Hesketh 308 - a World Championship winner?
#1
Posted 15 May 2006 - 22:54
I just re-read the Biography that Gerald Donaldson wrote about James Hunt, and it occurred to me- was the Hesketh 308 ever a world-championship winner? Or was it just the team doing the right job, and having a good string of luck?
Advertisement
#2
Posted 15 May 2006 - 22:59
Or have I misunderstood your question?
#3
Posted 16 May 2006 - 02:37
And the Wolf WR1 is son-of 308, and with a bit more luck that could have been a championship winning car.
So there's a lot of good DNA in that particular bloodline, but the cosmos wasn't quite aligned right for Master James to win a title in 308.
#4
Posted 16 May 2006 - 16:20
#5
Posted 16 May 2006 - 18:19
Originally posted by MarkWill
Hi,
I just re-read the Biography that Gerald Donaldson wrote about James Hunt, and it occurred to me- was the Hesketh 308 ever a world-championship winner? Or was it just the team doing the right job, and having a good string of luck?
In answer to your questions:
1) NO
2) Not particularly
The Hesketh was part of the Cosworth/Hewland kit car generation and anyone with that combination in the back and a half decent design for the chassis always had a chance.
Hunt at that stage of his career was a bit hit or miss (just ask Dave Morgan!); the move to McLaren concentrated his talents and made him the deserved champion.
If the Hesketh team hadn't wasted so much money and directed their undoubted talents correbtly they might well have won the world championship; on the other hand they probably wouldn't have had as much fun!
#6
Posted 16 May 2006 - 18:46
Originally posted by Stephen W
If the Hesketh team hadn't wasted so much money and directed their undoubted talents correbtly they might well have won the world championship;
I doubt it. After all, they were up against Lotus, McLaren, Tyrrell, Ferrari. It was a tall order for a kit car privateer to win the chamionship.
The races I went to where Hunt took part in the 308 you kept an eye on him, but not much more; the reason was that Hunt might one day do well -- as he eventually did. For the opposite reason, around the same time, you still also kept on eye on drivers like Graham Hill or Chris Amon -- they were racers who had actually done well in the past.
#7
Posted 16 May 2006 - 22:10
#8
Posted 17 May 2006 - 02:27
Just a thought.
#9
Posted 17 May 2006 - 03:12
#10
Posted 17 May 2006 - 05:45
My point is if you look at the operational environment that the Hesketh was built and developed in, it really wasn't that much different than Tyrrell. Obviously what was different was Tyrrell was very serious where the party atmosphere of Hesketh got in the way both financially and in terms of the operational program. Was Lord Hesketh's bank account enough to overcome auto racing network that Tyrrell and JYS had, we'll never really know. Or would the Lord finally gotten 'serious'.
But from what I've read/seen, Harvey Postlethwaite may well have been a better designer than Derek Gardner. Both cars were simple, reasonably robust, aero efficient for their time, and each had some innovation. Both were built by small teams: Tyrrell in a lumber barn and, if I remember the story right, a run-down garage on the Lord's property somewhere. So why would the Tyrrell be a world champion car in comparison to the Hesketh? Perhaps it was JYS (three years or so in rated F1 team BRM) vs. Hunt the Shunt (really little or no F1 experience when).
#11
Posted 17 May 2006 - 05:52
#12
Posted 17 May 2006 - 08:14
Originally posted by MarkWill
I see that the 308E and the WR1 look quite similar, but the 308C was a really different fish, and thats the one that I was on about - driven by Mr. Hunt of course. As someone said - sometimes it was fast, and others it really wasn`t, so I wonder what the difference was down to?
308C was, I'm afraid, an utter dog in both Hesketh and Wolf-Williams (FW05) incarnations!
308/308B was a nice car.;)
#13
Posted 17 May 2006 - 08:22
Originally posted by Stephen W
If the Hesketh team hadn't wasted so much money and directed their undoubted talents correbtly they might well have won the world championship; on the other hand they probably wouldn't have had as much fun!
I'm not sure that I believe this. Yes, the Hesketh team were always up for fun and conspicuous displays of wealth, but I still regarded them as serious contenders. Harvey Postlethwaite had all the right credentials - don't forget the Hesketh take on the March 731 went better than the works effort, and there was a very capable team manager in the ample shape of Bubbles Horsley pulling the whole thing together.
#14
Posted 17 May 2006 - 14:12
Originally posted by petefenelon
308C was, I'm afraid, an utter dog in both Hesketh and Wolf-Williams (FW05) incarnations!
308/308B was a nice car.;)
Don't fully agree Pete. It scored some points towards the end of 75, so, although we know Hunt was pretty good at that time, it wasn't a complete dog. Only when SFW got his mits on it did it look awful, or maybe that was the drivers he employed...
#15
Posted 17 May 2006 - 14:27
Originally posted by Mallory Dan
Don't fully agree Pete. It scored some points towards the end of 75, so, although we know Hunt was pretty good at that time, it wasn't a complete dog. Only when SFW got his mits on it did it look awful, or maybe that was the drivers he employed...
James didn't like it much, though - he said it had a strange feel to it. And even to my non-engineer eyes, it just looked wrong. That very shallow monocoque can't have been very rigid, and it seemed strange to have the top pick up points for the front suspension mounted on separate and flimsy-looking fabricated pieces.
#16
Posted 18 May 2006 - 10:39
#17
Posted 18 May 2006 - 10:46
#18
Posted 18 May 2006 - 10:59
Originally posted by Mallory Dan
Much too techy for me Ian, can we get back to Politics !!!!
Well, the extreme right wing of the car was more or less the same as the extreme left wing, which is what I've been saying for ages.
#19
Posted 18 May 2006 - 11:29
Advertisement
#20
Posted 19 May 2006 - 00:04
Back to the 308C - it didn`t look any worse than other contenders of the time - was it really that "dodgy"? ( I suppose so, if Hunt said so, but if you compare it with the M23 brick, for sure it looks flimsier)
#21
Posted 19 May 2006 - 01:06
Originally posted by MarkWill
Back to the 308C - it didn`t look any worse than other contenders of the time - was it really that "dodgy"? ( I suppose so, if Hunt said so, but if you compare it with the M23 brick, for sure it looks flimsier)
It looked pretty flimsy to me, as did the original Lotus T77. Not sure any of the other contenders at that time struck me that way - the Ferraris, Tyrrells, brabhams, Marchs, Ligiers; Penskes; Fittis; Ensigns etc all seemed more substantial. Even the Shadows and the Surtees TS19 didn't seem quite as delicate as the 308C.
#22
Posted 19 May 2006 - 23:13
my chassis just got 1st in class in the Barcelona TGP race last weekend so can't be that much of a hound
#23
Posted 20 May 2006 - 15:24
#24
Posted 20 May 2006 - 15:33
#25
Posted 20 May 2006 - 15:50
Originally posted by RTH
This was a fascinating period for motor racing, loads of technical interest , personalities on and off the track , circuits with individuality, year long full of interest . With hindsight it's a pity we didn't realise how lucky we were at the time compared to the last couple of decades
Well, because I often look back to the races I went to in the 70s, I do think that I realized back then that I was lucky to be there, seeing Stewart, Fittipaldi, Peterson, Cevert, Hunt, Lauda, Hulme, Andretti, Scheckter etc at the wheel.
In retrospect, there were loads of world champions on the track, but you didn't know it at the time...
#26
Posted 20 May 2006 - 17:11
#27
Posted 20 May 2006 - 19:12
Originally posted by ian senior
James didn't like it much, though - he said it had a strange feel to it. And even to my non-engineer eyes, it just looked wrong. That very shallow monocoque can't have been very rigid, and it seemed strange to have the top pick up points for the front suspension mounted on separate and flimsy-looking fabricated pieces.
Funny, nearly every car built with a shallow tub semed to have torsional problems, maybe it just isn't the way forward??
#28
Posted 20 May 2006 - 19:37
Originally posted by f1steveuk
Funny, nearly every car built with a shallow tub semed to have torsional problems, maybe it just isn't the way forward??
Were there similar problems with Tyrrell 008? -- if anything, that seemed to have a shallower tub than the 308C...
#29
Posted 20 May 2006 - 19:43
Originally posted by petefenelon
Were there similar problems with Tyrrell 008? -- if anything, that seemed to have a shallower tub than the 308C...
I believe the 008 wasn't brilliant torsionally, which was again a problem with the Hill GH2. I think it was a problem that lead Gordon Murray to his "pyramid" solution for Brabham
#30
Posted 22 May 2006 - 00:42
#31
Posted 22 May 2006 - 08:54
Originally posted by f1steveuk
I believe the 008 wasn't brilliant torsionally, which was again a problem with the Hill GH2. I think it was a problem that lead Gordon Murray to his "pyramid" solution for Brabham
Was just thinking about the Hill GH2; which of course never raced as intended.
That these shallow (pre-carbon fibre) monocoques should have torsional problems does not surprise me, though. Just looking at them, combined with the "hole" for the driver, tells you that this must be a consideration.
As for Murray's Brabhams, the BT42 was designed in 1972 - long before the 308C, the GH2 and the 008. Was Murray that far ahead of his time ?
Not that he could not go wrong as well - just look at the surface radiators on the first BT46.
#32
Posted 22 May 2006 - 16:37
Gordon showed me some sketches he did in 70/71, of a shallow tub, to increase air flow to the rear wing. He said that he thought it may twist , so to get a mixture of low and torsional stability, he did the pyramid section. The idea of a shallow tub was inspired to him by an Indy car I believe.
#33
Posted 22 May 2006 - 17:21
Originally posted by f1steveuk
I suspect the idea behind the 008 front wings was to increase the cord line, more wing in the leagally allowed space.
Gordon showed me some sketches he did in 70/71, of a shallow tub, to increase air flow to the rear wing. He said that he thought it may twist , so to get a mixture of low and torsional stability, he did the pyramid section. The idea of a shallow tub was inspired to him by an Indy car I believe.
That Indy pyramid car was drawn by Maurice Phillippe for the Parnelli team. Joe Leonard would win the 1972 championship with it.
#34
Posted 22 May 2006 - 17:30
#35
Posted 22 May 2006 - 22:13
i will post a few pics as soon as i work out how to
we were very lucky with our car, it had remained unmolested since it was laid up and went into private collections, very few new parts were needed for the restoration and everything was pretty much there.
If only i could get drawings of the cars i work on it would make life very easy, i guess they are all out there some where!
#36
Posted 24 May 2006 - 22:10