42 replies to this topic

[Arturo Pereira]

Hi
I downloaded the clip posted at this link http://tbk.fameflame...pic.php?t=13771 and there John Surtees clearly made some statements.
One of them really took my attention. He said that leaving Ferrari in mid 1966 was a big mistake for him and that, if he would have stayed, Ferrari could have won not only the 1966 Championship, but also the 1967 and 1968 ones. He also had nice words talking about Enzo Ferrari and blamed some of the Team managers for many mistakes made in those years.
In the past, I;ve heard his relation with Enzo Ferrari was far from being good and also that he had made some 'politically wrong' gestures at the podium when he won the 1967 Italian GP, driving for Honda by then.
These last 'rumours' does not fit with what I have just heard from John Surtees in that clip and so I would want to know your thoughts about these statements

Thanks in advance !!

[Hugo Boecker]

May be he gets older and wiser !?

[Zawed]

My understanding from reading is that one factor in the decision of Surtees to leave Ferrari was the conduct of Dragoni (spelling is probably wrong, sorry) who was the team manager at the time. I didn't think the Enzo Ferrari relationship was an issue, rather it was the hanger-ons who controlled the information to Enzo.

[Ray Bell]

That's also my understanding... that the ones running the team made life hard for FJ.

Wasn't Tavoni another in the thick of it?

[Gary Davies]

Originally posted by Ray Bell
... that the ones running the team made life hard for FJ.

Ray this is not the first time you have referred to Surtees as 'Fast John', and that might indeed have been a moniker that was used in some quarters. But I do not recall its use while he was racing.

What I do recall is the term 'Big John'.

Anyone else in the Fast John camp? Perhaps, for some reason, it was an Aussie thing.

[TIPO61]

Didn't the moniker stand for...Fearless John?

[TIPO61]

I should have typed 'doesn't' instead of 'didn't.'
We're fortunate to have him still.

[Roger Clark]

Originally posted by Ray Bell

Wasn't Tavoni another in the thick of it?

Not Tavoni, who left before Big John arrived.

I'd never heard of Fearless John until I found TNF.

[Ray Bell]

Originally posted by Roger Clark
Not Tavoni, who left before Big John arrived.

I'd never heard of Fearless John until I found TNF.

Thanks for the correction, Roger...

'Fearless John' was, I'm fairly sure, Henry N Manney's name for Surtees. It was commonly used in at least one major American magazine, anyway, and I think it was Manney in Road & Track.

'Fast John' I have never recognised.

I think 'Big John' was the Italian view, no doubt dating back to his motorcycling days.

[David Hyland]

Originally posted by Ray Bell
I think 'Big John' was the Italian view, no doubt dating back to his motorcycling days.

This post suggests that 'Big John' is actually a mistranslation of the Italian 'Il Grande John', which correctly translates as 'John the Great'.

[eccolo]

'Fearless John' was, I'm fairly sure, Henry N Manney's name for Surtees.

Ray,

You are correct. What a memory! I read it in a 1968 or 1969 R&T (or both) a week ago.

Franco Gozzi devotes 3 pages of his book to the circumstances under which Surtees and Ferrari separated. According to him, Dragoni was the cause.

[KJJ]

From what I've read Big John thought Dragoni favoured Bandini. John went to have it out with Enzo Ferrari, a meeting which led to them agreeing to part company. Surtees blamed the fact that Ferrari didn't go to the races and relied on various friends to inform him of what was going on. In later years John says Ferrari used to see the races on TV and was much better informed.

Interestingly Surtees seems to have liked Bandini but didn't get on with Mike Parkes?

[petefenelon]

Originally posted by KJJ
From what I've read Big John thought Dragoni favoured Bandini. John went to have it out with Enzo Ferrari, a meeting which led to them agreeing to part company. Surtees blamed the fact that Ferrari didn't go to the races and relied on various friends to inform him of what was going on. In later years John says Ferrari used to see the races on TV and was much better informed.

Interestingly Surtees seems to have liked Bandini but didn't get on with Mike Parkes?

Almost inevitable, especially in a politicised environment like Ferrari - Surtees was a driver who thought of himself as an engineer too, Mike was an engineer who thought of himself as a driver too. The fact that both were good enough at the "other" half of their job to get near the top in it (John as a constructor, Mike as a GP driver) says a lot for the talent of the two men. But guys that talented, with overlapping skills, in the same team, and that team a political snakepit..... it's a recipe for disaster isn't it? Especially as Surtees comes across as a rather fiercely determined sort of guy, and by all accounts Mike was considerably more relaxed about life yet still achieved his high goals....

[Ray Bell]

And I always thought it was the fact that Surtees was worried Parkes would get the upper hand and have to drive cars with a long wheelbase...

[Macca]

Dragoni favoured Bandini because he was from the north of Italy too, and Scarfiotti because he was related to the Agnelli family; and he was anti- everyone else, even Baghetti (from southern Italy) and Vaccarella (from Sicily).

In 1962 at the Nurburgring he said on the telephone to Enzo after the race, and in Phil Hill's hearing, "Your great champion did nothing". In 1963 at the first race Surtees did, at Sebring, Dragoni let another driver take the car that Surtees had been allocated and had set-up for himself, and justed walked away with a shrug when Surtees complained; he must have been hoping that Surtees would walk out on the spot, and he nearly did.

He put Scarfiotti in the car for the start at Le Mans in 1966 instead of Surtees firstly, I'm sure, to creep to Gianni Agnelli, and secondly to hack off Surtees; the question of the best tactic for winning the race seems to have been a minor priority.

And though Surtees has never publicly said what he discussed with Ferrari at the crisis meeting when he had driven to Maranello, I suspect that he gave Enzo a 'him-or-me' ultimatum which put Ferrari in an impossible position because Dragoni, who was a wealthy industrialist, was probably putting money into Ferrari which they couldn't manage without.

As to whether Surtees would have won in 1966 and maybe 1967 and 1968................hmmmmmmmm

In the car that Bandini drove at Rheims, would he have had a gentler touch and not broken the throttle cable? Would the regular "metalworkers' strike" that prevented them going to Brands have been avoided? How would the Ferrari have fared on the oily Zandvoort track against the lighter Brabhams?

In 1967 and 1968 his luck would have had to have been a lot better than Chris's; maybe in 1967 he would have been faster than Chris and taken enough points from the Brabhams to make it a four-way fight with Jack, Denny and Jim.


Paul M

[petefenelon]

Originally posted by Macca


As to whether Surtees would have won in 1966 and maybe 1967 and 1968................hmmmmmmmm

1967 - Surtees gets cheesed-off with the big ugly lump that drags the V12 engine round and goes off and hacks up a proprietary chassis to carry it - and wins the Italian GP.

Of course, it's not the "Hondola" in this alternate universe, but the "Ferrola" - I wonder if that could've happened? - after all, Enzo loved engines.......;)

[Ralliart]

Surtees said in his autobiography that, during his time with Ferrari, sports cars racing had priority over F1, that he, therefore, was always playing catch-up and, by the time Ferrari put the emphasis on F1, it was too late. The Old Man didn't attend the races, was dependent on his minions for information, and that he, Surtees, felt that his '64 championship was not as deserved, for want of a better word, whereas he felt sure '66 would have been his year if he could've stayed. There was frustration at Monaco '66 when he wanted to race the V-6 and felt he would have been very competitive there but was forced to race the V-8. Further frustration ensued at Spa when Dragoni ragged on him, telling him how to drive, and the final nail in the coffin occurred at Le Mans. Surtees had done everything he could, lived in Italy, enjoyed the Old Man's esteem as probably no other Ferrari had before him, learned the language to the extent that he became fluent, drove his cojones off, knew what was in the pipeline as far as development, and saw it all go down the drain when the Old Man, ultimately, decided to retain Dragoni. It raises the question, to me at least, why Ferrari chose, in effect, Dragoni over Surtees? "Car & Driver" ran a series of photos of Surtees and Ferrari having lunch together and going there or coming back. I mean, they had their arms linked as they walked. Ferrari feeding Surtees a forkful of linguini or whatever. Smiles all around. Jackie Ickx has said that he was one of the few drivers who could knock on Ferrari's door and be invited into the inner sanctum without having to wait for an audience with the Old Man and Niki Lauda was definitely one of the Old Man;s favorites (before his accident) but I've never seen any photos of them in the type of situation as Surtees and Ferrari. Did Dragoni have Ferrari blackmailed or what?

[Doug Nye]

John was confronted with an untenable situation at Ferrari and things were said to him by Dragoni - and things were done by Forghieri - which the Old Man could not un-say nor un-do - and which would have left something hanging over the driver's head which no driver, no sportsman, no Man, could possibly have tolerated.

The patrician ex-Haileybury Michael Parkes could, sadly, be an insufferable snob, and the tension between himself and John Surtees was perhaps as much class related as a sporting or engineering rivalry or personal antipathy.

In addition John simply didn't rate Parkesi's much-vaunted formally-qualified engineering capability, and the behaviour of the prototype 275GTB (its chassis Parkes-influenced) convinced him he was absolutely right.

A convinced Surtees is utterly unshakeable.

Parkes seemed to regard Surtees as a common oik whose real place was astride a motorcycle, probably delivering despatches to proper officers...

At best they tolerated one another and when teamed together in the P3 at Monza '66 - John fresh from his terrible Mosport Lola T70 shunt - it was actually Surtees who ended up doing most of the driving in the rain without a windscreen wiper while Parkes had apparently given up their cause as lost.

I believe that Dragoni even then reported to The Old Man that Parkes had earned the victory...which was a version of the truth that Surtees did not much appreciate. From that point these parallel relationships - Surtees/Parkes, Surtees/Dragoni, Surtees/Ferrari - were on an ever steepening slope.

Many years later The Old Man said to John "Let's remember just the good times" - and they shook hands and agreed to do so.

It's not a bad philosophy.

DCN

[petefenelon]

Originally posted by Ralliart
Surtees said in his autobiography that, during his time with Ferrari, sports cars racing had priority over F1, that he, therefore, was always playing catch-up and, by the time Ferrari put the emphasis on F1, it was too late.

A very curious book, that is (if you mean "John Surtees: World Champion"). Skates over acres of controversy, treats Team Surtees as an afterthought, but is happy to spend pages talking about minor tweaks to his early bikes.... and the odd political rant from Il Grande John. Great on his bike years and his early days in cars, up to his '64 title, but I feel that it becomes rather unreliable and skimpy after that - Il Grande John seems to be too much of a gent to feel the need to open the can of worms that was his later time at Ferrari.

[David McKinney]

Originally posted by Ralliart
Surtees said in his autobiography that, during his time with Ferrari, sports cars racing had priority over F1, that he, therefore, was always playing catch-up and, by the time Ferrari put the emphasis on F1, it was too late.

I'm not sure if it's the same thing, but I've heard Surtees say Ferrari gave sportscar racing priority each year until after Le Mans, which explains why the GP cars always got more competitive in the second half of the season

[Ray Bell]

While Surtees may have said it, it was also more or less common knowledge that Ferrari pushed the sports cars until Le Mans and if F1 lost out because of it then so be it...

I know I read that in several magazines, and probably from 1962 onwards.

[Arturo Pereira]

Thank you very much for your answers guys

Excellent picture of the situation's John Surtees faced in his years with Ferrari. Dragoni's and Parkes' roles seem clear to me, but I did not know Mauro Forghieri had also a role here.

Doug,

is there a way to put some light on JS' opinion about the performance of the Ferrari 312 F1 being a good mean to with 1966, 1967 and maybe 1968 Championships ?? JS talked about this lately so I guess he has a very good perspective of the events after a bit more of 30 years and he does not seem to me like a man who would say something like this without good reasons.

Since Forghieri's points were made clear, I deleted the respective question.

[dmj]

Originally posted by Doug Nye
Many years later The Old Man said to John "Let's remember just the good times" - and they shook hands and agreed to do so.

It's not a bad philosophy.

DCN

Interesting. Cimarosti says that these words were said already at their parting lunch in 1966, stating that they separated as friends. To add to first question, Cimarosti's review of 1966 season gives impression that he is more or less sure a combination Surtees-Ferrari would be sure bet for title.

[Ray Bell]

I don't doubt at all that 1966 was a title earmarked for FJ...

With their leading driver leading the title going into the British GP, I'm sure the metalworkers would have forgotten their strike long enough to make it there. He would most likely have won in France, and surely the Ferrari was sufficiently better than the Cooper at the Nurburgring for him to have turned around that dice with Brabham.

Italy... well, maybe he would have been forced to let Lorenzo win there... but undoubtedly a good result as Ferrari rode the crest of a wave on home soil.

So, let's say a win in France, a second at Brands Hatch, 9 points instead of 6 at the German and another six at Monza... that more than makes up what he needed to overtake the 39 Jack would have had.

1967? Well, bouyed by that performance, and with FJ in a strong position to call the shots, it would be most likely the car would have been better and he could continue the string of wins as the 49s worked out all the pieces they had that they could break and Jack staggered a little without having been bouyed by the '66 win.

For 1968, with this background, I'm sure the Repco quad cam would have been sorted out a year earlier in the face of all this, probably with the right oil in the cam boxes... Jack might have got this one.

[scheivlak]

Originally posted by Ralliart
There was frustration at Monaco '66 when he wanted to race the V-6 and felt he would have been very competitive there but was forced to race the V-8.

Well, add a few cylinders to that....
Anyway, John was still pretty competitive (leading the race IIRC) with the 3.0 V12 until he met problems and retired.

[scheivlak]

Originally posted by Doug Nye
John was confronted with an untenable situation at Ferrari and things were said to him by Dragoni - and things were done by Forghieri - which the Old Man could not un-say nor un-do - and which would have left something hanging over the driver's head which no driver, no sportsman, no Man, could possibly have tolerated.

The patrician ex-Haileybury Michael Parkes could, sadly, be an insufferable snob, and the tension between himself and John Surtees was perhaps as much class related as a sporting or engineering rivalry or personal antipathy.

In addition John simply didn't rate Parkesi's much-vaunted formally-qualified engineering capability, and the behaviour of the prototype 275GTB (its chassis Parkes-influenced) convinced him he was absolutely right.

A convinced Surtees is utterly unshakeable.

Parkes seemed to regard Surtees as a common oik whose real place was astride a motorcycle, probably delivering despatches to proper officers...

At best they tolerated one another and when teamed together in the P3 at Monza '66 - John fresh from his terrible Mosport Lola T70 shunt - it was actually Surtees who ended up doing most of the driving in the rain without a windscreen wiper while Parkes had apparently given up their cause as lost.

I believe that Dragoni even then reported to The Old Man that Parkes had earned the victory...which was a version of the truth that Surtees did not much appreciate. From that point these parallel relationships - Surtees/Parkes, Surtees/Dragoni, Surtees/Ferrari - were on an ever steepening slope.

Many years later The Old Man said to John "Let's remember just the good times" - and they shook hands and agreed to do so.

It's not a bad philosophy.

DCN

Whaaa... what a priceless post!
And talking about priceless: has anybody else ever seen that pic of the first row of the grid of the 1966 French GP, with Surtees in his Cooper-Mas between Bandini and Scarfiotti - right at the moment when in a split second just before the start John and Lorenzo look straight at each other? I remember something like that from a 1966 Dutch magazine ("Autovisie") - an entire moviescript in just 1 single picture.

And talking about moviescripts - couldn't a reality based movie about the 1966 Surtees/Ferrari saga be even 10 times better than the Frankenheimer Grand Prix movie (though that wasn't bad at all)?

[Tom Glowacki]

Anthony Pritchard's recent book, Scarlet Passion, has Gozzi's, Surtees' and Forghieri's versions.

Gozzi says Surtees accused Dragoni of being "incompetent and a dictator" and Dragoni called Surtees "ill-mannered and untrustworthy". This happens in the context of Ferrari seeing the Lola diversion as disloyalty which grew out of hand. Gozzi was sent to the Belgium GP to can Surtees, but Surtees thwarted that by winning the race, then Dragoni added Scarfiotti as a co-driver with Parkes and Surtees and that was that.

Forghieri has Ferrari jealous about the Lola deal, friction set in, Surtees and Dragoni had their problems, and Ferrari told Dragoni to can Surtees. Forghieri says he naturally took the boss' side, which Surtees did not understand.

Surtees has Ferrari cool with the Lola drive but Dragoni viewing Surtees as a threat due to his bringing in outsiders, mainly English, into Ferrari. He claims Dragoni and senior management misled Ferrari about Surtees, that Forghieri did not stand up for him, and so he had to quit.

What a soap opera.

[Dave Wright]

Originally posted by petefenelon


1967 - Surtees gets cheesed-off with the big ugly lump that drags the V12 engine round and goes off and hacks up a proprietary chassis to carry it - and wins the Italian GP.

Of course, it's not the "Hondola" in this alternate universe, but the "Ferrola" - I wonder if that could've happened? - after all, Enzo loved engines.......;)

In 1967 Ferrari had got cheesed off with the big ugly lump too. By Monza, the 312 was one of the lightest cars at the weigh-in. Indeed, Chris Amon really rated the handling too. Ironically, it was the engine he wasn't so keen on.

I think Surtees would have won the 1966 championship if he'd stayed at Ferrari. 1967 is harder to call - but I think it was a possibility. Amon showed the 312 was as quick as the BT24, he just had trouble getting past sometimes. 1968? - hard to see Ferrari beating the Cosworths.

[Hugo Boecker]

Originally posted by Dave Wright

I think Surtees would have won the 1966 championship if he'd stayed at Ferrari. 1967 is harder to call - but I think it was a possibility. Amon showed the 312 was as quick as the BT24, he just had trouble getting past sometimes. 1968? - hard to see Ferrari beating the Cosworths.

If you talk about ifs 1968 If Clark survived unbeliveble to see Ferrari beating the Lotus 49 -Cosworths

[Ralliart]

Henry Manney wrote in his report of Le Mans '66:
"...it turned out...(that) were too many drivers summoned for the available Ferraris...after some discussion it was agreed that Scarfiotti, as surplus, should act as reserve drivers for the P3s. The official reason for Scarfiotti being in reserve was 'in case Surtees got tired' which is all very well except that John came down before Friday's practice to find Scarfiotti's name on his car's worksheet as third driver.
"Smelling a rat, the Ferrari No. 1 then approached team manager Dragoni about this, only to get a very frosty reception indeed, culminating in the invitation that if he didn't like it, he could just not drive. As Dragoni has been promoting his Italian drivers and picking away at the conscientious Surtees for a couple of years now, John figured that the time for a showdown had come and left! He then telephoned Ferrari in Modena, who refused to speak to him, by intimation anyway thus proving that Ferrari knew all about it, beforehand, and finally got a telegram out of the Commendatore saying that Dragoni and Ing. Forghieri were his appointed representatives and that he could not intercede until he talked personally to all parties. Which meant the week after Le Mans. Naturally the bush telegraph got to work right away and almost before John had got back to the hotel Shelby was on the blower offering him a Ford drive! Surtees had some hope of saving the mess, though, and turned it down. This uproar results in Surtees losing his Ferrari F1 ride for the rest of the season and probably the World Championship as well; not only for himself but also for Ferrari, as Bandini is simply not quick enough on the fast circuits that remain. It also put the kibosh on a possible Ferrari victory for Le Mans, as without running anybody down, the Surtees/Parkes combination is the only one that would be quick enough and crafty enough to stay up with the Fords for the whole distance."
Later in the article Manney, in describing practice, writes: "Fearless John was..."

[Ray Bell]

That does seem to give a good rundown...

I would believe that Manney was in pretty thick with both Surtees and other members of the Ferrari team.

The subtlety of that opening line in your quote... "it turned out that there were too many drivers summoned..." that's a classic bit of understated writing, allowing readers to conjure up their own thoughts. Likewise, "after some discussion" could be read many ways.

And I'm sure most of them were right!

[Ralliart]

Interestingly, Ford was short of drivers as, (as Manney wrote):
"...Stewart's shunt at Spa, Ruby's plane accident, and Foyt's burned hands from Milwaukee made them three good drivers short." I hadn't realized, until reading this account, that Stewart (since the Fords went 1-2-3 that year) had (another) opportunity to add a Le Mans to his CV while, for Foyt, it might've been two in a row and, for Ruby, a first. Manney goes on to give the rundown on the Ferrari lineup and then wrote: "...but the big suprise was that he left the quickest injection Dino at home and handed three twin-plug carburetor roadsters to NART (Kolb/Follmer, Vaccarella/Casoni) and Maranello GB (Salmon/Hobbs). Further pecularities of the Italian temperament came to light when it turned out that not only were there too many drivers summoned for the available Ferraris but that some of them were highly discontented with their lot (Vaccarella, for instance). The reason for all this gradually was revealed when after some discussion..."

[KarlOakie Research]

Interesting in some ways just how little attention Denis Jenkinson paid -- at least in print -- to the whole Ferrari/Surtees dust-up. About the most that gets into Motor Sport is related to the fuel Shell/BP issue regarding Surtees: "When Surtees met Enzo Ferrari after Le Mans and they mutually agreed to to terminate their relationship, Ferrari naturally had no wish to terminate his contract with Shell, and neither did Surtees, for they were financing him for his Lola activities as well as Ferrari racing, but unfortunately the only team that had a vacancy for Surtees in mid-season was Cooper and they were contracted to the British Petroleum Company." (Motor Sport, August 1966, p. 701)

[Doug Nye]

DSJ regarded what had gone on as "politics" and "people stuff". He didn't have much interest or enthusiasm for writing about shabby "politics" and/or "people stuff" of that kind, and therefore ignored it...leaving such "gossip" to the weekly "comics"...

DCN

[Doug Nye]

...and on October 25... Congratulations to John Surtees on the 40th anniversary of his Drivers' World Championship win, decided by the result of the 1964 Mexican Grand Prix, 40 years ago today...

DCN

[Ray Bell]

Indeed... a special day it was for me too...

There are just too many Jim Clark fans in this world!

[Hugo Boecker]

Originally posted by Doug Nye
...and on October 25... Congratulations to John Surtees on the 40th anniversary of his Drivers' World Championship win, decided by the result of the 1964 Mexican Grand Prix, 40 years ago today...

DCN

Remember, Graham scored more points and didn't need Bandini's help !

[Ray Bell]

Hrrumph... I was going to say too many Graham Hill fans too...

[Rupertlt1]

When was Surtees first race in a Ferrari? First race in a works Ferrari?

 

RGDS RLT 

[Tim Murray]

His first race as an official member of the Ferrari works team was the 1963 Sebring 12 Hours, which he won with Scarfiotti in a 250P after his first falling out with Eugenio Dragoni over car allocation. He’d done several races in 1962 in the Maranello Concessionaires 250GTO, which might count as a works-backed entry.

[Collombin]

I never know quite how complete race listings in biographies and autobiographies really are, but the list in "John Surtees - World Champion" has Mallory Park, 11th June 1962 as his first race in the 250GTO.

[2F-001]

His first race as an official member of the Ferrari works team was the 1963 Sebring 12 Hours, which he won with Scarfiotti in a 250P after his first falling out with Eugenio Dragoni over car allocation. He’d done several races in 1962 in the Maranello Concessionaires 250GTO, which might count as a works-backed entry.

Those two didn't get off to a good start, did they?
JS's whole time at Ferrari must have been fairly uncomfortable; though, with the benefit of hindsight, that would seem inevitable.

Edited by 2F-001, 20 January 2024 - 09:32.

[Doug Nye]

Remember that John used personal unhappiness with a situation to fuel his personal competitiveness. The more he felt under threat the quicker he became...and that's 'quicker' from an already very fast starting level...  

 

DCN