35 replies to this topic

[William Hunt]

I have a question about Moss and his Lotus 18 during the Monaco GP of '61.
In one of my books there is a picture showing the side of the car and a huge part of the bodywork is missing.
In fact I found the photo also on the internet, here is a link so you know what I'm talking about:
http://journal.autos...eek21/gold1.jpg

You can see his legs and part of his body.
Now my question is? How did this come, why was this the case?

[B Squared]

From Automobile Year #9 (1961-62) on page 120 caption of a similar photo:

Stirling Moss gets a good draught of sea air on the harbour front. To make his Lotus lighter, in view of his adversaries' more powerful machines, he did not hesitate to strip-off sections he thought inessential.

B²

[ZOOOM]

Moss had said that it was very hot during that race and they deceided to remove the side panels for his comfort. There was apparently some pretty good discussion with the officials about it because the cars were not supposed to have any panels removed.
I also read recently that there may have been some nefarious reason known only to Moss and ACBC at the time. Anyone remember what it was?
ZOOOM

[Ray Bell]

And on such a slow circuit the aerodynamic advantages of the bodywork would be nullified...

Moss might also have decided that it 'looked cool'.

[Rob G]

And people think that a lack of numbers on the sides of F1 cars is a modern development.

[Gary Davies]

I've always understood it was because it was hot.

[David Birchall]

I've always understood it was because it was hot.

And also, I have always understood that they planned this in advance - latching points had to be added to the space frame to keep the top part in place. Moss and Chapman were both cleverdicks....

[Ray Bell]

Originally posted by Gary Davies
I've always understood it was because it was hot.

I'd have thought that was a given...

The lightness thing would have been a side-issue.

[B Squared]

I had a friend who was at the race and he said it was because of the heat, but I figured that the caption in a well respected annual of the period would carry more weight than the ramblings of an old friend. Little did I know!

B²

[Ray Bell]

From memory, Moss did the same thing at Warwick Farm in 1961...

And that was definitely because of the heat.

[Glengavel]

Maybe it did nothing but wind up the opposition?

[kayemod]

Maybe it did nothing but wind up the opposition?

Probably a good part of the reason, I bet just looking at The Master's 18 made the Ferrari drivers feel a few degrees hotter in their red cars. Just like the way that Stirling used to rub his hands with glee when it rained before a race, he didn't like racing in the rain any more than anyone else did, but if that was what the opposition thought, he had them half-beaten before the race started.

[Stephen W]

I seem to recollect a story about Moss at Monaco in '61. It goes along the lines of him taking a long hard look at Phil Hill's Ferrari whilst on the grid prior to the race; he then turned to Phil and said something like "I wouldn't have let them do that to my car." and then walked briskly away. Hill was then more concerned about what had been done to his car than the impending race.

On the subject of the missing panels I was always under the impression that it was done to keep Moss cool and was nothing to do with lightness. You have to remember that the race was over 100 laps and there were no refueling stops so the cars were a lot heavier at the start and took more manhandling.

[bradbury west]

Perhaps my memory is playing up but I thought it had something to do with Alf Francis doing a last-minute weld to a chassis tube with a wet cloth behind it to stop heat transfer to the tank and there was no time to put the panel back. Ah well, back to the home for the bewildered
Roger Lund

[cedricselzer]

There were no extra brackets welded onto the 18. The rear panel was held in place by a bungy strap attached to the 2 top radius arms. I have seen a photo of this some where. If Alf had welded the chassis he did this because it had broken. This is not surprising. When Innes drove the car at Monza it broke in 3 places.

Cedric Selzer

[David McKinney]

Don't forget that Moss drove a Lotus 18 at Monaco in 1960 as well as 1961...

[Otto Grabe]

I remember Rob Walker told it this way (correspondingly): Lotus appeared in Monaco (first race of the season) with the 21. The Walker team got in short term a conversion kit from Chapman to convert its 18 to a 18/21. Unfortunately some of the parts didn’t fit together and so it remained a 18. But some changes were already made and there was no time left to undo it. That’s why Moss drove this airy version. By Zandvoort the hole was closed, by Spa there was the 18/21 and by Monza they used the Lotus 21.
Don’t hang me if I’m wrong.

Otto

[Gary Davies]

From "Stirling Moss Scrapbook 1961" - Stirling Moss and Philip Porter.

PP: "Of course, you famously took the side panels off the Lotus 18. Was that because of heat or weight?"
SM: "Heat. To get more air around. It could get pretty hot in those things for 2 3/4 hours."

[ZOOOM]

As I said, the official reason was for the heat. However I seem to remember that recently, Moss revealed another reason for the missing panels which was odd. Wish like crazy I could remember....
I looked in "All but my Life" and there is no referrence...
ZOOOM

Edited by ZOOOM, 18 June 2009 - 15:21.

[Gary Davies]

I remember Rob Walker told it this way (correspondingly): Lotus appeared in Monaco (first race of the season) with the 21. The Walker team got in short term a conversion kit from Chapman to convert its 18 to a 18/21. Unfortunately some of the parts didn’t fit together and so it remained a 18. But some changes were already made and there was no time left to undo it. That’s why Moss drove this airy version. By Zandvoort the hole was closed, by Spa there was the 18/21 and by Monza they used the Lotus 21.
Don’t hang me if I’m wrong.
Otto

The Lotus Moss raced at Monaco was an 18, chassis number 912. (Source, The Formula One Record Book - John Thompson). This was the second time he raced that chassis, the first being at the Glover Trophy at Goodwood in April (He also did a few practice laps in it at the Aintree 200). The car had been purchased from Yeoman Credit.

According to 'My cars, my career' (Moss, with Nye) the 18/21 bits didn't go on for some weeks. He raced it in '18' form in the Dutch Grand Prix, after which the conversion was done and its first race as an 18/21 was at the Belgian Grand Prix in mid-June.

Edited by Gary Davies, 18 June 2009 - 15:45.

[Paul Parker]

As I said, the official reason was for the heat. However I seem to remember that recently, Moss revealed another reason for the missing panels which was odd. Wish like crazy I could remember....

As far as I could ascertain the panels were removed to provide some much needed airflow on a very muggy day. However this proved advantageous as reportedly Alf Francis had to weld up a cracked chassis tube on the grid, after wrapping the full fuel tank with wet towels!

[Doug Nye]

As I understand it, two vital systems had to be kept as cool as possible. One involved the famous Moss cochones and attached structural parts - the other was the Type 18's fuel tankage to prevent possible vapour locking problems of which some signs had been encountered during practice running. Most critically, panel removal was expected to allow hot air to escape from within the car, not for cool air to enter from outside the car.

DCN

[D-Type]

I remember Rob Walker told it this way (correspondingly): Lotus appeared in Monaco (first race of the season) with the 21. The Walker team got in short term a conversion kit from Chapman to convert its 18 to a 18/21. Unfortunately some of the parts didn’t fit together and so it remained a 18. But some changes were already made and there was no time left to undo it. That’s why Moss drove this airy version. By Zandvoort the hole was closed, by Spa there was the 18/21 and by Monza they used the Lotus 21.
Don’t hang me if I’m wrong.

Otto

It's not that simple. The main sponsor of Lotus was Esso. They took a dim view of Moss winning GP's in a Lotus and BP getting the credit so they told Lotus they couldn't sell a 21 to Rob Walker or any other private team. So, over the year Walker and the other privateers progressively developed and modified the 18's with sleeker 21-style bodywork and 21-style rear suspension etc until they evolved into the 18/21 . As Gary says, in the case of the Walker car the upgrade was done between the Dutch and Belgian GP's.
Fast forward to Monza. The 21 with its smaller cross section area was significantly faster than the 18/21. Innes Ireland suggested that he and Moss swap cars and so he drove the 18/21 while Stirling drove his 21. There wasn't time to completely respray the cars whilst they were being race-prepared - only the easily removed top section so Moss drove a car withgreen bottom half and Walker blue top whilst Innes had a green top and blue lower body. Both cars retired.
Some have said that Esso were not pleased about the swap and put pressure on Chapman to drop Ireland at the end of the season. I don't think this is likely and believe that it was a purely Chapman decision as he wanted Clark as his no 1 driver and felt that Innes would not accept no 2 status while Trevor Taylor would.

As to the panels, in Motor Sport DSJ said it was for ventilation. I must admit that I like the idea that it was to banjax the opposition but DSJ was there.

Edited by D-Type, 18 June 2009 - 21:59.

[ensign14]

And people think that a lack of numbers on the sides of F1 cars is a modern development.

The organizers did make them improvise a 20 on the back of the car with masking tape. This is why, had I been a racer, I would have asked for 47 as a number.

[William Hunt]

The reason could officially have been heat and somehow I find that hard to believe because why would they just do it there then?
I'm also surprised that the organizers allowed the car to run like that.
The real reason might still have been weight with the heat issue an excuse to hide that they were after a performance gain.

[fines]

The reason could officially have been heat and somehow I find that hard to believe because why would they just do it there then?

Because aerodynamics don't play a role at Monte Carlo, but you wouldn't want to create turbulences and drag at a track like, say, Francorchamps or Nürburgring. Also, cockpit ventilation as well as radiators work better on a fast track than they do on a slow one, that's why you also don't see the "Monaco noses" anywhere else, for instance...

[Roger Clark]

Because aerodynamics don't play a role at Monte Carlo,

And especially not in a Lotus 18. Reims that year must have been even hotter than monaco but nobody was inclined to remove bodywork there. I don't think monaco '61 was a particularly hot day. Another factor must hav ebeen tht the driver had to work rather harder at Monaco and would therefore need more cooling.

Team Lotus also removed bodywork from their 21s in at least two races in the winter of 61/62.

[David McKinney]

Moss won the 1962 Wigram race without the lower bodywork of the Rob Walker 21. Wigram is a very fast course by today's standards but probably regarded then as 'medium fast' - think Goodwood without the chicane but with a hairpin at, say, Madgwick

[kayemod]

Because aerodynamics don't play a role at Monte Carlo.

Before the days of front and rear wings, I doubt if removing side panels on a 1960/61 car would have a huge effect on aerodynamics even on fast tracks. The upper bodywork maybe, but those spinning wheels create so much turbulence and drag, that I'd have thought that removing side panels on a car of that era would have very little effect on performance. As has been said, driver cooling and Sir Stirling playing mind games with the opposition, just another small addition to the SCM legend.

[d j fox]

Roger--sorry must beg to differ--I have a picture in my files of both work's Lotus 21's at Thillois in '61 French GP showing side bodywork removed.

David Fox

[RCH]

I can't see that weight would have been an issue here, except that it might have made the car too light? Don't forget cars were built down to a minimum weight and although I don't have the info to hand Chapman being who he was I doubt whether the Lotus was much over the minimum. Removing the panels COULD have made it too light. Best not to talk about that one!

I have always believed that it was to do with cooling, Monaco being the tight circuit that it is required more physical effort from the driver so the panels were removed for driver comfort. Certainly I believe that's what Raymond Baxter said in his commentary and if DSJ said the same that's good enough for me.

Someone mentioned mind games... weren't they invented by Ayrton Senna?

[kayemod]

Someone mentioned mind games... weren't they invented by Ayrton Senna?

Hardly, mind games have been an integral part of motor sport since Georges Bouton won that first ever race in 1887 in the Bois de Boulogne. Few drivers have been able to do it with Sir Stirling's style and panache though, Senna was good at it, but never really in the same league.

[RCH]

Hardly, mind games have been an integral part of motor sport since Georges Bouton won that first ever race in 1887 in the Bois de Boulogne. Few drivers have been able to do it with Sir Stirling's style and panache though, Senna was good at it, but never really in the same league.

Sorry as you probably realised I was being a little TIC. I suspect that Stirling Moss was very good at mind games, Senna on the other hand very bad at them but not in the sense of being opposite to good.... Sorry if this is too cryptic but it is totally OT anyway.

[Roger Clark]

Roger--sorry must beg to differ--I have a picture in my files of both work's Lotus 21's at Thillois in '61 French GP showing side bodywork removed.

David Fox

You're quite right. I thought I remembered that Lotus removed bodywork but the only pictures I could find suggested they didn't. Closer investigation confirmed they did. Interestiong that Moss didn't use it there. He started the race with overalls soaked in water.

[Ray Bell]

This ploy, he later admitted, was almost totally 'mind games'...

Seems he like the way he looked in soaked overalls. Where is All But My Life?

[kayemod]

Where is All But My Life?

I haven't bothered to look up the reference, but my own copy is sandwiched between Mike Hawthorn's Champion Year and a book by Bill Bryson on English grammar. As you may guess, I don't really have a filing system where books are concerned, it's mostly done by size and colour. You're quite right though Ray, I remember the quote.