imagine that lack of  real, non period development extends to  Ferrari and Maserati engines also,  but clearly not to Jaguars and US V8 engines because that is where the owners and drivers seem desperate to win….. so horsepower becomes everything and the engines are somewhat less costly in the first place.

And there  are people who still think it is real,  but it still gives some excellent racing

Exits left…

Roger Lund



#87 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 79,958 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 05 April 2022 - 11:13

It is supposed to be real in Australia, Roger...

 

The old catch-cry was (is), "As it was, so it shall be!"

 

But I think FIA Passports, which are more or less 'open shalther', allow cars to enter races here.



#88 hatrat

hatrat
  • Member

  • 339 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 06 April 2022 - 19:14

Perish the thought that we have the temerity to use the words”cylinder heads”. Hatrat knows what I mean.

 

The re-cast FJ cylinder head issue does create more power and the matter has been well addressed here.

 

A further issue is the recently introduced re-cast Ford FJ blocks - seemingly sensible on the basis of a diminishing supply of the original (used) items. While the new blocks are apparently dimensionally the same as the original they are structurally superior and this along with an all steel bottom end allows significantly more rpm than could be obtained using a genuine period block. Of course as the rpm increases so does the bhp.

 

Meanwhile the FIA seems to be turning a blind eye to this and other "improvements" that create real performance gains but showing how proactive they are  :stoned: have come out with an edict that spring platforms shouldn't able to be altered so you find the ideal position and then grind off the threads. I presume they haven't considered that all you need to do is have different sets of shocks with appropriately set spring platforms at the ideal position for each track (with the threads ground off) and just swap them as needed and they would all comply with the FIA edict as being non-adjustable ...... problem of the FIA edict solved for the competitor but just another increase in the cost to compete at the top end in historic racing.



#89 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 11,512 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 06 April 2022 - 20:35

Historic racing can be fun - but any idea that it shows us racing cars "just as they were" is of course an entirely unsustainable fiction.  Racers make sure of that.  'Authority' has always been off the pace - and in so many ways acts contrary to common sense, and inflates costs while profiting from some... 

 

DCN



#90 john aston

john aston
  • Member

  • 2,676 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 07 April 2022 - 17:26

No sleep is lost by me about historic racing's period accuracy  - except from excitement the night before I set off for Goodwood Members' Meeting . Which is tonight ....

 

The past is another country ,and if you want historical accuracy , then factor in dangerous cars, amateur hour marshalling , dreadful medical facilities , rubbish food , bad teeth  and the lingering smell of unwashed armpit and Embassy Regal. I'll take His Grace's resto-mod interpretation , on and off track thanks .