Jump to content


Photo

Lotus T33 - BRM vs Climax


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 Vicuna

Vicuna
  • Member

  • 1,588 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 18 March 2005 - 21:38

Was there a reason why Graham Hill drove a BRM engined Lotus at Monaco in 1967 and Jim Clark drove a Climax engined one?

Advertisement

#2 GIGLEUX

GIGLEUX
  • Member

  • 1,519 posts
  • Joined: April 03

Posted 18 March 2005 - 21:59

At the beginning of 1967 season the Ford DFV engine was not ready. For the first WC race in South
Africa , Team Lotus entered two 43 cars with the H16 BRM engines. The 43 was certainly not the car for Monaco so two 33s were entered, Clark with the 2000cc V8 engine he used during a great part of the 1966 season(33-R14), and as only one such engine was at disposal, G.Hill, ex BRM driver inherited a 2000-V8 BRM engine, in fact the combination used by Arundell the preceding season (33-R11).

#3 Vicuna

Vicuna
  • Member

  • 1,588 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 18 March 2005 - 22:22

Agree with that but what I'm wondering is why did Hill have a BRM and Clark a Climax?

Why not both with BRMs or both with C-Cs?

Was it because each knew the engine charactertics of the respective engines?

#4 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 8,307 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 18 March 2005 - 22:25

Essentially there was only one 2-litre Climax V8 available to Team, while Graham could rely upon having a halfway-decent BRM V8 provided by his old team-mates at BRM - though they would not do him too much of a favour in his now rival role. Monaco was a uniquely well-suited circuit for 2-litre cars amongst a 3-litre field, and Team's only available proven 3-litre engine was the hefty BRM H16 - a proven blind alley.

DCN

#5 Vicuna

Vicuna
  • Member

  • 1,588 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 18 March 2005 - 22:40

Thanks DCN

#6 Macca

Macca
  • Member

  • 3,311 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 16 May 2005 - 12:33

The race list/chassis number index in Tipler's book is interesting - in early 1966 R11 used a Climax but then obviously Team Lotus realised that the H16 for the 43's would be a) heavy, b) useless; and since Climax were officially out of racing, they had only made two 2-litre engines (using a long stroke crank in a big bore engine) so Lotus had to give Clark the best chance by keeping one as a spare for R14.

It was difficult to swap back-and-forth with a BRM V8, even if they used a gearbox with the same right-hand linkage as the ZF; the water-pipes were different sizes, for instance.

So they put a readily-available BRM V8 into R11 to give Pete Arundell a chance to get in the races, and that was what Graham Hill was stuck with in early 1967 when he replaced Pete.

Paul M

#7 Mac Lark

Mac Lark
  • Member

  • 744 posts
  • Joined: April 02

Posted 17 May 2005 - 05:48

Didn't ACBC tell Reg Parnell that a BRM would never work in a Lotus 25?

Different CoG??

Presumably that would be the same for the Lotus 33??

#8 Macca

Macca
  • Member

  • 3,311 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 17 May 2005 - 16:15

Yes, I'd heard that story..............but it struck me as odd, because the BRM V8 always looked lower than the Climax; the intakes were certainly lower, and the lower camshaft cover on each side of the BRM was lower than on the Climax, so it looked as though it should have a lower C of G.

Wonder if there was some ulterior motive in ACBC's comments...............



Paul M

#9 Peter Morley

Peter Morley
  • Member

  • 1,887 posts
  • Joined: October 02

Posted 17 May 2005 - 17:25

It could just be the difficulty of plumbing the BRM.
A period article about Ian Raby's Brabham (which he converted from Climax to BRM) said that BRMs need larger diameter oil & water pipes (e.g. they rely on higher flow rates).
Maybe ACBC felt that it would be hard to fit suitable sized pipes (plus radiators & tanks) in the confines of a 25 tub.

The change of gearbox (no one else had ZFs) could have more effect on the c of g than the engine type - the crank centerline being determined by the gearbox input shaft - the engines are so very similar that it is hard to imagine there is a significant difference in their weight distribution.

#10 Paul Parker

Paul Parker
  • Member

  • 1,685 posts
  • Joined: October 02

Posted 18 May 2005 - 13:48

For the record I was told by one of the BRM engineers that the Coventry Climax V8s always had more torque, if less actual BHP, than the Bourne equivalent.

#11 Macca

Macca
  • Member

  • 3,311 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 18 May 2005 - 14:52

Team did try a Hewland in a Climax 25 when they were very short of ZFs..............of course, ACBC famously did not get on with Mike Hewland, and slagged off his boxes as a 'bunch of old mangle gears'..........until he had to use them in 1968.

Did Parnell run Hewlands with their BRMs? The engines certainly looked to be mounted as low in their 25s as the Climax in the works cars - maybe the ZF was lighter.


Paul M

#12 275 GTB-4

275 GTB-4
  • Member

  • 6,815 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 14 June 2005 - 09:15

anyone posted this before...http://members.madas...brm-e-V16.htm...

#13 Macca

Macca
  • Member

  • 3,311 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 14 June 2005 - 13:41

That link didn't work, try this:

http://members.madas...gkinson/brm.htm


Paul M

#14 Macca

Macca
  • Member

  • 3,311 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 16 June 2005 - 13:12

Posted Image

Regarding what gearboxes the Parnell Racing 25s used - I found this shot of Hailwood's car at the European GP at Brands in 1964.


Paul M

#15 Roger Clark

Roger Clark
  • Member

  • 5,999 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 16 June 2005 - 19:19

Originally posted by Macca
Posted Image

Regarding what gearboxes the Parnell Racing 25s used - I found this shot of Hailwood's car at the European GP at Brands in 1964.


Paul M

I think that Parnell used Hewlands throughout 1964, the only exception being the Austrian Grand Prix where Amon drove R4 on loan from the factory with Climax and ZF. Two weeks later, at Monza, Parnell had bought the car and fitted a BRM and Hewland.