BRM P115
#1
Posted 24 January 2003 - 08:28
I'm interested in learning about the '67 BRM, the P115. I know this car had an extra gear over the other challengers that season due to the useless torque curve of the engine, but could anyone tell me how it was used?? Was G1 used to get the car going from a standing start and the other 5 gears treated 'as normal'; as in a first gear corner in any other car was taken in second in the Beast?
What kind of diff ratio would be used in this car where I've heard that the Lotus 49, for example, used a 45 power and 85 coast with a minimum of clutches?
To keep this thread in TNF, does anyone have links or stories to the drivers talking about thier experiences driving the car, and why in the world did it look like all the pieces of the engine were pulled from a scrap heap and thrown together??
Advertisement
#2
Posted 24 January 2003 - 22:40
Ill-advised, maybe, but it wasn't that bad. The engine did win a Grand Epreuve, after all...
#3
Posted 24 January 2003 - 22:47
Which race did they manage to win, BTW?? Spa was a second place that would have been a win if not for the afformentioned reliablility problem...
#4
Posted 24 January 2003 - 23:15
#5
Posted 24 January 2003 - 23:16
Brykus apparently beat me to it ( ), but he missed it- V16 instead of H16...
#6
Posted 24 January 2003 - 23:23
#7
Posted 24 January 2003 - 23:33
#8
Posted 25 January 2003 - 00:09
Originally posted by Aubwi
Newtown, the torque curve would have been about the same as one 1.5L V8 alone, only doubled. So it might be more accurate to say they needed the extra gear for the extra power and extra top speed rather than a poor torque curve. For what it's worth, I think it's a safe bet to say it had no more trouble to "get going" than the old 1.5L F1 cars.
Aubwi, if people who made Grand Prix Legends are to be be?lieved BRM was indeed quite peaky... Here are representations of engine characteristics in GPL:
http://eaglewoman.si...help/tables.htm
Brykus- You're telling me?!? I've lost count of times I've put a foot in my mouth...
#9
Posted 25 January 2003 - 08:52
Six speed gearboxes were not new to BRM with the P83/115. They used them for the 1.5 litre cars too. I doubt first was a starter special. I would have thought like any six speed gearbox, the ratios would be evenly spread. It's probably more important not to have too big a gap between fifth and sixth than a very low first gear.
On the Centre of gravity thing - Tony Rudd, the engine's designer wrote that the centre of gravity was lower than on their V8. I think the problem was the engine was VERY heavy.
Looking back the idea of an H16 seems crazy when with hindsight the V-8 was the solution. But when the decision to go ahead was made, 1.5 litre engines were V-8s or V/flat 12's and coventry climax had a flat 16 1.5 litre in development. The idea of a 3 litre 16 cylinder was not so outlandish.
#10
Posted 25 January 2003 - 09:59
Collecting Rodriguez stuff for so many years, I found a copy of a symposium on "Transport engines of exceptionally high specific output" written by A.C. (Tony) Rudd and dated 17-18 September 1968. It's about the development of the BRM H-16 F1 racing engine. Although Pedro never raced the car nor the engine, I've kept it as I thought it was an interesting engine. The symposium is very technical with diagrams and some pictures, certainly not my cup of tea.......
I'll give you his conclusions :
CONCLUSIONS
The engine has so far failed to reach its prime objective, which is to power a car to win the Formula 1 Constructors' Championship. The main reasons were that it was too heavy, and although now fairly reliable, still destructive to transmissions.
The reasons for the excessive weight have been given: modifications to the cylinder heads to overcome casting problems, and redundant strengthening to control vibration problems subsequently eliminated.
The paper has shown how most of the problems arose from excessive caution in the design; making the pairs of heads from one casting to avoid water leaks; isolating the output gears from the crankshafts and carrying them in their own bearings. The more advanced features, such as using the engine as part of the car structure, gave no troubles.
Development of the engine with a simplified crankcase carcase and four-valve heads is continuing.
If you're interested in the whole symposium, I can always scan it for you (9 pages). Just send me your e-mail address.
Here's a very rare picture of Pedro in a BRM H-16 (in Yardley colours!) doing some PR for Yardley in a Brussels Shopping Centre just 4 days prior to his victory at Spa 1970.
#11
Posted 25 January 2003 - 10:28
One of the rarest posted on this forum so far, I'd venture to say. Are there more?
Reason the c of g was low was because the heads sat lower, all four of them, and that overcame the weight of that one crank. They included, of course, eight camshafts...
#12
Posted 25 January 2003 - 15:17
The picture where Pedro is sitting in the BRM H-16 is the only one I have. I have other pictures of this Yardley PR session but these are only portraits.
I have a cover of Motoring News from July 15th 1971 where key personalities of BRM are posing beside a variety of famous Bourne cars. Here you can see the BRM H-16 in Yardley colours.
Comment : Raymond Mays is alongside the original supercharged 1.5-litre V16, gearbox engineer Alec Stokes accompanies the four-cylinder 2.5-litre car in which Bonnier won BRM's first Grand Prix, engine-designer Aubrey Woods is paired with Graham Hill's championship-winning 1.5-litre V8, current team manager Tim Parnell grins from behind a regrettably unauthentic Yardley liveried H16 while chassis designer Tony Southgate views his latest creation, the P160.
#13
Posted 25 January 2003 - 19:22
Originally posted by Pedro 917
I have a cover of Motoring News from July 15th 1971 where key personalities of BRM are posing beside a variety of famous Bourne cars.
Not a week for BRM to be celebrating very much.
#14
Posted 25 January 2003 - 22:14
#15
Posted 25 January 2003 - 23:44
#16
Posted 26 January 2003 - 16:47
#17
Posted 26 January 2003 - 18:01
#18
Posted 26 January 2003 - 18:55
#19
Posted 26 January 2003 - 22:00
Curiosity forces me to ask, of all the B.R.M. engines, which was, dollar for dollar or Pound for Pound, the most successful engine? Yours, M.L. Anderson
Doug Nye answers: 25-Jan-03 22:44 15
Twin-cam Lotus-Ford 4-cyl.
Funny, but it is the truth! Yours, M.L. Anderson
Advertisement
#20
Posted 26 January 2003 - 22:05
Originally (1966) 555 lbs. (252 kg) plus 118 lb. (53.5 kg) of gearbox and clutch according to Tony Rudd (who ought to know!) - In his book "It Was Fun -My Fifty Years of High Performance". By 1967 he quotes 508 lbs. (231 kg). Ultimately they developed a 64 valve light weight engine with magnesium crankcase castings sandwiching five titanium blocks that came in at 398 lbs. (180.5 kg) - this development however never produced the targeted power.
#21
Posted 26 January 2003 - 22:06
DCN
#22
Posted 26 January 2003 - 22:52
#23
Posted 26 January 2003 - 23:04
Originally posted by Pedro 917
Collecting Rodriguez stuff for so many years, I found a copy of a symposium on "Transport engines of exceptionally high specific output" written by A.C. (Tony) Rudd and dated 17-18 September 1968. It's about the development of the BRM H-16 F1 racing engine. Although Pedro never raced the car nor the engine, I've kept it as I thought it was an interesting engine. The symposium is very technical with diagrams and some pictures, certainly not my cup of tea.......
Pedro 917 has sent me a copy of this paper. I'd like to thank him for that; it really is most interesting to anyone with an interest in racing engines and most of it is comprehensible even to the likes of me.
#24
Posted 26 January 2003 - 23:09
#25
Posted 26 January 2003 - 23:23
Originally posted by Mike Argetsinger
Alan Baker's post reminded me that a year or so ago we were having a similar TNF discussion and the question came up about how much the engine actually weighed. I looked in Tony Rudd's book and here is what I posted at the time.
Originally (1966) 555 lbs. (252 kg) plus 118 lb. (53.5 kg) of gearbox and clutch according to Tony Rudd (who ought to know!) - In his book "It Was Fun -My Fifty Years of High Performance". By 1967 he quotes 508 lbs. (231 kg). Ultimately they developed a 64 valve light weight engine with magnesium crankcase castings sandwiching five titanium blocks that came in at 398 lbs. (180.5 kg) - this development however never produced the targeted power.
The Tony Rudd paper sent to me by Pedro 917 quotes a design target weight of 380lbs. It also gives the reasons for the increase, as already quoted by Pedro 917:
The reasons for the excessive weight have been given: modifications to the cylinder heads to overcome casting problems, and redundant strengthening to control vibration problems subsequently eliminated.
#26
Posted 27 January 2003 - 21:59
Do 917 or You mind posting it here for the benefit of community (I thought 'for me', but 'benefit of community' sounds much nicer ). Thanks in advance.
I would love to but I'm afraid it would take too much time as I'll have to scan all 9 pages again and use the Optical Character Recognition, re-read everything to correct the usual errors than adding the pictures and diagrams.......
If you want a copy, just send me an e-mail and I'll be glad to forward it to you!
#27
Posted 27 January 2003 - 22:04
Do 917 or You mind posting it here for the benefit of community (I thought 'for me', but 'benefit of community' sounds much nicer ). Thanks in advance.
I would love to but I'm afraid it would take too much time as I'll have to scan all 9 pages again and use the Optical Character Recognition, re-read everything to correct the usual errors than adding the pictures and diagrams.......
If you want a copy, just send me an e-mail and I'll be glad to forward it to you!
#28
Posted 30 January 2003 - 01:27
Originally posted by Doug Nye
THE Alan Baker????? Welcome to TNF regardless!
DCN
Could be the one played by Frank Sinatra in Come Blow Your Horn (Paramount, 1963)!
#29
Posted 30 January 2003 - 09:58
In other words, welcome home. Don't bother about bringing ol' Blue Eyes in here...