43 replies to this topic

[ray b]

Why did F-500 die ?
the motorcycle engined cars of the early 50's

[David McKinney]

You doubtless mean the 500cc Formula 3
Although fairly strong on the Continent in its early years, no-one could come up with a design to beat the British cars, and the formula slowly faded away for lack of support
It continued longer in Britain, but was badly affected by the burgeoning popularity of small sportscar racing from 1955/56 on, and killed off by the advent of Formula Junior in 1959

[HDonaldCapps]

If you mean the 500cc Formula III/3 cars, the category simply ran its course and was replaced by, among other things, Formula Junior. The CSI dropped the formula at the end of the 1959 season. It was also a function of its time, so when the times changed....

[philippe charuest]

i thinq that even before the "junior" the 1000cc twin cylinder class were already more popular

[ray b]

found a link to most of the cars of this type
http://www.500race.o...ues/marques.htm

but it looks to me that the class was going or gone
before the switch to F-Jr or the rise of the go-karts

[ianselva]

I think you'll find it had a lot to do with the near monopoly of the Cooper-Norton, no other manufacturer really got a look-in, which wasn't much good for an International formula.
When I first started watching motorsport at Brands and Crystal Palace the 500s had a 'consolation' race for the JAP engined cars because the Norton engined cars were that much faster/more reliable

[Ray Bell]

Don's got the main reason right there...

Its time had run out. It served a purpose, then it wasn't needed any more.

[David McKinney]

Originally posted by philippe charuest
i thinq that even before the "junior" the 1000cc twin cylinder class were already more popular

Where?
I can only think of hillclimbing

[Stephen W]

Originally posted by David McKinney
I can only think of hillclimbing

Ah! At last a convert!

[David McKinney]

Not so much of the "convert"
I attended my first hillclimb in 1960 and for some reason I can't explain was fascinated by the RAC Championship from even before that, in spite of living 12,000 miles from the nearest venue

[bradbury west]

I suspect that the arrival of the 1100cc sports racer class sounded its death knell too from say '56 onwards . These speedy little devices with very sophisticated handling for the time represented a major step forwards for the young "hotshoes" and clubmen alike. They also offered greater racing opportunities in both location and calibre of event, I suspect. The hoped-for cheaper option of sub500cc 250cc racing died the proverbial death
Roger Lund

[RAP]

In the early 50s in the UK F3 was hugely succesful with a good variety of makes, but part of the problem was that it became expensive, at least if you wanted to win. There were no engine restrictions and at the front of the field cars had grand prix Norton engines tuned by ace bike tuners like Ray Petty, Steve Lancefield and Francis Beart. At the back of the field reliability was often poor, which did little for its image too.

At the time Cooper domination was usually cited as "the problem" but I think the reality is, as Bradbury West says, the 1100cc Climax sports cars looked bettter value and by 1957 500cc racing was on a downwards path. Formula Junior simply finished it off.

RAP

[Claudio Navonne]

F 500/500 cc die? When?









Claudio.

[Stephen W]

A Cooper at Shelsley Walsh

[David McKinney]

Originally posted by RAP
I think the reality is, as Bradbury West says, the 1100cc Climax sports cars looked bettter value and by 1957 500cc racing was on a downwards path. Formula Junior simply finished it off

Pretty much as in Post 2

[Michael Clark]

Originally posted by David McKinney
I can't explain was fascinated by the RAC Championship from even before that, in spite of living 12,000 miles from the nearest venue

Me too! I started reading the results in Motoring News in 1972 - as much as anything I just loved the range of chassis/engine combinations.

Finally managed to attend a round in 2003 - at Doune! Loved it.

[mikeC]

Originally posted by Claudio Navonne
F 500/500 cc die? When?



Claudio.

Just beautiful

[mikeC]

P.S.
I still have the one I built, aged six!

[Eric Dunsdon]

Originally posted by David McKinney
You doubtless mean the 500cc Formula 3
Although fairly strong on the Continent in its early years, no-one could come up with a design to beat the British cars, and the formula slowly faded away for lack of support
It continued longer in Britain, but was badly affected by the burgeoning popularity of small sportscar racing from 1955/56 on, and killed off by the advent of Formula Junior in 1959

I dont remember seeing much U.K Formula Junior in 1959, just a couple of races at Brands Hatch. It wasnt a patch on 500cc Formula Three either, especially once the rear engined British cars began to monopolise it which, I suspect, isnt quite what Count Johnny Lurani had in mind!.

[HiRich]

Depending on your viewpoint, the 500 formula died either because it outlived its usefulness, or through a series of unfortunate circumstances and bad decisions. Pretty much all of these can be traced to the drivetrain.

The formula was conceived during the Second War, on the presumption of austere times - the bike engine & methanol formula was proposed on the (correct) assumption that both car engines and petrol would be incredibly hard to source. As the 1950s progressed, money and decent small car engines became much more plentiful. Race bike engines remained quite expensive, temperamental (still are, and always will be, and the same applies to the gearbox, clutch and chain), but (for whatever reason) did not progress that much in performance terms. By the late '50s competitors could buy a faster, more reliable car such as the small sports cars for only a little more money. They also started on the push of a button rather than that of a mechanic. When FJunior offered these in a single-seater format, the end came very quickly.

What would have made the difference would have been the availability of a reliable, restricted, and cheap engine. From about 1950 it was clear that on track at least, the Norton engine was unmatched. Yet bizarrely, the factory refused to sell engines to this captive market. The rich bought whole bikes, secondhand prices went through the roof, and the poor had to accept their JAP motor would keep them out of the elite group. What's more, a Norton wasn't enough - you needed a Lancefield- or Beart-tuned motor, or failing that a Robin Jackson unit.
- Sleeving down 1 litre car engines proved a step too far.
- The Italian multi-cylinder engines failed to deliver on four wheels as well as they did on two (though it's not clear why)
- The Turner 500 proved to be a dog.
- The great hope was the JAP 4-cylinder, but it never ran in anger (presumably because Mr Prestwich died just as the design was finished).
- A 750 formula (as adopted by the Italians) might have helped. But it should be noted that, probably because the car designs were behind the Coopers, the British 500s still mullered the C750s.
- None of the other British marques, or perhaps the lack of good tuners, provided competition to the Norton. Triumph and Vincent certainly had decent motors, but the number of users can be counted on one hand.
- Neither the CSI or RAC/MSA seriously considered restricting engine development. Despite regular complaints from the genetelman drivers who made the grids so busy, they seemd to forget the original principle of cheap racing for the impecunious competitor. When they did, by making Nortons run petrol, it was too late.
I have little doubt that if the powerful and reliable Honda engines of the '60s had arrived earlier, the formula would have lasted longer. But ultimately, by about 1957, a Lotus XI offered better value than a Cooper Mk XI, and the big names drifted across. By 1959, the market was ready for more power. FJunior offered this, and particularly in America it killed the 500 market stone dead in the space of just six months.

There were other factors:
- For some reason, the British were always much more competitive than their European counterparts. There's no logical reason for this, but it hardly inspired the Continentals when a contingent of British drivers would turn up at your local prize event and sweep the board.
- Le Mans 1955 didn't help. Maturing series in France and the Low Countries were hit very hard as events and championships were cancelled.
Whilst there were handy series outside the UK (East & West Germany, and the Scandinavian countries were all thriving) there was still a feeling that only the British took it seriously - after all, we were the ones who thought of it, we made the best cars and had the best drivers.

Despite all this, though, it had a limited shelf life. By the late 1950s chassis technology had moved on and any decent design could handle a lot more than 40hp. Even with a fair wind the 500s would only have lasted a few more years.

[HDonaldCapps]

The first actual season for FJ in Britain was 1960.

There were 500 diehards in SoCal -- the 500cc Club later Formula Racing Association -- who came up with various schemes for keeping the basic 500cc F-III premise alive, F-IV and so forth, long after everyone else had moved on to FJ or something else.

In retrospect, it is often surprising that it lasted as long as it did, "HiRich" enumerating some of the many issues relating to F-III.

[Rob Miller]

By the middle of the 50's cars with low cockpit sides were just so out of fashion.

[Doug Nye]

Aah - well that would be it then.

DCN

[Roger Clark]

This is from Ken Gregory's autobiography "Behind the Scenes of Motor Racing", written in 1959. He starts by describing how Stirling Moss gave up F3 in 1954, following accusations of "taking candy from the children".

Much of the criticism came from the 'formula 3 only' factions within the BRSCC. and it accentuated the foolish 'closed shop' attitude they had adopted when the Club spread its wings and took up other types of racing as well. That same attitude has virtually wiped them out of racing today. They harbour petty jealousies, and I have, generally speaking, found them too narrow minded a crowd. It is always 'Our cars started the Club; we want this, we want that', and they never seem to realise that their position has been safeguarded only because there were other forms of racing in the programme.

As the Formula 3 movement gathered strength and Brands Hatch became available, there was no more enthusiastic supporter of the 500s than I, yet the basic design of the cars, and above all the noise, has hardly changed in the last ten years. Obviously the 1959 '500' is a better, faster car than that of 1950, but it still relies on chain drive and the ever faithful Norton or JAP engine to propel it; there has been no progress, no new designs, nothing, yet the Formula 3 supporters cannot see it, and oppose any suggestions to modify the Formula to bring in new competition.

He continues with further criticism of the noise and concludes:

In my opinion the 500cc car has done its job, and is now outdated in its present form. The BRSCC would do better, I feel, to drop it outright now, and fall in line with the Continentals by adopting Formula Junior.

As an aside from all of that, it is interesting to speculate what might have happened if Lotus had built a 500.

[Geoff E]

I have memories of going to watch M/C races at Cadwell Park in the late 1950s and there used to be a couple of F3 races in the programme. Were these races at Cadwell a long-term happening or an indication of not being wanted elsewhere?

[Rob Miller]

If Lotus had built a a 500

it would have been front-engined so as not be a Cooper copy

it would have had terriffic handling and road-holding (as long as it was not numbered 17)

it would have been so light that it would fall apart if it hit a bump.

[RAP]

Originally posted by Geoff E
I have memories of going to watch M/C races at Cadwell Park in the late 1950s and there used to be a couple of F3 races in the programme. Were these races at Cadwell a long-term happening or an indication of not being wanted elsewhere?

They were regular additions to the motor bike programmes from 1953 to 1961.

[Russell Burrows]

Hi guys, I'm an interloper from the bike threads who is curious about the performance of the Norton engined cars. A Manx poked out about 50 bhp, weighed about 300 pounds and was good for about 130mph. How quick were the cars ?

[Rob29]

Originally posted by Russell Burrows
Hi guys, I'm an interloper from the bike threads who is curious about the performance of the Norton engined cars. A Manx poked out about 50 bhp, weighed about 300 pounds and was good for about 130mph. How quick were the cars ?

When I first discovered the sport c1955 I recall the lap record for Brands Hatch was 60secs for both 500cc bikes and cars both Norton powered.

[Russell Burrows]

Originally posted by Rob29
When I first discovered the sport c1955 I recall the lap record for Brands Hatch was 60secs for both 500cc bikes and cars both Norton powered.

Thanks for that. The cars appeared extemely light and flimsy but were presumably heavier than the Manx, since they would have cornered faster, hence similar times ? Or was the drive train arrangement power sapping in some way ?

[Derwent Motorsport]

I think what is interesting is how few cars survived. Does anyone have any figures for say, how many Cooper 500s were made? I can only assume that the survival rate for the 500s is perhaps far lower than for any other formula.

[David Birchall]

I think the survival rate is surprisingly good! How many other formulas were there in the fifties? Formulas one and two would have been built in far smaller numbers. Formula three cars still turn up but their low value makes professional restoration uneconomical.

[Geoff E]

Originally posted by Russell Burrows
Hi guys, I'm an interloper from the bike threads who is curious about the performance of the Norton engined cars. A Manx poked out about 50 bhp, weighed about 300 pounds and was good for about 130mph. How quick were the cars ?

A post at the bottom of this page states that John Cooper lapped the Grenzlandring at 106.83 mph (in 1952) in a streamlined Cooper. A lap of that circuit at that speed would not have involved much (if any) braking. In 1952, it would have been the long stroke engine.

http://www.ten-tenth...read.php?t=9846

The Grenzlandring was lapped at over 120mph in 1949 by a BMW bike http://www.etrackson...-history-3.html

[Ray Bell]

I've always been led to understand that the F3 cars presented a smaller frontal area than a bike and hence were quicker in a straight line...

Maybe that's not true?

[David Birchall]

Originally posted by Ray Bell
I've always been led to understand that the F3 cars presented a smaller frontal area than a bike and hence were quicker in a straight line...

Maybe that's not true?

I wondered about that, but concluded that with two wheels breaking the air it would probably be worse than a bike with a good fairing. A bike with a 'Dustbin' fairing should be far superior I would think-perhaps that is what the previously mentioned BMW had (And possibly supercharging)?

[Geoff E]

Originally posted by David Birchall
I would think-perhaps that is what the previously mentioned BMW had (And possibly supercharging)?

Apologies - my link did say it was supercharged.

[fines]

No dustbins in 1949, but supercharging was allowed in Germany until 1950, I think. Schorsch Meier or Wiggerl Kraus?

[Russell Burrows]

As the design of some cars encased the engine almost entirely, how were they cooled ? Also, Ive seen a reference to a 'Beart' car somewhere - did Francis Beart produce an entire car ?

[Eric Dunsdon]

Reg Bicknell's 'Revis' which had its front wheels enclosed, managed to see the Cooper's off a few times in 1954.

[David McKinney]

Originally posted by Russell Burrows
Ive seen a reference to a 'Beart' car somewhere - did Francis Beart produce an entire car ?

There was a Beart-Cooper, which was a considerably modified production Mk VII (IIRC) with the fuel-tanks relocated from the sides, as would be adopted by the factory with the Mk VIII. I'm sure there were other improvements too

[HiRich]

Originally posted by Russell Burrows
Hi guys, I'm an interloper from the bike threads who is curious about the performance of the Norton engined cars. A Manx poked out about 50 bhp, weighed about 300 pounds and was good for about 130mph. How quick were the cars ?

Several of the Norton cars were tuned by the same people famous in bike circles. 50hp is about right for the Norton cars, running methanol.
Official weight was 440lbs, so about 30% heavier than a bike once a driver is added. Without special bodywork, top speed was likely to be about 110mph. Drivetrain was the same (primary chain normally to the Norton gearbox, then secondary chain to the axle), so there's no reason to expect higher losses. I suspect the lower speed is due to higher aero & rolling losses, and shorter gearing to accomodate the higher weight.
The cars could carry more speed through the corner, and in the early 1950s there were many occasions when 500 cars and bikes ran at the same time. In most cases they were very competitive, with the cars generally shading it by tenths of a second.

Originally posted by Derwent Motorsport
I think what is interesting is how few cars survived. Does anyone have any figures for say, how many Cooper 500s were made? I can only assume that the survival rate for the 500s is perhaps far lower than for any other formula.

Cooper records are notoriously poor (Doug's book seems to record most available data), and there's much speculation of chassis going "over the fence" to avoid various national taxes. My notes suggest perhaps 5-600 Cooper chassis were produced (including the long-chassis versions to take the 998/1098 JAP Twins), and I have notes on at least that number of other production models and specials around the world.
I don't know how many are on the 500 register (a couple of hundred in various states of health?), but there are many more scattered around the world, particularly in Scandinavia, Australia and the USA, and more that are "known of" by people unwilling to tell. As David suggests, even with the Goodwood Revival giving a big boost to the British movement, restoration is still barely economical and normally undertaken by blind enthusiasts like our own rbm (just joking Rich!).

Originally posted by Russell Burrows
As the design of some cars encased the engine almost entirely, how were they cooled ? Also, Ive seen a reference to a 'Beart' car somewhere - did Francis Beart produce an entire car ?

Cooling was always one of the big problems, often leading directly to seizing. Many early Coopers quickly acquired "ear" scoops behind the driver's shoulders. Mid-period Coopers (Mk V-VII) gained large scoops under the seat, and the full cover on the Mk VIII was quickly cut away.
The Beart-Cooper (also called the Mk VIIa) was built by Francis Beart in 1953. The chassis was similar to the standard Mk VII, but the four-tube chassis was tied together with vertical tubes rather than the standard straps. That feature at least partly inspired the 1954 Mk VIII. The car is famous as much for its guest drivers (Moss, Lewis-Evans, Brandon & Colin Davis amongst others) as its success. As far as I'm aware the chassis is missing in action (although there have been many claimants). Just to confuse the matter, Beart also ran some later, probably standard Cooper chassis, unhelpfully reported at the time as a Beart-Cooper...

[Russell Burrows]

Thanks for the responses gentlemen - I had no idea that Beart was involved to that extent. After the demise of the Manx he turned his attention to the Aermacchi, an Italian 350 pushrod single. This was an exeptionally light piece of kit in its original form but Francis lightened his further, even going so far as reducing the size of the front brake - a radical move as the front stopper is responsible for most of the braking on a bike. The Beart Aermacchi pictured is ridden by Aussie Jack Findlay.

[Dutchy]

Rich I was told by a usually impeccable source that the Beart Mk VIIA survives.

I know no more.

[rbm]

Originally posted by HiRich


restoration is still barely economical and normally undertaken by blind enthusiasts like our own rbm (just joking Rich!).

(joking)

totally agree the new projects, engine and bodywork will be more than I earn gross in a year and what will it be worth when done? about 2/3 of the cost of the engine and bodywork let alown the rest of it if I'm lucky
but I guess that is not the point of having 500's - its more a ...err.... masochism type of thing, trying to keep one of the most fragile forms of 'proper' single seater race car going and making it to the finishing line.