55 replies to this topic

[fines]

When? early July, 1919
Where? Tacoma, Washington - Pacific Coast Speedway
Who? Dario Resta and unknown (to me at least) mechanic

But what????

Is it one of the famed 1919 Sunbeam Indy entries, that never ran? Phil Harms can't decide if it's a Sunbeam or a Peugeot, maybe because Resta ran a "Resta Special" in 1918 already, which must have been his old Peugeot? Anyway, this car still carries #1 from a previous meeting at Sheepshead Bay, where it finished third in a ten-mile sprint and retired early both in the 30-mile semi and 50-mile final. At Tacoma, it finished last in both heats and retired early in the final. No more appearances, it seems!

Help!

[David McKinney]

The frontal treatment looks very Delage, to me

[Doug Nye]

At first glance to me the car looked like a Sunbeam with tricky radiator cowling forming a dummy vee in place of the normal bluff Sunbeam affair, but the contemporary Sunbeam chassis - at least those of 1916 and 1921 either side of this 1919 date - did not kick up in this manner so far ahead of the rear axle. Fascinating pix...

DCN

[dbw]

for what it's worth,the composite radiator cap and the upper end of the outside brake lever look very pre-war peugeot....the board track tires on most likely non-metric lock-ring rims[with 52mm rudge hubs] along with the snap-on upholstery are typical american board track practice of the day.... damn! that track surface looks scary...

[fines]

William Court says about the 1919 Sunbeams that "they were very similar to the 1916 cars", although I don't know if that maybe only concerns the engines. I only have a small pic of the 1916 racer (Power & Glory, p89), and the general layout isn't very different from this one - except, mostly, for the different position of the rear axle. Other details, like the steering drag link emerging from behind the chassis rail are strikingly similar. Has anyone ever seen a picture of the 1919 Sunbeam?

[robert dick]

Disguised Peugeot, ex 1914 Lyon - 4.5-litre (EX5/L45), probably the ex-Lyon spare car (André Boillot) – then Alphonse Kaufman/Peugeot Auto Import :
- the body is more or less completely new;
- the front axle is 1914 Peugeot without the front brakes, the damper mounting is slightly different from the original Lyon cars;
- the frame is 1914 Peugeot;
- the exhaust is 4.5-litre Peugeot;
- the steering wheel is 4.5-litre Peugeot.

[fines]

Thanks Robert, brilliant info as usual. Although I have to say, the rear of the frame does not look Peugeot to me...

[karlcars]

The latest Automobile Quarterly (vol 43, No 1) has a good story on Resta. Both photos appear, the side view (showing occupants only) being identified as a "Peugeot". The co-driver is identified as "Bob Dahnke" (you're welcome). Maddeningly, the text does not even mention the 1916 Tacoma race at which the photos were taken. And a November, 1916 photo of Resta's Peugeot clearly shows the distinctive circular hood-side aperture that is missing on the "Tacoma" car.

All most frustrating!

[robert dick]

Frame :
typical for the Peugeot are
1) the two cross tubes – can be seen on the photo on the left and right side under the starting number “1” – the front tube being used to fix the steering gear, the rear one to fix the back end of the sub-frame carrying engine and gearbox;
2) the mounting of the rear spring.
The perspective (concerning the rear part of the frame) is somewhat misleading due to different (in comparison with Lyon) rear wheels/tyres.

Circular hood-side aperture :
The original Claudel carburettor had been replaced by a Miller instrument. Although the Miller was in principle a copy of the Claudel, it is possible that the aperture was not necessary anymore. Just a suggestion.

[dbw]

could this be the car mentioned in dee's "miller dynasty"?..in the chapter on "wild bob" burman's" burman-peugeot it mentions that resta had worked on his peugeot in millers shop to fit a master carburator.... also good reading on the rebuild of burman's engine by miller,offenhauser and john edwards...some excellent photos of burman's car in probably it's original guise as the ex-goux indy car....if resta's car originally looked like this one it would be interesting to map the changes..
btw...identical radiator caps!

also..what slander to mention miller and claudel in the same breath[er..sentence]!!!...having worked with both,the miller is significantly less awful than the claudel..tho it's amazing either even worked at all.

[fines]

Karl, these pictures were taken in 1919, not 1916! It's really not surprising the text doesn't mention Resta at Tacoma in 1916 because he did not race there in 1916! But thanks for the mechanic's name!

Robert, I have checked again against another EX5 (Boillot/Lyon), and the rear of the frame looks identical. The Wilcox EX5 was different, however, the frame did not reach that low. : Also, those cross tubes, while I'm sure they were there, are not visible on any other EX5 I've seen! You're right about the mounting of the rear spring, but the 1916 Sunbeam had exactly the same arrangement. : :

The side aperture can't have been too useful - I know that the Burman-Peugeot had a new engine built by Miller with a single Miller carb, and the old Peugeot rebuilt with two Millers (see respective pictures in Mark Dees, "Miller Dynasty", p31 and Gordon White, "Offenhauser", p14), but I have never seen it with two apertures.

dbw, I believe most Peugeots in the USofA went to Miller's shop at one time or another, probably all. And yes, the track surface is very scary! 2x4 laid on edge, but unlike other board tracks not smoothly against each other, but in order to save lumber spaced at about 3/8 inches, and the space filled with crushed stone and tar! Drivers likened the ride on the Tacoma boards to a ride through a meteor shower!!!

[Jim Thurman]

Originally posted by dbw
for what it's worth,the composite radiator cap and the upper end of the outside brake lever look very pre-war peugeot....the board track tires on most likely non-metric lock-ring rims[with 52mm rudge hubs] along with the snap-on upholstery are typical american board track practice of the day.... damn! that track surface looks scary...

The story goes that the Tacoma track builders didn't take into account the wet weather or used improperly treated lumber, which led to the boards shrinking (!) and leaving the gaps plainly visible between each board. I've read that in later years they used tar to fill in the gaps.

Very scary.


Jim Thurman

[humphries]

From "Motor Age" 30 May 1918

" The card for the Decoration Day meet at Sheepshead Bay Seedway.........30 May..... The car which Resta will drive is a combination of the Peugeot chassis which he has previously driven fitted with an engine which he is understood to have built himself...."

"Motor Age" 6 June 1918

( Details of specs for cars )

Driver.............Resta
Car.................Resta Special
Mechanic........Dahnke
Engine............Resta Special
Cylinders........4
Size................3.67x6.75
Valves............16
Camshafts......2 OH
Carb & No.......Miller 1
Ignition & No...Bosch 1
Plugs & No......KLG 4
Oil...................Oilzum
Wheel Base....106
Tyre size.........( blank!)

A quick scan of the races in which it participated in 1918 and 1919 reveals that this car was fast but fragile. Tacoma 4 July 1919 the Resta Spl was 5th in the 40 mile race and again 5th in the 60 mile race. Dario got $900 in prize money.

And so to bed.

[dbw]

at that time there were very few folks capable of "building" an engine....the specs sound a lot like the original peugeot to me...."modified" perhaps is a better word.....or what was it??

no sleep for the wicked....

[robert dick]

Cross tubes :
On the original Peugeots, they were hidden by the bodywork.

= = = = = =

Bore/stroke dimensions of the Peugeots :
- 1913 = 100/180 mm – 5.6 litre
- 1914 = 92/169 mm – 4.5 litre
- Burman special rebuilt by Burman/Miller/Offenhauser in the spring of 1915 = 93/180 mm (300 cubic inches to comply with the 1915 formula), using a new block.
- 1918 Motor Age sheet of the Resta special (converted in mm) = 93.2/171.5 mm.
All these dimensions, especially the strokes have to be considered with caution since the blocks were mounted “désaxé” = the cylinder axis was offset in relation to the crankshaft center. The crankshaft diameter was not identical with the piston stroke. In some cases the piston stroke was indicated, in other cases the crankshaft diameter.

First idea (have absolutely no proof for it) :
The Resta special had
- either the rebuilt engine of the Burman special,
- or a completely new engine built on exactly the same lines.
And of course with Miller being involved.

Second idea :
Resta special = Burman special + 4.5-litre-Peugeot front axle + new body.
(the frame of the Resta special could be ex 1913 ACF Peugeot resp.1914 Indy Peugeot).

= = = = =

Any infos about the Peusun driven in the 1916 Indy 500 by Aldo Franchi?
Peugeot frame + 4.5-litre Sunbeam engine + seems to be 4.5-litre Delage radiator.
Who assembled it? How did it look later?

According to the exhaust, the Resta special has a Peugeot (or Burman special) engine, no Sunbeam engine.

[fines]

Thanks for all the great contributions, but I'm not sure we're talking the same car here! There's no question that Resta drove a Peugeot-based Special in 1918, and that that was quite (=very much) successful, winning handicaps at Sheepshead Bay and Maywood's Speedway Park in June, as well as running competitively with the V12 Packard and the latest Frontenacs in various sprint programs at Sheepshead and Maywood later that year.

But this 1919 car was a "no-go" - humphries is right in saying that it finished 5th in the three Tacoma races, but he neglects to inform us that there were only four other cars present: two Frontenacs and the two Durant/Chevrolets, in reality two four-year-old Stutzes (sp?) - all four SOHC-copies of the EX3 Peugeot, not really state-of-the-art.

Also, I have to disagree with Robert here: the front of the car doesn't look anything like the EX5, and this is not a Peugeot front axle (it's almost completely straight)!

My suspicion still centers around the 1919 Sunbeam - has anyone ever seen a picture of it?

[fines]

Originally posted by robert dick
All these dimensions, especially the strokes have to be considered with caution since the blocks were mounted “désaxé” = the cylinder axis was offset in relation to the crankshaft center. The crankshaft diameter was not identical with the piston stroke. In some cases the piston stroke was indicated, in other cases the crankshaft diameter.

That doesn't make sense: my (limited) geometrical understanding is that the stroke is determined by the crankshaft diameter, no matter how far you offset the actual cylinder. I made a sketch drawing with an offset of 30°, and still the stroke was equal to the crankshaft diameter. The actual offset was about 3°, can you confirm that?

[robert dick]

Of course the stroke is determined by the crankshaft diameter, but the stroke is not = crankshaft diameter in the case of an offset cylinder (try with the help of a scheme/diagram to find the TDCs and BDCs).

= = = = =

At the moment (we have not enough infos to be sure), I would still say that
- the front axle is ex-4.5-litre Peugeot (part of the axle (on the photo) is hidden behind the tube carrying the starting handle),
- the frame is either ex-5.6-litre or ex-4.5-litre Peugeot (btw : 106 inches = 270 cm was the wheelbase in 1913 and 1914),
- the steering wheel is ex-Resta-4.5-litre Peugeot as used in 1915 and 1916 Indianolis 500,
- the shape and location of the exhaust manifold is typical for 4.5-litre Peugeot.

Taking into account the Motor Age data sheet posted by Humphries giving 93.2/171.5 mm, I would say that the engine is a rebored 4.5-litre Peugeot, using either the original block or a new block à la Burman special. But I would tend to the original block.
And the difference between the original 169 mm stroke and the 171.5 mm of the data sheets could come from the fact that Peugeot, in 1914, had to give an exact indication of the stroke to comply with the 4.5 litre limit of the ACF.

= = = = =

I do not agree with the statement that the 300 cubic inch Stutz was “not really state of the art”. The Stutz had only one camshaft since two camshafts were not necessary – see 4.5-litre Mercedes, and 300 cubic inch Maxwell, and Frontenac. The Stutz was on the same level as the Peugeot and the Mercedes, perhaps even a step better due to the additional 0.4 litre displacement. Differences in the performance, in the years 1918 and 1919, are due to the preparation and fatigue of the cars. In my eyes, the Stutz was the best 300 cubic inch four-cylinder.

[robert dick]

Possibly there is a misunderstanding concerning “désaxé” :
The block was not mounted exactly above the crankshaft, but a few centimetres sideways, most of the time by a distance between ten and twenty percent of the stroke. “Désaxé” was/is a distance, in this case measured in millimetres or centimetres, not an angle - in degrees.

[humphries]

Fines

Yes, there was only 5 competitors at Tacoma, 1919; no neglect intended.

Resta's poor performance was explained thus:-

" Dario Resta, who is a stranger on this speedway, did not attempt much speed, and followed the other cars in the three races with his Resta special. He explained his car was geared too high for the track and for that reason he could not go after first place."

Earlier at Sheepshead Bay 14 June 1919 Resta was third in the first 10 lap race ( a field of 13 ran! ) just beating De Palma in the Packard. This car looks the same as the Tacoma car but retired on the 3rd lap with plug trouble in the 50 mile race. It seems to have been competitive.

However, it was stated Resta was driving a Resta Special and not the Resta Special.

Also in 1919 Resta was negotiating to become the Subeam agent in the USA and it would have been politic to have raced a Sunbeam based car. Sunbeams were taken to the States for the Indianapolis 500 in 1919 but they were not remotely race worthy as the Brooklands track had not been repaired and the cars were not properly tested. I think the cars were withdrawn without them even running at the Brickyard. Perhaps Resta did utilised one of these cars?

After second thoughts my money is on the 1919 Tacoma Resta Special being a Sunbeam! Resta was a sharp businessman.

John

[Doug Nye]

Originally posted by humphries
After second thoughts my money is on the 1919 Tacoma Resta Special being a Sunbeam! Resta was a sharp businessman. John

Sharp businessman maybe - fine driver certainly - but if that's a Sunbeam chassis frame he's had a hell of a lot of work done to it 'cos it's not like any Sunbeam chassis frame of the period I recall ever having seen...

DCN

[dretceterini]

My knowledge of cars of this period is much less than many of you; but based on my limited knowledge, I would have to agree with Doug...it doesn't look like a Sunbeam to me...

[humphries]

Doug and Dret

Had a look at the stats that Phil Harms compiled and he knows a thing or two about AAA racing.
For Tacoma 1919 he has Resta driving a car called a Sunbeam that had a Peugeot chassis and engine!

That Resta was possibly promoting the Sunbeam name would be very appropriate for him as the Sunbeam agent.

Somewhere, but I cannot remember where, probably Motor Sport many moons ago, I read that one of the engines from one of the 1919 Indianapolis Sunbeams was used in another chassis. It may well have been installed in the Resta Special.

The two 1919 Sunbeam Indy cars were returned to the UK. One was converted into a road car and the other was transformed into a Brooklands single seater track special.

On third thoughts I think the Resta Special was a Peugeot with a Sunbeam engine! Would that be technically feasible when studying the photo? Exhausts etc

John

[robert dick]

Coming back to the désaxé blocks :
The stroke of a désaxé engine is always longer than the crankshaft diameter (simply apply the well known theorem of our old Greek friend Pythagoras).
Assuming that the connecting rod length = 2 x crankshaft diameter (was usual at the time), the stroke of a désaxé engine is longer than the crankshaft diameter by

0,03 % if the block is désaxé by 0.05 x crankshaft diameter,
0,13 % at 0,10,
0,30 % at 0,15,
0,54 % at 0,20,
0,845 % at 0,25,
1,22 % at 0,30,
the last value meaning that for a a crankshaft diameter of – for example - 200 mm, the stroke is 202,44 mm.

= = = = = =

Sunbeam engine :
The 1919 Indy Sunbeam was a combination of the 4.9-litre = 300-cubic inch six-cylinder, as used at Indy in 1916, with the 1914 TT Chassis.
I think it is clear that on the photo it is not a six-cylinder.
The 1914 4.5-litre four-cylinder had the dimensions 94/160 mm which are difficult to relate to the 93,2/171.5 of the data sheet.
Moreover the exhaust manifold was different in shape (the angle was different too) in comparison to the manifold of the photo. And it would certainly have been difficult to mount the four-cylinder Sunbeam engine into the Peugeot sub-frame, which clearly seems to be present on the photo (two cross tubes).
Conclusion : I would say the engine under the bonnet is not from Sunbeam.

[fines]

Originally posted by robert dick
Possibly there is a misunderstanding concerning “désaxé” :
The block was not mounted exactly above the crankshaft, but a few centimetres sideways, most of the time by a distance between ten and twenty percent of the stroke. “Désaxé” was/is a distance, in this case measured in millimetres or centimetres, not an angle - in degrees.

Sorry for the confusion, but that was exactly my point: If the piston moves in a vertical line, then the con-rod at both DCs is angled (about 3°, if the contemporary drawing is anything to go by - then again, it is the one with the spurious valve arrangement...), so that connecting the crankshaft DCs and the piston DCs would form a parallelogram (or rhomboid), which means that all opposing angles and lines are identical - I don't see where Pythagoras fits in here

Re Stutz: treu, DOHC isn't everything, but a four-year-old design, copying mainly from an even older (six years!) and discarding its (arguably) most prominent feature can't really be called state of the art. The Stutz was a good car, yet even in its prime hardly a match for the EX5, and the Durant team was very much an amateur (if wealthy) operation. But we don't need to discuss this, it's not the relevant point.

Re Sunbeam 6: yes, you're right! It never even occured to me to count the manifold tubes... But don't forget the data sheet is not necessarily valid for this car!

And humphries, thank you so very much for the contemporary quotes! Do you have more of these? I'm currently knee-deep in late-teens/early-twenties Indy Car racing, and sure as hell could afford some help...

[robert dick]

Originally posted by fines

... where Pythagoras fits in here...

Hoping that Don will turn a blind eye to this reply :

Stroke = √[(2,5d)² – (ad)²] – √[(1,5d)² – (ad)²]
is nothing else than Pythagoras.
d = crankshaft diameter (connecting rod length = 2d)
a = désaxé ratio in relation to crankshaft diameter
If the block is not désaxé, a = 0, and stroke = d.

[VAR1016]

Originally posted by Doug Nye


Sharp businessman maybe - fine driver certainly - but if that's a Sunbeam chassis frame he's had a hell of a lot of work done to it 'cos it's not like any Sunbeam chassis frame of the period I recall ever having seen...

DCN

Oh well, here goes - how about Ballot? No-one's mentioned that one yet!

PdeRL

[humphries]

All and Sundry

Sometimes, if it were possible, I would give myself a good kicking!!

The Resta Special is a Premier!

Griffith Borgeson "The Golden Age of the American Racing Car"

"...with the oubreak of war in Europe, the Indianapolis management became concerned about losing the crowd appeal of "international" participation in its events and ordered several Peugeot cars from France. The factory replied that it was out of the racing business and totally involved in the war effort. The Speedway therefore commissioned the Premier Company to build three replicas of the GP Peugeot. These copies, owned and campaigned by the speedway and which raced under the names of Peugeot, Premier, and Premier-Peugeot, were quite successful. They were such accurate copies that, according to legend, when Goux came over in 1919 with one of the prewar cars and cracked a cylinder block in practice the day before the "500", a Premier-Peugeot block was sent for, dropped directly onto the studs of his crankcase, and enabled Goux to finish third in the big race..."

On page 43 of Borgeson's book is a photo of the 3 Premiers prior to the 1916 "500", the same photo appears on p55 in Dick Wallen's "Board Track, Guts, Gold and Glory".

All Resta did to one of the Premiers, that he must have acquired in 1918, was to extend the dummy vee-shaped radiator at the front, make the cockpit surround a little more aerodynamic by fixing on extra cowling and add vents to the side of the bonnet. Cosmetics.

Robert's option " or a completely new engine built exactly on the same lines" appears to be correct.

George Wiedely's whose organisation built the Premiers was something of a visionary building a straight eight racing car in 1905 using drive shafts not chains and a multiple-disc clutch not the leather-faced cone type.

John

[m.tanney]

  The Automobile Journal's account of the 1916 Indy 500 gives the bore and stroke for the competing engines. The Peugeots of Resta, Aitken and Merz all had a bore of 3.655 inches, with a stroke of 6.6. The Premiers of Rooney, Anderson and Wilcox were measured at 3.66 X 6.656. The Peugeot with the largest bore - the one closed to the figure given for the Resta Spl. in the Motor Age article mentioned above - was Mulford's, which had a 3.662 bore and a 6.625 stroke. So the Premier copies had a slightly smaller (.004 in.) bore. Odd that Mulford's car would have a slightly larger bore than the other Peugeots. Maybe his engine (or at least the block) was a copy made by someone else, not Premier. If "aftermarket" blocks were available in America, that might explain the slightly different dimensions of the Resta Spl.
  While on the subject of the Resta Special, I have a confession to make. I saw a couple of vintage photos of it for sale on Ebay last year. I didn't think to bid on them. Now, of course, I wish that I had. The one thing that sticks in my mind about them is that the colour looked lighter than in the photos seen on this thread and in the Dick Wallen book. I believe that the photos were from Tacoma, though I do not recall if they were identified as such, or if I came to the conclusion after checking Phil Harms' stats. Lesson learned: the next time I see vintage American racing photos I'll either buy them or email Phil.

  Mike

[fines]

Originally posted by robert dick


Hoping that Don will turn a blind eye to this reply :

Stroke = √[(2,5d)² – (ad)²] – √[(1,5d)² – (ad)²]
is nothing else than Pythagoras.
d = crankshaft diameter (connecting rod length = 2d)
a = désaxé ratio in relation to crankshaft diameter
If the block is not désaxé, a = 0, and stroke = d.

Hey, you're right! Apparently, I was working from the assumption that crankshaft and piston DCs are always the same, which they're not, of course, in a désaxé engine! I was getting:

stroke = √(2d²-ad²)+d/2-(√(2d²-ad²)-d/2)

measured at crankshaft TDC and BDC, which is obviously always d. Turns out when piston TDC is 3° after crankshaft TDC, piston BDC is about 4° after crankshaft BDC! Didn't know that...

humphries, I wouldn't bet my money on it being a Premier - although it's possible, there are numerous details that are very different: the front axle, the steering drag link, the hand brake.... Hmm! :

[fines]

Originally posted by humphries
George Wiedely's whose organisation built the Premiers was something of a visionary building a straight eight racing car in 1905 using drive shafts not chains and a multiple-disc clutch not the leather-faced cone type.

John

Wasn't that car air-cooled, too? Anyway, a drive shaft was nothing new: Renault used it since 1900, and Darracq a year later. I'm not so sure of disc clutches, but weren't the early Mors and Napiers similarily equipped?

About the Premier boss, I have his name as Weidley, what is the correct spelling?

[Don Capps]

I have been following this with some interest. My initial thought was that perhaps it was a modified Premier -- engine or chassis & engine. I don't think that it was a Sunbeam. Certainly there are many of you much smarter than I am on these matters, but I have a strong suspicion that perhaps the Resta Special was a Premier engine in a modified Premier chassis. There were several craftsmen talented enough to do such work and Resta certainly had the contacts.

[humphries]

Don et al

If Resta had bought one of the Premiers in 1918, as I am certain now was the case, then at Indianapolis in 1919 the Speedway would be only able to enter two. In the provisional entry list in "Motor Age" sure enough only two Premiers were entered, #46 and #47, but with no nominated drivers.

On race day Wilcox who had provisionally been #45 but was #3 on race day was also entered by the Speedway. This car was a Peugeot-Peugeot! Goux was also entered by the Speedway but originally his car may have been entered by the driver. His car was a Peugeot but with a Premier engine installed as related by Borgeson.

Of the two Premiers, one was assigned to George Buzane and appeared in the race day entry list as #16. Unfortunately Buzane rolled it in practice. He and the mechanic were not seriously hurt, bruises and a sprained ankle, and the engine was salvaged and put into the other Premier car. Apparently it was a better engine. This other car however never made the grid, so no Premiers in the race.

The other Peugeots were Peugeots. Lt Arthur Klein brought his car back from France after serving at Issoudun, although the car was paid for by Frank P. Book, the Detroit millionaire. Book also had a Detroit ( designed by DePalma ) with a Mercedes engine in the race.

Andre Boillot was in the so-called Baby Peugeot and entered by Goux for the works.

Ray Howard was in A.G. Kaufman's older car.

An interesting sidelight was that Howard Wilcox was a local boy and the crowd was ecstactic with his win, despite driving a foreign car, and a local band spontaneously gave a rendering of "Back Home in Indiana ". The following year it was played before the race and has been played every year since.

Sorry for waffling on. To the pub!

John

[robert dick]

Premier :
A lot of chassis details, the front axle (see the Elliot type front axle of the Premier), the steering gear mounted outside the frame, are not in accordance with the Resta special on the photo.

After reexamining the photos, I am sure that the chassis of the Resta special is 1914 4.5-litre Peugeot, including the front axle (the front brakes have been cancelled) and the back axle. The mounting of the rear spring shackle was typical for the 4.5-litre Peugeot and only for this Peugeot : The back end of the frame was slightly introverted so that the leaf spring was/could be shackled ABOVE the rear cross member. This is apparent on the photo, the 1913 solution with the spring shackled below the cross member would look different.
The combination of front axle, shaping of the frame, sub-frame mounting and rear spring shackle has only one solution : 4.5-litre Peugeot.
The exhaust manifold is also 4.5-litre Peugeot.
The engine itself remains open, but I would still tend to the old 4.5-litre block.

Ballot :
Is a good idea. Of course the eight-cylinder engine and the corresponding sub-frame don’t come into question. But the 1919 4.9-litre Ballot main frame was very similar to the 4.5-litre Peugeot, although slightly longer – wheelbase 275 cm instead of 270 cm. The front axle too was similar. But a lot of details are not in accordance with the photo. And the Ballot was a brandnew car in 1919, unlikely to be modified/rebuilt during the same season.

= = = = =

Side aperture/Peugeot carburettors :
In 1913 Peugeot used Claudel carburettors, in 1914 officially Zenith, but at least in practice, one car run at Lyon (1914 ACF) with a Claudel.

= = = = =

Disc clutches :
Fiat began to use the disci multipli clutch with the 1904 Bennett racer and of course Panhard was famous for the use of the Hele-Shaw clutch, a “luxury multiple disc clutch”.

[VAR1016]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by robert dick
Ballot :
Is a good idea. Of course the eight-cylinder engine and the corresponding sub-frame don’t come into question. But the 1919 4.9-litre Ballot main frame was very similar to the 4.5-litre Peugeot, although slightly longer – wheelbase 275 cm instead of 270 cm. The front axle too was similar. But a lot of details are not in accordance with the photo. And the Ballot was a brandnew car in 1919, unlikely to be modified/rebuilt during the same season. [/QUOTE]

= = = = =
Disc clutches :
Fiat began to use the disci multipli clutch with the 1904 Bennett racer and of course Panhard was famous for the use of the Hele-Shaw clutch, a “luxury multiple disc clutch”. [/QUOTE]

Thanks Robert, I was beginning to think I had dropped a clanger!

When I wrote my original post concerning the Ballot, I thought that there was a an earlier Ballot - and worse, could not find the book to check. After reading your message I realise that the first one was the five-litre of 1919 - I was all mixed up about Ernest Henry and the Peugeots.

I love the "luxury" clutch!

PdeRL

[Ray Bell]

Originally posted by VAR1016
.....After reading your message I realise that the first one was the five-litre of 1919 - I was all mixed up about Ernest Henry and the Peugeots.....

So were Ballot...

Old Ernie designed them.

[robert dick]

Remarks :
1) Front view of the Resta special :
The left hand (seen from the driver’s seat) member of the main frame (beginning at the radiator cross member - rearwards) seems to have been repaired after a serious damage.

2) The hand lever operating the rear drums is not from Peugeot.

[humphries]

Robert

Your knowledge of the cars from this period is light years ahead of mine. Your technical claims I accept, but like all historians I believe in tossing everything into the pot.

This Resta Special could be a right mongrol as have been many racing cars.

Your assertion that the car had sustained damage to the front frame on the driver's left side is worth investigating using comtemporary sources.

Motor Age 5 Sept 1918 Race:- Uniontown 2 Sept 1918 ( The 1918 Resta Special )

" Resta had a spectacular spill on the third lap of the match race...when his car blew a tire in death curve...Resta snapped the steering rod in swinging his machine round". No indication of contact damage.

If the 1918 Resta Special was not a Premier based car what about the Premier rolled ( 3 times! ) by Buzane at the 1919 Indy. That must have required a considerable rebuild using the Speedways bits and pieces from Peugeots and Premiers.

Motor Age, on the victorious Wilcox Peugeot "...Wilcox drove his car a long ways with a broken frame horn. He lashed it in place at the pits." A photo shows it was on the driver's left hand side.

Finally, following the withdrawal of the Sunbeams from the 1919 "500", " Resta, it is understood, will be affliated with the Ballot team in the capacity of either relief driver or team manager, probably the latter." It was the original intention to keep the Ballots in the States and race them over the next four months after Indy.

Perhaps Resta campaigned one of these Ballots. The French drivers returned to France as did the cars although perhaps the one wrecked on the backstretch by Paul Bablot stayed behind. The accident was caused by a collapsed wheel.

One reason for the poor showing by the Ballots was blamed on the poor protection for the drivers because the cockpit surrounds were too low for " the cowls to shoot the wind over their heads". Bablot's car was not modified but the additional cowling is obvious on the Resta photo in question. The main problem however was with the gearing, which required a change of wheel type. Resta's excuse for his poor showing at Tacoma was blamed on its gearing.

The biggest problem with all of these cars is that in 1920 the formula changed to 3 litre engines and most of these cars in the USA became obsolete and disappeared. Fascinating nonetheless, but I should be getting on with the updates for the 2nd edition of the Black Books.

John

[Pets22]

my mistake - thought it was a rasta special

[robert dick]

Premier chassis/Peugeot chassis :
The main frame members of the Peugeot chassis had a characteristical “flip-flap” section in the gearbox/”driver’s feet” area, the main frame making a slight kink and being wider rearwards. This kink is apparent on the front view of the Resta special, and such a section was not used on the Premier frames.

The photos seem to have been taken with some sort of early wide-angle lens and especially the photo borders are heavily contorded. Nevertheless I think the front end shaping of the frame is not original and has been straightened. The chassis had probably an accident which damaged the left hand side and the front end.

The radiator cap is the same as on the Premiers, the thermometer is different but seems to come from the same manufacturer. In any case it’s possible that a Premier radiator is hidden behind the cowling. The bonnet straps are fixed on the frame à la Premier, not à la Peugeot. The hand lever is not Premier and not Peugeot, but more “Premier style” than Peugeot style. Maybe a Premier mechanic/engineer worked on the car.

Perhaps the Wilcox Peugeot frame/axles/steering in combination with the Buzane Premier engine/radiator...

[Don Capps]

Robert, Thanks for putting into words what I was trying to figure out how to say. I just had a hunch when I first starting really reading and looking into this thread that somehow there was a Premier involved -- mostly on the strength of the the radiator cap and the other bits you've pointed out. I think it is safe to say that someone VERY familiar with both the Premier and the Peugeot -- in that order -- put this Special together.

This also reminds me of just how much more I really wish I knew about this era. Every time I just think I am getting beyond the Total Novice stage here comes something like this. Needless to say, I am very thankful -- and impressed -- by the knowledge of those of you here on TNF.

[Gerr]

Dunno if this helps or not:

Jack Fox wrote in the 1979 500 Yearbook:

"Aitken's ride in the Speedway-Owned Peugeot was given to the hard-driving Howdy Wilcox formerly a star with the now-defunct Stutz team. While the dark blue car been constructed in France along about 1914, its many races in the United States had seen so many parts replaced that by 1919 at least half of the car was American. In any case, despite its age it was perhaps the best ride in the field, or, at least, the most dependable.
The Speedway's other entry, another Peugeot was entrusted to Frenchman Jules Goux, the 1913 Winner."

Fritz Frommeyer wrote in the '81 Yearbook:

"Carl Fisher invited Goux to prepare the Speedway's four car team of two Peugeots and two Premieres (Peugeot copies commissioned by the Speedway in 1916)."

Fox's History of the 500 has the two Speedway-owned Peugeots in first and third and the two Premieres as DNQ. If Premier was no longer (I don't know) producing road cars, perhaps Fisher wanted the glory to go to Peugeot so they would consider entering future 500s ?

[fines]

Originally posted by humphries
If Resta had bought one of the Premiers in 1918, as I am certain now was the case, then at Indianapolis in 1919 the Speedway would be only able to enter two. In the provisional entry list in "Motor Age" sure enough only two Premiers were entered, #46 and #47, but with no nominated drivers.

On race day Wilcox who had provisionally been #45 but was #3 on race day...

As I have it, one of the Premiers was already wrecked in its debut appearance by Tom Rooney. AFAIK, there were never more than two entered for any other race...

But your mention of the "provisional" entry lists intrigues me, since for some time already I am piecing together alternative entry numbers for Indianapolis races of the time, mainly from pictures. Do you have access to these? It would spare me a lot of time and effort...

Originally posted by humphries
The other Peugeots were Peugeots. Lt Arthur Klein brought his car back from France after serving at Issoudun, although the car was paid for by Frank P. Book, the Detroit millionaire. Book also had a Detroit ( designed by DePalma ) with a Mercedes engine in the race.

I have the Detroit as a Mercedes chassis with a "copy of a Mercedes" engine! Interesting, obviously one of our respective sources had it the wrong way around - I wouldn't be surprised if mine was wrong, though...

Now, this car, do you know if it was the same used by George Buzane in 1917 and John DePalma in early 1920? Would make sense...

[humphries]

Fines

Yes you are correct in saying that only two Premiers ever appeared at races during the rest of the 1916 season. Although Tom Rooney's accident at the 1916 Indy was a big one..."3.10 (pm)- Rooney's Premier turns over on the south end of the track. His car struck the outer wall, threw the mechanic, Thane Houser, out and the car rolled back down the bank with Rooney still in it. Rooney is taken from the wreck with a dislocated shoulder, a broken thigh and cuts and bruises."...I am sure the car would have been repaired even if not to the original spec. They just did not bin them in those days. When the Premiers ( two?) appeared at Chicago 11 June they were now painted gray instead of the unlucky green but did not take part in the race.

At the tragic inauguration of the Uniontown track on 2 Dec 1916 Irishman Frank Galvin crashed his Premier into the pits killing the very English Hughie Hughes ( Ken Miles was out of the same mould ) who had just walked in after abandoning his own crashed car. Gaston Weigle, Galvin's mechanic was also killed; Galvin and a spectator died later. A dozen other people were hurt, some of them seriously. Galvin was an interesting character. It was claimed he had been a top cyclist on the Continent, held the world's paced record of 1:02'04 for 100km and won the then richest purse ever for a bike race in 1906 at Sydney - $32,000! Allegedly he finished second to Christian Lautenschlager in the 1912 Hamburg-Berlin race in an Opel; a race about which I know nothing. Can any cycling enthusiast verify the bike claims?

For some reason the results of this 112 mile Universal Trophy race are not recorded by Dick Wallen. The race was not stopped!

So Rooney, Galvin and in 1919 Buzane all crashed Premiers. Robert asserts that the Resta Special had suffered damage to the frame; so it could have been one of these Premiers. What colour was the Resta Special? The Speedway team withdrew from racing 1917/1918.

The entry list that appeared in Motor Age 29 May 1919 had blanks for numbers 3,4,11,13 ( of course ), 20,40,42 and 44. #16 was DePalma, #17 had Pullen as the driver, #45 was Wilcox, Peugeot and #46, 47 Premiers. The race numbers of the rest were the same as on race day.

" The Detroit Special is the product of the de Palma Manufacturing Company, of Detroit, of which Book is the chief stockholder. The building of the car was supervised by de Palma himself, who planned to use it when the famous Mercedes with which he won the 1915 Indianopolis 500-mile race should no longer be seviceable.

Eddie Rickenbacker prepared to campaign the car in 1917 before he enlisted in the Army and went to France as staff driver for General Pershing. He took the car to Cincinnati for the 300-mile race on Memorial day, and suddenly decided to abandon racing for fighting. After Rickenbacker terminated his connection with Book, George Buzane, the Greek speed demon, took the car and drove it at Cincinnati and Chicago.

In its two starts in 1917 the car showed it had ample speed for the big time competitions, and minor changes have since added considerably to its ground covering ability. Book withdrew it from racing because of the demands made on the de Palma company by war work, and it has since been covered with a tarpaulin except when airplane engineers hauled it out to study its construction." Motor Age 29 May 1919.

What I like about Book is that he and his two brothers, millionaires as well, used to work in DePalma's pit in pristine white overalls. Now why doesn't Paul Stoddart ask Bernie to be the lollipop man and Paul sell raffle tickets to us punters, the prize being a one-off drive in a Minardi.

John

[Don Capps]

For some reason the results of this 112 mile Universal Trophy race are not recorded by Dick Wallen. The race was not stopped!

John, Here are the results:

112 Mile race

Uniontown Speedway

Uniontown, Pennsylvania

2 December 1916



Distance: 100 laps of 1.125-mile planked board speedway for 112.5 miles

AAA Sanction No. 996

Starter: John D. Aitken, Assistant Jonathan L. Cadwalder	Referee: F.H. Rosboro

Formula: Class E, Under 301 cubic inches



Originally scheduled for 25 November, rain delayed the running of the event until 2 December. 



Results

1st	Louis Chevrolet

	Frontenac Motor Corporation Frontenac Special Frontenac

	100 laps, 1 hr 14 min 12.2 sec, 90.97 mph, $1,000

2nd	Dave Lewis

	Premier Special Premier

	100 laps, 1 hr 16 min 36.2 sec, 88.12 mph, $700

3rd	Ralph De Palma

	Mercedes Special Mercedes

	100 laps, 1 hr 17 min 56.4 sec, $500

4th	Barney Oldfield

	Crawford Special Crawford Duesenberg

	100 laps, 1 hr 25 min 00.0 sec, $300

5th	Milt McBride

	Olson Special Mason Wisconsin

	100 laps, 1 hr 25 min 18.00 sec

6th	Bert Watson

	Olsen Special Mason Duesenberg

	81 laps, flagged

7th	Jimmy Meyer

	Pugh Special Mason Duesenberg

	95 laps, flagged

9th	Jerry Mason

	Ogren Special Mason Duesenberg

	92 laps, flagged

8th	Otto Henning

	Ogren Special Ogren Miller

	87 laps, flagged

10th	Frank Galvin (Gaston Weigle)

	Premier Special Premier

	77 laps, crash into the pit area with fatal injuries to Galvin, Weigle, Hughes, and a spectator

11th	John De Palma

	JJR Special Mason Duesenberg

	73 laps, Out

12th 	Hughie Hughes

	J.C. Hoskins Hoskins Special Duesenberg

	63 laps, out

13th	Art Klein

	Crawford Special Crawford Duesenberg

	18 laps, Out

[humphries]

Don

Cheers! Just the info for which a stats-junkie like me craves. Any race numbers? Now it begs the question, how many other AAA sanctioned events do you have results for that do not appear in the Whallen book i.e the neglected dirt ovals of the time?

John

[fines]

Originally posted by humphries
Don

Cheers! Just the info for which a stats-junkie like me craves. Any race numbers? Now it begs the question, how many other AAA sanctioned events do you have results for that do not appear in the Whallen book i.e the neglected dirt ovals of the time?

John

That's a good question! I'll soon start a new thread posting info that I have and asking for info I would like to have... Actually, on second thought, I would like to have pretty much everything anyone can dream of, so let's put it that way: Info that I need to have! Better? Anyway, watch this space...

John, thanks very much for the info on the Detroit, and the Indy #s. Do you have the original #s from 1915? All I can piece together are the non-qualifiers and #10 (the Cornelian) and #38 (the Kleinart).

As for DePalma, wasn't he on Packard's payroll during the whole of the war? At least from early 1915 to the end of 1919, that is?

[robert dick]

Just an idea :

According to John’s reply/Motor Age 30 May and 6 June 1918, a Resta special combining a Peugeot chassis and an engine “built by Resta himself” already existed in 1918.

As far as we know, only four 4.5-litre chassis have been built by Peugeot.

In the 1919 Indianapolis 500, three of them started as pure Peugeots and the fourth as Peugeot with Premier engine, driven by Goux and finishing third.
On condition that the 1918 Resta special was based on a 4.5-litre Peugeot chassis and that the 4.5-litre production was limited to four chassis, this Peugeot/Premier was nothing (could not be anything) else than the 1918 Resta special entered under another name.

Later in the 1919 season, the Peugeot/Premier was further modified and again entered as Resta special (in the 1919 Indianapolis race Goux used another steering wheel than Resta on the photo – Goux preferred more flexible steering wheels – possibly the steering wheel was replaced for this race).

[Michael Ferner]

The Los Angeles Times, August 6 in 1916:

Dario Resta has signified his intention of making Southern California his home for the winter even though he does not race in events here. The indomitable English pilot will spend the most of his time in the shops of the Harry Miller company also, in redesigning the motor of his Peugeot.

Neither Resta nor his Peugeot showed in any races during 1917, except for the driver's short stint in a Frontenac at Sheepshead Bay. Did Harry Miller built the engine for the "Resta Special", and modify the EX5 chassis???

Robert is right in that four 4.5-litre Peugeots ran in the 1919 Indy 500: Goux's car was described as "ex-Boillot/ex-Aitken" (and didn't have a Premier engine at that: its original Peugeot engine was repaired with one block of a Premier engine after a con-rod had pierced the original Peugeot block two days before the race - perhaps a few other parts of the Premier engine were also used for the rebuild, but at least 80 % of it remained original Peugeot), and Ray Howard's as "Resta's 1916 winner". Which leaves the Wilcox car as the former Merz car, and Klein's as the Mulford/de Palma car.

Now, how could Howard drive the 1916 winner, if it became the "Resta Special"??? A. G. Kaufman and the "Peugeot Auto Racing Co." in New York still had two other Peugeots - the 1913 Coupe de l'Auto cars, driven in 1915 by Caleb Bragg/Frank Galvin/George Babcock and Jack Le Cain!!! Maybe they put the Resta engine in the EX4 chassis, and Resta his new (Miller-built?) engine into the redesigned EX5???

[bradbury west]

Michael, any chance of posting the original photographs again, please?
Roger Lund