117 replies to this topic

[pinchevs]

Was it really Ferrari at Spa 1968?
I always thought this was first tried by one of the British teams.

------------------

[Xaxor]

My guess is the Gold-Leaf Lotus 49B of Graham Hill in 1968 Monaco. I recall front wings and a swept-up duck-tail for downforce. The car caused a sensation by abandoning traditional national colours and painting the whole car with the sponsor's label.

[Dennis David]

Ferrari

------------------
Regards,

Dennis David
Yahoo = dennis_a_david

Life is racing, the rest is waiting

Grand Prix History
www.ddavid.com/formula1/

[Fast One]

Lotus and BRM ran FRONT wings at Monaco in '68. Can't remember if anyone else did. But Jack Brabham ran both front and rear winglets at Monza in 1967. Neither Ferrari, Lotus, Honda, or anyone else had them at that race. They were not full-width wings such as appeared in '68, but they were definite add-ons and therefore qualify in my mind.

Oddly enough, a Porsche ran a huge, full-width wing, mounted to the body amidships during practice at the 1000 km. race at the Nurburgring in 1956! Yes '56!!! I do not believe it ran during the race itself, but it was a decade earlier than Jim Hall's Chapparel.

[Tarnik]

Well, that is intruiging. Ferrari AND Brabham both were the first to run full-size, completely separate-from-the-body wings. This was Spa in 1968.

[Ray Bell]

I had a suspicion that it was the Dutch GP of 1968, with Ferrari and McLaren...
But I could be wrong.
The May brothers, who were Swiss, ran a big wing over their Porsche Spyder in 1956 - was it at the Nurburgring or the Targa Florio?
There were no wings anywhere on the Lotus or Ferrari that ran the Tasman Series in early 1968, but by Monaco there were moves afoot.

[PDA]

It was indeed the May bros, and it was 55 not 56. that ran the high wing Porsche at Nurburgring; but only in practice. The scrutineers would not let them race. Some said at the time that they were embaressing the Porsche works team, who's manager then had a word in the officials' ears.

the Lotus had nose wings that were rather like dive planes rather than full wings early in 68, but the first full wing was on the Ferrari at Spa. Lotus quickly followed with wings mounted higher, and directly onto the wheel hubs (the ferrari wing was mounted on struts which attached to the chassis).

In '55, the Mercedes Benz 300 SLR was fitted with a movable "air brake" behind the drivers head. the drivers raised it to assist braking, particularly at the end of the Mulsanne straight. Moss and Fangio quickly found that if they raised it partially, they could take the bend after the pits flat, whereas with it lowered they had to lift off the throttle.

[Fast One]

PDA--

They may have been there in '55, but I don't think so. Speedvision did a "Legends of Motorsport" episode of the '56 1000kms. and I saw the car then. The narrator even commented on it. I paid special attention when the cars came around on the 1st lap, and didn't see it in the field. Anyway, I know it was used for practice in '56. Maybe it was there a year earlier as well.

[Joe Fan]

Brabham and Ferrari were the first F1 teams to use wings. They were first used at the 1968 Belgium GP. One race prior this at the Monaco GP, Lotus used a "swoop tail" which I would classify as a spoiler. Wings were not a Formula One invention. The idea was copied from American Chaparral sports cars.

[Eric McLoughlin]

I always thought it was Ferrari and the replies seem to confirm this. At certain races in 1967 Jack Brabham's and Denny Hulme's Brabhams did feature what looked like air deflectors on each side of the nose cone but I have never been sure if they were there to generate downforce or to perform some other function.. It's hard to see what else they could have been used for. Unlike today, Formula 1 has not always been at the forefront of technology. On many occasions, GT and CanAm racing were well ahead. The May brother's Porsche and the Chaparral are classic examples of this. I saw the Porsche at the 1997 Goodwood Festival of Speed. The wing is mounted over the centre of the car and is painted Daylo Orange! Chaparall also ran a fan car in 1968 (I think), years before Brabham.

As far as I am aware, the oldest user of an inverted wing was on an experimental rocket powered car built by Fritz Von Opel in the 1920's. I'm also sure I've read somewhere that the record breaking Auto Unions of the 1930's also featured aerodynamic skirts running along the side of the car, 40 years before the Lotus 78 and 79.

[Fast One]

Eric--

If you saw the whole Brabham that Jack raced at Monza in '67, you would be sure the were functioning as wings. There was difinitely a rear "wing" on the car in the form of a sizable horizontal fin on either side of the engine cowling. Attached or not, they were wings. So it was Brabham, NOT Lotus, BRM, or Ferrari who brought wings to Grand Prix racing.

[Ray Bell]

Repco Brabhams of that era often had aluminium deflectors around the front of the opening through which the front suspension protruded. These were to assist in getting air to exhaust from the radiator, quite clearly their purpose, but perhaps understandably misunderstood today. That's nothing to do with the items mentioned by Fast One.
Anyone got pictures of those?

[Fast One]

There is a great shot on page 50 of the December, 1967 issue of Road & Track which clearly show the rear "wing" on one side. The front wings may be no more than you suggest, but their shape and location would have definitely created downforce, whatever their other functions. Black Jack was nobody's fool, and my bet is it was a two-for-one deal.

[Leo Landman]

Gentlemen, I quote from Mr. Oliver's excellent book, on the Spa '67 GP:
"During practice both 49s appeared with bib spoilers around the nose cone, the intention being to counter any negative lift that might be induced by the high speeds (...) they made the back end unstable since there was nothing to balance the downforce created at the front of the car..."

So it was Lotus in 1967, at least in F1. Brabham did turn up with a nouveaute in Monza '67: the bubble canopy over the cockpit! It wasn't used in the race - too stuffy.

In '68 all designers played around with fins, wings and spoilers.

Bye,
Leo

[Indian Chief]

Another question.
Did IndyCars use wings first or did F1 designers use them first on openwheelers?

[Fast One]

Leo's post led me to the September, 1967 Road & Track, where there was a picture of Clark's Lotus during the race, with no wings or spoilers of any kind, but, surprise, surprise, Black Jack Brabham had different spoilers on the front than those at Monza. The Spa versions could have only been for downforce. In addition, Black Jack is rinning the same rear wing he used at Monza. So, while Lotus may have practised with them, our man from Down Under was without question the first to use them in a race!

In addition, Vanwall showed up with a perspex bubble top for Stirling Moss' car at Monza in 1958. It only added 50 rpm down the straights, and Moss elected not to use it. Surely Chapman, not one to ever miss a trick, would have taken a look. But his bubble top at Spa was definitely not the first.

[MattC]

I seem to remember an item on (UK) TV, maybe last year, that showed how some F1 team (possibly Lotus) had 'discovered' downforce when they cut a different shape hole in the nose to improve airflow for cooling/engine-intake/some-other-reason. The hole happened to put part of the panel in a position to create downforce.
Anybody know anything about this? (It was probably a fairy story.... )

[Eric McLoughlin]

Matt C
The story about Lotus "discovering" downforce by accident in this way does sound a bit apoctyphal. Whenever one talks about innovation in Formula One, it's amazing how often Lotus gets the credit, even when they don't deserve it. In this case, it looks like the honours really belong to Brabham and Ferrari (at least as far as F1 is concerned). However, using shaped bodywork (as opposed to aerofoils) to generate downforce IS something that was pioneered by Lotus. The classic 70's wedge shaped Formula One car originated with the 1970 Lotus 72. This itself had evolved out of Lotus's experiences using the wedge shaped gas turbine car at Imdianapolis in 1968.

[Ray Bell]

The only magazine I have that covers that era is RCN, which has only one or two pics for GPs. It shows the little nose wings Brabham had at Spa, and also some shaping of the rear bodywork that is clearly for downforce. So the envelope is clearly pushed back to that race.
But in the same issue there's a picture of Foyt winning Indy, and his car has the wrap-around bib on the nose as Lotus used!
The really effective wings were those used later on by a number of teams that acted directly on the suspension. These didn't load up the springs, but showed themselves to be fragile.
I think Lotus were first, but Brabham had them front and rear, with a split in the middle at one time so that they acted independently on each wheel - must ask him why he did that! Never questioned it before...

[PDA]

Matt C - the cut a hole in the front because the bonnet (hood) is lifting at speed, is usually attributed to bruce Maclaren on his Cooper Oldsmobile sorts racer. I have a photo somewhere of Eion Young cutting the hole with tin snips after the practice session.

Fast one, - OK. I bow to your better knowledge with regard to the year.

[Fast One]

PDA--

Please do not bow, as my knowlwdge is superior to no one's. I just was lucky to see a show on the '56 race a few days before. Save your bows for Don, Dennis and Ray, the real gurus around here.

[pinchevs]

A quote from THE COMPLETE HISTORY OF GRAND PRIX MOTOR RACING by Adriano Cimarosti:
"The Beelgian GP was held on June 9th, a date of some historic significance, as the Ardennes race marked the first occasion on which GP cars ran with rear-mounted stabilising wings.
Lotus had an additional metal foil fitted to the wedge-shaped engine cover of their cars to increase downforce on the rear axle, while Ferrari mounted an aerofoil wing over the 312's engine, and with this Chris Amon was fastest in the first practice session. Soon after that the Brabham was also seen with a rear wing mounted over the engine, which distributed downforce more evenly over the whole car and not just on the rear suspension.

------------------

[Fast One]

I have the Cimarosti book, too. He was referring to Belgium, 1968. He is probably right as far as a full wing goes. But he's wrong in the larger sense. What Brabham ran on the front and rear were definitely wings in terms of function. Just because they emerged from the body, instead of standing independent of it does not change their function. Saying what Brabham ran weren't wings is analogous to saying that a Spitfire doesn't have wings because they emerge from the body. If you define it that way, a Spitfire does NOT have wings, but it still flies, so the definition is stupid.

What Brabham ran as early as Spa, 1967 (a whole year earlier than some "historians" have allowed, were protruding fins that generated downforce. Sounds like a wing to me. If you doubt it, look at the photographs. They can neither lie nor be misinformed. Lotus and Ferrari may have been the big names, but Black Jack brought wings to Grand Prix racing, and that is just a fact.

What is of more interest to me is the odd curiousity that the first two courses to see downforce on Jack's cars were Spa and Monza, what would today be considered very low-downforce tracks. At the 'Ring, Zandvoort, and Mosport, tracks where you would think that downforce would make a bigger difference, the cars ran without them. Any ideas why?

[This message has been edited by Fast One (edited 02-01-2000).]

[Fast One]

I was thumbing through my Brumm catalog and what should I see but the May brothers 1956 Porsche RS, complete with wing, in 1/43 scale. The wing mounted just behind the cockpit and was nearly as wide as the car! I wish I had a scanner...

[Ray Bell]

Perhaps, in those less well-informed days, they were seeking stability at speed rather than sheer cornering force. Perhaps, also, with the methods used, they didn't figure wind resistance into the equation.

[Todd]

I've seen pictures of the May 550. They were finding down force. They were faster than the Porsche works team who responded by having them sanctioned. The most pitiful part of the whole episode is that the racing establishment of Europe stuck their heads right back in the sand. They figured the episode was over once the May car was banned. None of those sorry SOBs really considered what had been foretold. I'm always amazed how far the F1 establishment still has their heads up their butts.

When Jacques Villeneuve came from CART to Williams, they didn't want to listen to what he had to say about set up. In the US, running ovals and road courses teaches teams to set up each corner of a car individually.
JV told Head that the circuit they were going to run had nine right hand turns, most of them fast, and only a few left hand turns, all but one of them slow. Why not set up the car to turn right and make time in all the right hand turns?

They looked at him like he was a backwards idiot and said that for road courses, you set up the front and the rear of the car. Left and right stay the same. It took them much of the season to finally wrap their narrow little minds around what he was saying and his famous outside pass of Schumacher was the result.

[pinchevs]

according to Ferrari's official book "Ferrari 1947-1997":
"In 1963-64 a Swiss engineer, Micheal May, was a consultant to Ferrari on its successful adoption of Bosch direct fuel injection for its racing engines (see... May had been the first to exploit downforce wings in circuit racing (as distinct from record breaking). His privately-entered Porsche 550 Spyder went so quickly in practice at a 1956 Nurburgring sports-car race that the Porsche factory team manager supported those who argued successfully for the removal of its big wing. May mentioned the function and the success of this device to Mauro Forghieri of Ferrari. A well, early in 1968 in New Zealand, Ferrari engineer Gianni Marelli had witnessed experiments with a primitive wing tried, but not raced, on a Lotus driven by Jimmy Clark. In the meantime it was no secret that in America the Chaparral team was using large wings on its Can-Am sports cars, although they had not yet demonstrated convincing superiority over the series Champions McLaren.
Ferrari itself had experimented with a rear wing on the 246 SP when the value of the tail spoiler was discovered in 1961, but that proved premature. Taking note now of all these influences and assessing as well the potential value to be obtained from a wing to aid cornering traction, Mauro Forghieri and his team engineered, built and mounted an aerodynamically-sound wing on the 312 F1 Ferrari and tested it in 1968.
The results were good enough for both the team's racing cars to appear with wings at Spa in Belgium for the GP on 9 June. On this fast circuit, where the wing would have maximum effect, both Ferrais qualified on the front row of the grid. One raced without its wing but the other, driven by Chris Amon, used it in the race - marking the first deployment of a downforce-generating wing in F1 competition.

------------------

[Keir]

Ferrari '68 at Spa is the correct answer.
Prior to this Bruce McLaren and Jack Brabham toyed around with wings, but neither used them in a qualifing or race situation.
It was only when Chris Amon came out during practice at Spa did everyone take wings seriously.
Spoilers and winglets are not considered wings. For example during the '69 Monaco GP, wings wre banned during practice, yet almost every team came out with spoilers and swept up tail sections, which were deemed legal.

[Fast One]

Like I said, the pictures don't lie...

By your definition, only WWI airplanes had wings. Anyway, think what you want, but the fact remains that Brabham was the first to use wings in a race, and that race was Spa, 1967.

[JimE]

It was indeed Ferrari and Brabham at Spa '68, but this followed an unofficial test by Lotus during the '68 Tasman tour of New Zealand when Jim Clark showed an interest in this and his mechanic constructed a small airfoil made from a section of helicopter rotor blade was mounted on struts above the gearbox. After testing Clark thought they should stop testing as Colin Chapman back in England at the time did not know what they were up to.
Gianni Marelli a young Ferrari engineer who was there at the time photographed it from every angle.

------------------
JimE

[Joe Fan]

Fast One, is this what you are looking for?

[Fast One]

Yes, bless you my boy!

I wish I could get you to scan in my pictures of the 1967 Brabham at Spa and Le Mans.

[This message has been edited by Fast One (edited 02-04-2000).]

[Ray Bell]

So do I. How do you post pictures here?

[Eric McLoughlin]

I've been digging through my 1967 "Motor Sports" (any excuse)to see if I can come up with any more detail on the Brabham nose "deflectors". Here is an extract from DSJ's report on the Belgian GP:

"The Lotus cars (49's) had small air deflectors on the sides of the nose cowling as they were anticipating reaching 190 mph and there was a feeling that the front might suffer from aerodynamic lift. Brabham was also trying similar deflectors".

This was in qualifying and, unfortunately, the race photos do not show any of the Brabhams and the picture of Clark's Lotus 49 shows that no deflector was fitted for the race.

The next month's magazine shows pictures from the French GP at Le Mans and DOES show Brabham's and Hulme's Brabhams with the deflectors fitted. On this occasion however, the caption beneath the photograph states, "The deflector by the front suspension is to encourage a suction to help extract radiator air".

Methinks perhaps that there was a bit of disinformation emanating from Black Jack's technical department.

Maybe if I bump into him at Goodwood this year I'll ask him what these things were really for.

[Fast One]

I just wrote to him a few days ago to ask. Have no idea if he'll answer, though. The front "deflectors" at Spa are quite different than the ones used at Monza. Road & Track has some in race shots of Spa and Monza showing them on the Brabham. I am equally, if not more interested in the rear "winglets". It's hard to tell from beat up old B&W photos at odd angles, but the Monza ones look a little bigger than the Spa versions. I may have to get a scanner, so I can show you guys. Maybe wiser brains than mine can make more out of them.

[Joe Fan]

It seems that there is a great debate on the definition of what a wing is here. Front fins shouldn't be classified as wings in my book nor should a swoop tail like the Lotus 49B that raced at Monaco in 1968.


Fast One, a beautiful car don't you think? All it needs now is an enclosed roof.;)

Ray, I don't have a scanner but if you can find a picture somewhere on the net, just right click on it, hit properties and it will show you the exact URL address specific for the picture (usually ends with .jpg or .JPG if it doesn't then you can't post just that specific picture) then type in this exact URL address on your post in between and it will appear. You can click on edit on my post above that has the picture in it to show you how it is done.

[Fast One]

I really think people are getting way too hung up on what is and isn't a wing, when the real question is: What does a wing do? The answer, for racing cars, is "generate downforce". If what we are looking to determine is what was the first aerodynamic device of a very specific type attached to the car in a very specific way to be used in Grand Prix racing, then it could well be the Amon Ferrari...or any other car in history, depending on how narrow we make our definition. But in the end, it is of no more interest than determining the first orange and white car to carry number XX that changed all four tires in under ten seconds.

When ideas are new, experiments tend to run in different directions. The pathe doesn't narrow until the best method is found...or really the best method the rulemakers decide to allow to continue. Brabham did not run wings of the sort that Amon's Ferrari did, but if the accomplished the same thing in terms of downforce, even if less efficiently, and if the otherwise resemble the aerodynamic device known generally as a wing, then what we have is a wing, like it or not. And like it or not, I am sure Black Jack's cars meet all the criteria. Including those front fins, spoilers, or whatever you want to call them.

The important question for history is who first used an aerodynamic device SPECIFICALLY TO CREATE DOWNFORCE. Attempts to narrow the question are attempts to manipulate the answer. Until Jack Brabham, any downforce created was incidental, not intended. After Jack Brabham were variations on and improvements on the theme. But Jack was first to attempt to create downforce on a Grand Prix car. Not Lotus, not BRM, and certainly not Ferrari, who historically have been one of the least innovative builders. By Monaco '68, Lotus and BRM had delibeately added devices to create downforce. By Spa, Ferrari raced a new kind of wing mounted to the body. Soon wings were mounted directly to the suspension because it was more efficient than mounting them to the body,
and that was the rage until too many failures led to the practice being banned.

The Ferrai method is the closest to resembling that of a modern car, but that was an accident of the rules, not of any special genius on Forgieri's part. So let's be broadminded and look at intent in evaluating the experiments. That way we won't be answering our questions before we ask them.

[Ray Bell]

I agree, anything that was deliberately aimed at downforce (and that later included the whole body shape of the 72) counts as a wing in this discussion.
My problem with posting pictures is that I can scan my own, but have no means of putting them up anywhere. What's the solution?

[Keir]

WOW, we are certainly getting serious here.
But, I must refer everyone to the 1969 issue of Road & Track, where in the Monaco Grand Prix report there is included the rules regarding what is, and is not, a wing.
I've seen photos of the '67 Brabham and by definition, Jack never ran wings. Aerodynamic devices, yes, but wings, no.
Not until Spa '68, after Amon's Ferrari.
I've been a racing fan for many years and spent ten years racing in Formula Vee and I've seen many the racer try to call a wing by another name to try to get it by the scrutineers, but wings are wings, and everything else isn't

[ZippyD]

This Keir character must be daft!!!! What in Jehova's great universe does driving a crummy Formula Vee have to do with wings of any kind? Wings on a Vee. Really!!!!!!

------------------
"Pete, Do you sometimes get tired? Lately I have been getting tired. Very tired."

[MattC]

Todd:
Is that story about JV and corner setups true?!? If so, it's a better story than any of the others above!
Could you supply more info on your sources, please?
(Incidentally, was that pass the one that some people put down to a backmarker giving JV the advantage?)

Matt

[Keir]

Wings on a Vee!!!!
That's against the rules mate, and we never broke the rules. Did we??
And what do you mean crummy?
We always cleaned the car after lunch.
It was the stains from the Molson that were hard to get out.
"Keep the change"

[Dennis David]

That makes sense to me in that the most important corners are the fast ones especially leading to long straights.

------------------
Regards,

Dennis David
Yahoo = dennis_a_david

Life is racing, the rest is waiting

Grand Prix History
www.ddavid.com/formula1/

[Ray Bell]

ZippyD - Colin Bond ran a wing on the Bardahl Vee before the rule relating to wings was written! But only once.
The reason we should count any appendage as a wing in this reasoning is because of the natural progression to put that appendage on supports and get it into the air.
Jack's things count!

[Keir]

OK, guys, I give up.
But you have to change the question to;
What was the first F1 car to run "things"
Then the '67 Brabham, Lotus, et al would
all qualify.
But the only correct answer to the original question is Chris Amon's Ferrari, Spa '68.
The problem I believe everyone is having is that the rules were written a long time ago, but I was actually around to see them go into effect. In all of the history of F1, no rule or description of an aerodynamic device was ever as clear. A wing can only be a wing.
And everything else isn't. Dig up the old FIA rule, it's clear today as it was then.

[davo]

Keir,

I think your confidence in the clarity of the definition of wings is eye popping. F1 rules have struggled to define also sorts of simple (?) things: rigid, fuel, round, flat, anything to do with Ferrari's barge boards

Wouldn't a "dive plane" odd little triangular "fins" on the lower front corners, with flow over both sides of a surface to generate downforce be a "wing"

Brahbam gets my gurnsey from F1 for intent and some level of understanding in generating lap time out of aerodynamics.

Does anyone get an earlier credit than May with his Porsche (broad or narrow definitions) if we are looking at automotive exploits other than F1?

[ZippyD]

Keir is right on two counts:
1- You have to define the differance between a true wing and "other" areodynamic devices.

2- He's old enough to remember them at their infancy. I think he's also old enough to remember pneumatic tires being used for the first time and who won the 1935 Targa Florio.

------------------
"Pete, Do you sometimes get tired? Lately I have been getting tired. Very tired."

[karlcars]

I would just like to thank one of the participants for citing the text I wrote for the Ferrari Official 50th Year book on wings. That was my best effort on the subject. I know Michael May well and I can assure you that he had downforce very much in mind when he put a wing on his Porsche. The car that appeared at Goodwood is a replica, not the original. In the early 1960s an Indy roadster was fitted with a mammoth wing but it didn't make the show.

------------------
Karl Ludvigsen

[Keir]

Again, let's go back to 1969 at Monaco.
Dive planes, nose fins, spoilers, angled pieces of bodywork were all allowed after the official ban on "wings".Their dimentions were limited, but they were allowed, hence none of those items can be considered wings.
At least, by definition, The '67 Brabham would have been legal that day.
As for May, so many things can cause downforce, body panels, flaps, raised pieces of bodywork. But from Spa '68 almost all F1 teams used some kind of reverse lift aeroplane wing suspended above the main chassis by struts that either connected to the suspension or frame. These are the true "wings", and nothing like them have been used in F1 before Spa'68, or after Monaco '69. Pictures tell the true story. Now get out those old racing books and have a look.
As for me being old enough to have seen the 1935 "Targa" and the birth of pneumatic tires, ZippyD knows better than that, and he also knows the size of my motor racing library. Everything about Autoracing history is out there somewhere, you just have to look.

[pinchevs]

Looking over Ferrari’s 50 years book I found out that they were also the first ones to install a driver-controlled wing on a F1 car at Monza in 1968. Twin hydraulic cylinders allowed the driver to control the angle on incidence of the wing on the 312 F1. I just wander if the Chaparral cars did not have this device first?

------------------