28 replies to this topic

[john glenn printz]

PREFACE: Here again I had no connection with USAC and had no connection with anyone in racing. Here is what I think I witnessed and what I thought was taking place. I saw live all three Indianapolis 500s narrated here, i.e. 1963, 1964, and 1965, and one weekend of qualifications for all three. In addition I was present at the 1964 and 1965 Milwaukee 200s.

The Brits in particular should be interested in what a few of their compatriots wrought in America, i.e. at Indianapolis and in USAC Championship racing, during the 1960s.

My 1956-1962 former essay on the USAC Championship division is only a prelude of sorts, to what would take place here, in 1963 to 1965. My perspective is quite different from that of Joe Scalzo's interesting and informed 1999 book INDIANAPOLIS ROADSTERS 1952-1964.

Edited by john glenn printz, 06 October 2009 - 19:59.

[john glenn printz]

USAC NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP RACING 1963 TO 1965: THE REAR ENGINE-FORD V8 CHAMPIONSHIP INDIANAPOLIS CAR REVOLUTION, 1963 TO 1965 by Ken M. McMaken and John G. Printz.

PREAMBLE TO THE REVOLUTION: There are some investgators of the history of U.S. National Championship automobile racing who maintain, in effect, that the most successful of the American race car designers have adopted and taken their most salient design ideas from prior Eurpean Grand Prix practice. Advocates of this position would assert that in at least three distinct time periods before 1966 can it be clearly discerned when European designed Grand Prix machines greatly influenced the design of American Championship and Indianapolis racing cars. These are (1.) The venerable Offenhauser 4 traces its hoary lineage back to the Miller straight 8's of 1921 and 1922, which in turn, incorporated many design features taken directly from the French built Grand Prix Peugeots of 1912-1914 and the French made eight cylinder Indianapolis/Grand Prix Ballot cars of 1919-1922; (2.) The German and Italian Grand Prix cars of 1934-1939, i.e. Auto-Union, Alfa Romeo, Maserati, and Mercedes Benz, led to the eventual introduction of more advanced chassis construction on some American Championshp-Indianapolis vehicles incorprating such ideas as tubular frames, independant suspensions systems, and the use of torsion bars, during the period 1937-1950, and (3.) the Europeans, mostly from England, were totally responsible for the move to rear engined Championship vehicles for use on the paved ovals during the three year period of 1963 to 1965. It is of this last development that we will principally be concerned with next. A complete rear engine car revolution, it should kept in mind, had already taken place in Grand Prix racing by late 1960.


A brief sketch of the history of the rear engine racing car is somewhat as follows. The very first rear engined Grand Prix cars were the Benz "Tropwagens" of 1923 which ran at Monza (September 9) in the Italian Grand Prix. They were not a totally successful design idea but they led to the 1934-1939 German Auto-Unions, conceived at first by the famous Dr. Ferdinand Porsche (1875-1951). These cars, though thoroughly unorthodox, were certainly a very victorious assemblage of autos. One of them, with Nazi swastikas painted on it and driven by Bernd Rosemeyer (1909-1938), won the Long Island 300 Vanderbilt Cup contest of 1937 which was, in actual fact, the very first occasion that a rear engined machine won a genuine U. S. National Championship event. Still the Nazi era Auto Unions seemed an anomaly still, in the post World War II revival of Grand Prix (1946-1957), for the sport was again totally ruled by the hitherto more conventional and normal front engined equipment.

The complete changeover to rear engines vehicles in Grand Prix racing occurred during the years 1957 to 1960 and was due to Cooper Cars of England. This small firm had been constructing rear engined formula racing cars since 1947/48. Only gradually did they move into the higher and more prestigious categories of motor racing. During 1958 and 1959 rear engined Coopers won the European Formula II championships decisively both seasons. Already by 1957 Formula II type Coopers were appearing in genuine Formula I Grand Prix events and were not doing too badly at that. Overall wins during the 1958 Grand Prix season, first at the Argentine Grand Prix (January 19) and then at Monaco (May 18) by the small, greenly painted Coopers, shocked and upset those who followed the international Grand Prix scene. But these two victories convinced the Cooper factory to a field a genuine Grand Prix car and team for 1959. The upshot was that Coopers won two successive World Grand Prix Titles (1959 and 1960) in the hands of Australian driver Jack Brabham (b. 1926). The 1960 season would witness the last Grand Prix contest won by a front powered car, a Ferrari Dino 246, at Monza (September 4).

Rear engined equipment had also appeared at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway at various times. The very first example was a Marmon V16 engined monstrosity built by ex driver Lee Oldfield (1875-1978). This car actually ran practice laps but was too slow to attempt a qualification. In the late 1930s, car constructor Harry A. Miller (1875-1943) and salesman Preston Tucker (1903-1956) talked the Gulf Oil into building four rear engined 6s of very advanced and novel design. These cars ran at Indianapolis under Gulf sponsorship during the years 1938 to 1941, and surfaced again after World War II in private hands. They continued to be entered at the Speedway until 1953. They seldom qualified however and never ever functioned properly in a race, even under the Gulf Oil aegis. Another, but post-war example, rear engined racer was the beautifully built but ill conceived "Rounds Rocket Special", which featured a standard Offenhauser 4. It was at the Speedway in 1949 and 1950 but didn't qualify either year. All these cars, the Marmon Oldfield V16, the Gulf Millers, and the Rounds Rocket, were obviously inspired by the pre-war Auto Unions. The rear engine car concept, therefore in 1961, was not really new to the Indianapolis Motor Speedway either.

After competing in the United States Grand Prix at Riverside, CA (Nov. 20, 1960), where he placed 4th, Jack Brabham and constructor John Cooper (1923-2000) headed east to the Indianapolis Motor Speedway to conduct some experiments and tests with their Formula I Grand Prix car. Brabham found he could lap the Speeway as high as 144.8 mphwith the Cooper which had an engine of only 2.5 litres capacity (USAC allowed up to 4.2 lites). Eddie Sachs' winning pole speed in 1960 had been 146.592 mph. All this set Jack Brabham and John Cooper to thinking that a modified Formula I type Cooper with a bored out Climax engine just might have a real chance at winning the great U.S. mid-Western American racing classic. So in 1961, with some financial backing from SCCA sportsman Jim Kimberly (1907-1994), Brabham appeared at Indianapolis in May 1961 with a 2.7 litre (168 cubic inches) modified Formula I Cooper.

The Brabham-Cooper entry aroused a lot of curiosity and speculation among the USAC regulars and even among the SCCA road racing crowd. Brabham qualified the Cooper at 145.144 mph to start an ominious 13th on the race day grid. The Speedway's first two time winner (1921 and 1923), Tommy Milton (1893-1962), had the Cooper pegged about right. Before the race Milton predicted that the Cooper was quite unfit for Indianapolis and wouldn't prove to be an effective threat for first place. Brabham's tiny car was vastly underpowered (265 horsepower vs 400 hp for the Meyer-Drake Offenhauser 252's), was 15 mph slower down the two long straightaways, and had admittedly but an edge in turn speed through the Speedways' four distinct corners. But all this, according to the 1921 and 1923 "500" winner, was the wrong combination.

At Indianapolis one must stay in the very narrow racing grove when negotiating the four turns and, if slower moving cars are directly in front of you, you will find yourself generally and effectively blocked. Or to put it another way which is more simple, you just can't pass these slower vehicles in the four turns, even with a car with very superior turn speed. Only when you have a completely empty road in front of you, can you take advantage of, and utilize, your superior turn speed. Such was the situation, according to Milton, and after the race Brabham could only second Milton's earlier remarks. Brabham said, "I was being outrun on the straights and I couldn't use my superior speed in the turns because of the heavy traffic. I would move up on everybody in the turns and then they would all just run away from me on the straightaways. Things got a lot better as the race wore on and the traffic thinned out. If I had the horsepower of the Offy I think we could have given them all a good fight."

Edited by john glenn printz, 06 October 2009 - 17:27.

[john glenn printz]

USAC NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP HISTORY 1963 TO 1965 (cont.-1) That the Brabham-Cooper entry of 1961 started a rear engine car revolution at the Speedway cannot be countenanced by this author. The entry finished 9th, out of the 12 cars still running, and what great feat is this? Let's check the real situation and the relevant facts. None of the established and successful Indianapolis car constructors, such as Epperly, Kurtis, Lesovsky, Trevis, or Watson changed his mode of living, working, or thinking for the 1962 and 1963 "500s". Nor, outside of hot rodder Mickey Thompson, a complete outsider, were any totally new rear engined cars built for the 1962 Indianapolis event. The next three years (1962-1964) would prove Thompson, taking on the "500" for the first time in 1962, was way out of his league. Only one of his three 1962 entries made the race and it finished a dismal 20th. Now a 9th in 1961 (Brabham) and a 20th in 1962 (Gurney) for the rear engine machinery was not the type of result that was going to disturb or greatly upset the old USAC established order and, in fact, it didn't disturb the leading Indianapolis roadster builders one iota.

Wherefore and whence them the supposed fundamental changes caused and effected by Brabham's Cooper? In turn the real revolutionary year (1963), was in 1961, still two whole years away, Chronologically the Cooper may have gotten there first, in some real sense, but it didn't start any revolution. And it might seem bold to say so since everyone dates the rear engine car changeover at Indianapolis to 1961 and the Cooper!

To define the true impact and the exact position of things after the 1961 "500", I will concede the following. The SCCA sport car crowd was very interested, as I have said, in the 1961 Brabham-Cooper entry at Indianapolis, but their one and only theme, was to knock and severely criticize all the U.S. manufactured USAC Championship vehicles and all oval track automobile racing. The SCCA neither knew nor cared anything about the USAC National Champion racing, but the Brabham-Cooper Indianapolis entry in 1961 and the Thompson-Gurney effort in 1962 got their attention. It wasn't in the least that the SCCA membership had become interested in the Indy "500" and/or the U.S. National Championship title per se. What the SCCA regulars wanted to witness was unargulable evidence that the USAC Indianapolis and National Championship cars and pilots were inferior to the drivers and the equipment running on the international Grand Prix circuit. Or to express the thought here in a more forceful manner, the SCCA folk wanted to see the whole USAC Indianapolis/Championship establishment get soundly wipped and trounced in its own ball park; and made to look complely ridiculous by the European cars designs and Grand Prix drivers. Naturally all of this would provide very high level comedy and an interesting drama.

The result however, as to whether you thought Brabham's 1961 try had been a success or not, pretty much depended on who you were and how you looked at the situation. The Indianapolis-USAC Championship regulars had certainly not been skunked in 1961, so far as the actual results were concerned. To most of the Indianapolis oriented crowd, the Cooper had provided an interesting diversion and experiment but hardly anything more. The Cooper showed only average speed, had never gotten near the race leaders, and placed 9th overall. The Cooper had, indeed, proved it could handle all four corners faster, but lap speed is the only thing that counts in the end, and here the car had proved definitely deficient.

So the basic sentiment remained the same. If you want to win at Indianapolis you had better get a Watson designed roadster, preferably built by him. with the latest model Meyer-Drake Offenhaser 252 installed in it. After all, at the "500", Watson designed cars finished 1st and 2nd in both 1959 and 1960, took the first five place in 1961 and the first three in 1962. What kind of proof you want?

Amonst the SCCA set however the feeling was very different. The Indianapolis rookie, Jack Brabham, in a car giving away 135 horsepower (!) had still managed to lap the 2 1/2 oval at a fairly decent pace and his times through the turns were decidedly superior. With anywhere near the same horsepower Jack and the small Cooper would have made monkeys out of all of the rest of the Indianapolis starting field. Rear engined machines were obviously the way of the future if only the die-hard, conservative, and backward U.S. car constructors and owners would be be acute enough to see it.

Mickey Thompson's abortive 1962 assault at the Speedway, was not considered to add much evidence to the argument either way. So in mid-1962 and even in early 1963 the great debate was still up in the air.

Edited by john glenn printz, 13 October 2009 - 15:46.

[john glenn printz]

USAC NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP HISTORY 1963 TO 1965 (cont.-2) THE REVOLUTION BEGUN. 1963 SEASON (12 races).

The season's twelve winners were:

1. April 21 Trenton 100, Foyt, A. J., Offenhauser/Meskowski D, 102.491 mph, PO NTR.

2. May 30 Indianapolis 500, Jones, Parnelli, Offenhauser/Watson R, 143.137 mph, PO NTR.

3. June 6 Milwaukee 100, Ward, Rodger, Offenhauser/Watson R, 100.561 mph PO.

4. June 21 Langhorne 100, Foyt, A. J., Offenhauser/Meskowski D, 104.036 mph D.

5. July 28 Trenton 150, Foyt, A. J., Offenhauser/Watson-Trevis R, 100.403 mph PO NTR.

6. Aug. 17 Springfield 100, Ward, Rodger, Offenhauser/Watson D, 95.557 mph, D

7. Aug. 18 Milwaukee 200, Clark, Jimmy, Ford/Lotus RE, 104.452 mph PO NTR.

8. Sept. 2 DuQuoin 100, Foyt, A. J., Offenhauser/Meskowski D 96.234 mph, D NTR.

9. Sept. 14 Indianapolis Fairgrounds 100, Ward, Rodger, Offenhauser/Watson D, 93.545 mph, D NTR.

10. Sept. 22 Trenton 200, Foyt, A. J., Offenhauser/Watson-Trevis R, 101.358 PO.

11. Oct. 27 Sacramento 100, Ward, Rodger, Offenhauser/Watson D, 92.174 mph, D.

12. Nov. 12 Phoenix 100, Ward, Rodger, Offenhauser/Watson D, 85.010 mph D.

Daniel Sexton Gurney (b. 1931), a tall, lean, and young all-Americn boy, started racing sports cars in 1955 and quickly got so good at it that he was running them in Europe by 1958. Gurney moved up to the Formula I ranks in 1959 and had his first Grand Prix start at Rheims on July 3, 1959 in the French Grand Prix, driving a Ferrari. After that Dan became a Grand Prix regular driving for BRM in 1960 and for Porsche in 1961 and 1962. Gurney was thus in very close contact with the quick and decisive alteration from the front to the rear powered Grand Prix cars during 1958 to 1961.

Gurney, as a good patriotic American, also had his eye on the great mid-West 500 mile Hoosier classic as well. Gurney figured a modern, well designed, rear engined racer ought to be able to win the "500" rather easily, and Gurney probably rightly considered Anthony Colin Bruce Chapman (1928-1982) of England to be the best rear engined race car designer, engineer, and builder in the world. So in early 1962 Gurney tried to get Chapman interested in an Indianapolis venture by paying Colin's way to the 1962 "500". Dan himself was entered in the race in a radical John Zink rear powered turbine car which didn't pan out, so Gurney later switched to one of Mickey Thomson's three rear engined Buick V8 powered entries. Of these three only Gurney's made the starting lineup. It started 8th but retired after 92 laps with rear end failure.

Meanwhile Chapman witnessed the Indianapolis racing scene for the very first time and at firsthand, and what he saw must have both amused and astonished him. New engines, but of a very antique design (the Meyer Drake Offenhauser 252) put into chassis that were at once simple and naive in conception and construction! After getting a good look around the old Speedway Chapman must have had an uncontrollable smile on his face and a bright gleam in his eye. Here was a race that paid $125,000 for 1st place, far and away more than any Grand Prix event, and winning it with a more modern constructed car must have seemed like duck soup to the highly talented and sophisticated Chapman!

So Gurney and Chapman naturally got together for an assault on the upcoming 1963 "500". They went to the Ford Motor Company offices located in Dearborn, MI. The Ford Motor Company had just embarked on what would prove to be the most ambitious motor sports program in the entire history of the American automobile industry. Ford, now spearheaded by ex-salesman Lee Iacocca (b 1924) wanted to change its public image into that of a performance and competitive winner, to capture the more youthful (i.e. under 40 years of age) new car market in the U.S. automobile spectrum.

On June 11, 1962 Ford officially withdrew from the Automobile Manufacturers Association's pact of June 6, 1957, which set the stage for a massive Ford attack on the LeMans 24 Hour sports car race as well as in other areas. The firm also toyed with a rather vague image of running at Indianapolis with front engined cars powered with highly modified Ford Fairlane type aluminum blocks. Almost certainly nothing more would have happened to this Indianapolis project if Chapman and Gurney had not walked into the correct Ford office at the right moment, Juky 23, 1962, with their scheme for a rear engine team entry at Indianapolis in 1963.

Edited by john glenn printz, 09 November 2009 - 16:50.

[john glenn printz]

USAC NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP HISTORY 1963 TO 1965 (cont.-3) In essence Chapman told Ford if they could provide him with an engine with anywhere near the same horsepower and torque, even a bit less, than the ancient Meyer-Drake Offenhauser, he could easily design a vehicle that would outrun any existing Indianapolis car or Watson designed roadster. Ford was already convinced it could come up with a competitive motor that could beat the old Offenhauser 4. Just what Colin Chapman thought about the proposed Ford engine is unknown but the Ford people were very skeptical about Colin's assertions about his proposed rear engined chassis for Indianapolis. Actual past Indianapolis experience however, didn't seem essential or necessary to either Ford or Chapman, for a possibe win at the "500" in 1963. According to Colin the U.S. Indianapolis car constructors were hopelessly behind the times and were seemingly totally ignorant of all the more advanced and modern automobile chassis design techniques.

Ford Motor decided to do some serious preliminary checking before making a definite commitment to the ideas of Colin Chapman and Dan Gurney. Among the people that Ford talked to were Rodger Ward and A. J. Watson, among others. The Ford group found not one of the better, experienced, or first class contemporary Indianapolis pilots, like Foyt, Jones, or Ward, would sign onto to any Ford Indianapolis venture for 1963. These drivers would not risk losing a year's chance at winning the U.S.' most important and prestigious motor race, when at the height of their careers, for any type of experiment project or scheme. They knew all too well, as does anyone else in the business with sense, that completely new and untested engine and chassis designs not tested in actual competition, don't usually win their first or second time out. A completely new Ford Indianapolis team with plenty of money may have a lot of real potential but let's see some of it demonstrated on an actual race track first. If you can show or prove to us in 1963 that your rear engined cars can win, then we will be only too happy to pilot them in 1964, but nothing has been shown to us yet. Such was their attitude and it was totally realistic. As racing authority Laurence Pomeroy wrote, in his GRAND PRIX CAR, Volume II, London, 1954, page 174, (quote), "A law of automobile design, is that the first concept of a superior concept of a superior principle is always defeated by the perfected example of established practice."

Likewise Ford found clearly that among the Indianapolis-National Championship-USAC establishment or regulars, that A. J. Watson was considered the top chassis builder and the Meyer-Drake Offenhauser 4 was really the only powerplant to be seriously considered. Ford purchased a new Meyer Drake 252 4, just to see and test what the opposition at Indianapolis would have there in 1963. At first the Ford investigators couldn't even figure out how to disassemble an Offy and Takeo Hirashima, from the Meyer-Drake company itself, had to make a special trip to show them how to do it! The Ford engineers were astonished and shocked by the horsepower and torque figures produced by this seemingly antique, primitive, and thoroughly humble design. Even more incredible, the Ford experts found, was its endless endurance and its indestructibility. They decided to deliberately destroy the motor, to see how much punishment it would take, and couldn't get it to blow or self destruct! In their investigations however Ford discovered one veteran USAC Championship car owner, Lindsey Hopkins, who was of the opinion that rear powered equipment was probably going to be the way of the future.

Ford didn't know which way to go and its Indianapolis project went no further until Jimmy Clark (1936-1968) won the U.S. Grand Prix at Watkins Glen, NY (Oct. 7, 1962) with a Lotus in impressive style. Clark then took his winning 1 1/2 litre Grand Prix Climax/Lotus type 25 to Indianapolis for experimental runs and trials at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway. Clark got as high as 143 mph for a lap, which was a truely phenomenal speed considering the Lotus was powered by an engine of only 91 cubic inches compared to the more normal Indianapolis or Championship car's 252 cubic inches! The Chapman-Gurney proposal thus looked very promising and so the Ford Motor Company gave the go ahead to Chapman to build one experimental prototype chassis sole for use at the Speedway.

Meanwhile Ford was busy at work, developing and testing a special Ford V8 pushrod aluminum block motor for Chapman's new chassis. The new Ford/Lotus prototype, dubbed the "Mule", was ready for testing at Indianapolis in March 1963 and on March 24, Gurney turned a lap in it at 150.5 mph. Chapman was soon commissioned by Ford to construct two new cars for the upcoming "500". All three machines were entered at Indianapolis in 1963 with the "Mule" to act as a spare or backup car. The two newer models featured an offset chassis, which the original prototype "Mule" didn't have. Dan Gurney and Jimmy Clark were to be the two official Ford/Lotus drivers. Gurney was considered the number one driver over Clark, because the whole project had been initialized, at the start, by Gurney himself and because Dan had had previous and actual Indianapolis race experience in 1962. Jimmy Clark, of course, would be a new rookie with no oval track experience.

The Ford/Lotus team then, at Indianapolis in May 1963, must have been somewhat chagined at the fact the better Offenhauser engined roadsters, both in practice and the qualifying sessions, showed a superior lap speed than the two new rear engined Lotuses. But the Ford/Lotus crew still had an ace up its sleeve. Their Ford V8 engines used gasoline instead of alcohol, as did all the Offys, which would cut the number of pit stops required to just one, while the Offenhauser powered vehicles would require at least three. Thus a Lotus car could still win, even with a slightly lower lap speed.

The first day of the 1963 qualifications was May 18. Gurney crashed in the early morning practice, thus wiping out his new offset Ford/Lotus. Dan's demolition of his car greatly altered and weakened his position. Gurney was now forced to drive the old "Mule" prototype test car, which was no match for Jimmy Clark's newest and now sole "offset" Indianapolis type Lotus. Clark qualified at 149.75 mph and would start 5th on race day. Gurney tried to qualify the "Mule" late during the first day qualifications, as he was uninjured from his morning shunt into the outer wall, but his foot got entangled in the throttle strap and the attempt had to be aborted. Dan made the lineup the next day by posting 149.01 mph, to start 12th on the grid. When the time trials were entirely over, six front engined roadsters had out-qualified Clark's speed of 149.75 mph. Parnelli Jones was the fastest and on the pole, in a 1960 model Offenhuser/Watson, with a time of 151.153 mph. Andy Granatelli had three Novis at the track, in the hands of Jim Hurbubise, Art Malone (b. 1936), and Bobby Unser (b. 1934), and all three surprisingly made the show. It was the first time a Novi had been in the "500" since 1958.

Edited by john glenn printz, 04 February 2011 - 16:29.

[john glenn printz]

USAC NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP HISTORY 1963 TO 1965 (cont.-4) Race day saw Jim Hurtubise lead surprisingly the first lap from Parelli Jones, but Jones passed "Hercules" on the next circuit and started pulling away. Hurtubise's big red Novi stayed in 2nd place for the next 37 laps and was, in fact, holding everyone else up, who couldn't quite sneak pass the huge machine which had higher straightaway speeds but was slower in the corners. Finally Rodger McCluskey got by Hurtubise on lap 39 and then gradually others too, got by the Novi. The two Ford/Lotus cars were not, at first, even in the top ten, but lay about 11th and 12th, with Gurney running directly in front of Clark. It soon became evident that Dan was holding Clark up and Jimmy finally lost his patience and quickly sped around his teammate on lap 40. From this point on Clark was the number one pilot on the Ford/Lotus team and Gurney was forever regulated to second violin.

Jones pited on lap 63 and relinquished the lead to McCluskey. The two Ford/Lotuses were now quickly moving up in the standings as all the methanol burning Offenhauser powered roadsters had to pit for fuel replenishment. When McCluskey went in for fuel on lap 67 Jimmy Clark inherited the lead with Gurney running 2nd! It was a new and very slick way to move into the front two positions, as neither Clark nor Gurney had passed anyone, but rather, every car in front of them had disappeared for their first scheduled pit stop for refueling. Clark now led until he made his only stop of the day on lap 95 which put Parnelli Jones in front again. The question, at this point, was whether Jones' front engined Offenhauser/Watson could win over Jimmy Clark's Ford/Lotus, with two more stops for fuel and tires still ahead of it. Dan Gurney had already been effectively eliminated from contention by chassis problems and an overlong pit stop. Jones stayed in front as he pitted on laps 126 and 163, both under a yellow light. As the race entered its final stage it appeared that only Parnelli's Offenhauser engined Watson roadster was going to outrun the more modern, lightweight monocoque Ford/Lotus of Jimmy Clark. Would Jones' car hold up?

It always began as a very faint, hardly perceptible, wisp of white mist coming out of the tail pipe of the car, as it accelerates out of the corners. Ever imperceptibly and inevitably the problem worsens. At first only one spectator in a thousand will notice it but soon, as the engine trouble deepens, the white smoke escaping increases and others too now notice the white wisps. The white fumes steadily increase until the vehicle is pumping it out in huge amounts on the two long straightaways, as well as in the turns. It is the kiss of death. The now hapless driver can either stop and park his car or continue on until the engines blows. There are no other possibilities.

Shortly after Jones' third and last scheduled pit stop, white vapours started coming off Parnelli's car's exhaust pipe, while Jimmy Clark began moving in on Jones for the kill! Clark was now only 4.5 second behind Jones on lap 177. Jones was clearly in very deep trouble now with the white smoke increasing on his every trip around the Speedway. Could the machine make it to the finish? Clark, however backed off, dropped back, and then inexplicably (!), the white smoke from Parnelli's car began to disappear! How could that be? Engine trouble of this kind never ever corrects itself but leads inexorably to ruin.

As it turned out Jones had not had an engine oiling problem at all! A bolt which held the external oil tank, located on the left side of the car, had split the tank horizontally. Oil then leaked from the crack and was being blown onto the hot exhaust pipe where it was instantly being turned into white smoke. The quickly moving car led to the false appearance that the white fumes were being issued from the exhaust system. As the oil level reached the area of the oil tank where the crack existed, the oil stopped escaping and the phenomenon of the white exhaust fumes cleared itself up!

All this had happened amist an immense rhubarb at the start/finish line. Ex-AAA board-track driver Harlan Fengler, now Indy's Chief Stewart, had emphatically warned all the teams before the race that he would immediately black flag any car dropping oil. Fengler had already thrown Jim Hurtubise out in the big Novi, on lap 102, for that very reason. Jones' machine was definitely leaking oil and Colin Chapman asked Fengler to black flag Jones, as the rules seemingly called for. Almost immediately Parnelli's car owner, J. C. Agajanian, arrived on the scene and talked Fengler out of it. Jones' No. 98 Agajanian Special had stopped spraying the track with oil during the ensuing debate among Agajanian, Chapman, and Fengler, and Jones was allowed to continue.

The track was becoming more and more oily, not all of it from only Jones' machine, and Clark decided to decrease his speed on lap 178. Jimmy thought Jones might fail to finish and/or be black flagged and, in any case, a sure 2nd place finish was much better than spinning out. Others were not so lucky or wise. Eddie Sachs spun while in 4th place (lap 170) and Rodger McClusky while running 3rd (lap 199). At the finish Clark trailed Jones by 43 seconds. The top five postions were:

1. Jones, Parnelli, Offenhauser/Watson R, 3:29:35.40, 143.137 mph NTR.

2. Clark, Jimmy, Ford/Lotus RE, 3:30:09.24, 142.752 mph.

3. Foyt, A. J., Offenhauser/Watson-Trevis, R, 3:30:57.34, 142.210 mph.

4. Ward, Rodger, Offenhauser/Watson R, 3:32:37.80, 141.090 mph.

5. Branson, Don, Offenhauser/Watson R, 3:32:58.11, 140.866 mph.

Dan Gurney, in the "Mule", had to settle for 7th place after making three pit stops. There had been two other rear engined machines in the race, both from the stable of Mickey Thompson, beside the two Ford/Lotuses. A 1962 Thompson car, now powered by a Chevrolet V8 and driver by rookie Al "Mr. Clean" Miller (1921-1971) finished 9th. A new 1963 Thompson model car, piloted by Duane Carter, which used 12 inch wheels (!) and was more of a giant go-kart than anything else, went out after 100 laps. None of the three Granatelli Novis got past the 102 circuit. But the main fact of the event was that Scotchman, Jimmy Clark, a complete rookie had led the race and had almost won it, in a rear engined lightweight car using a motor of only 350 horsepower to the Offenhauser's 405. It made a great impression and started the rear engine car revolution at the Speedway and the nation's other Championship paved oval tracks.

The Ford interests were gracious in defeat. Benson Ford (1919-1978), Vice-President of the Ford Motor Company, told Fengler, "We were delighted with the race outcome, and I believe that is the finest decision you could have made."

Edited by john glenn printz, 07 October 2009 - 20:16.

[HDonaldCapps]

I think that JGP's comment that it is 1963 that is the year that the true impact of rear-engined cars at the IMS and on the National Championship Trail should measured is correct. While the Kimberly/ Cooper/ Brabham effort of 1961 certainly garnered much attention, its immediate impact was minimal to none in the larger scheme of things. However, with the involvement of Ford and its sponsoring the Lotus entry and effort in 1963, once you take those necessary steps away from the scene to enable the larger view, the probable year as the catalyst tends to point towards 1963 rather than 1961. Not that 1961 did not play a role, as JGP mentions, but that the year that the "revolution" actually occurred was 1963.

[john glenn printz]

USAC NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP HISTORY 1963 TO 1965 (cont.-5) On June 24 the Ford Motor Company announced it would enter the Ford/Lotus cars in the upcoming Milwaukee and Trenton 200 mile races. The drivers again would be Jimmy Clark and Dan Gurney. If there were any lingering or remaining doubts left after Indianapolis, about the efficacy of the Ford/Lotuses they were quickly dispelled after the Milwaukee 200 of August 18. The two fastest qualifiers were Clark (109.303 mph-new track record) and Gurney (108.781 mph). In the race Clark led all 200 circuits and set a new track record by averaging 104.452 mph. Dan Gurney placed 3rd with A. J. Foyt, in an Offenhauser/Watson-Trevis roadster wedged in between Clark and Gurney. At Trenton on September 22, it was very much the same story except minor mechanical trouble put both Lotuses out of the race. Clark qualified fastest at 109.356 mph (new track record) and Gurney was just behind him at 109.025 mph. Clark led the first 49 laps before retiring with a ruptered oil line. That gave the lead to Gurney, who led until he too went out on lap 147 with a leaking camshaft oil seal. A. J. Foyt then, in his old and faithful Offenhauser/Watson-Trevis roadster, took over the front position and stayed there for the win.

The most important of the 1963 USAC Championship events were the three that the factory Ford/Lotuses competed in, i.e. Indianapolis 500, Milwaukee 200, and the Trenton 200, but there was plenty of action also in the other nine events on the Championship Trail. In the season's opener at Trenton (April 21), Lloyd Ruby, in a modified rear engined 2.7 litre type 18 Climax/Lotus was the quickest qualifier at 106.414 mph, a new track record. In the race Ruby lastest for 40 laps before a broken gear box put him out and A. J. Foyt went on to win in an Offenhauser/Meskowski dirt track car. This, indeed, was to be the last occasion that a dirt car would win a genuine National Championship ranked contest on a paved track.

Watson type roadsters, powered by Offenhauser 4's, won four of the six paved oval races while a Watson built dirt car, driven by Rodger Ward, won four of the six 100 mile dirt track contests. A. J. Foyt, in the same Meskowski dirt track machine, which won at Trenton (April 21), was also victorious in two other dirt surfaced events on the 1963 schedule. Indeed Foyt had another remarkable season. A. J. won five races, was 2nd on three occasions (Springfield, Milwaukee on April 18, and Sacramento), finished 3rd twice (Indianapolis and Indianapolis Fairgrounds), and in single instances was 4th (Milwaukee June 9) and 8th (Phoenix). Foyt was still running at the finish in all twelve 1963 Champ car contests and A. J. won his third U. S. Driving Title in four years. Foyt and Ward each won five races, and between them, won all but two of the 1963 season's events.

The top ten USAC Championship driver standings for 1963 were: 1. A. J. Foyt 2950 points, 2. Rodger Ward 2210, 3. Jim McElreath 1655, 4. Parnelli Jones 1540, 5. Don Branson 1352, 6. Jimmy Clark 1200, 7. Chuck Hulse 1020, 8. Roger McCluskey 750, 9. Jim Hurtubise 660, 10. Johnny Rutherford. 640.

Edited by john glenn printz, 08 October 2009 - 15:35.

[john glenn printz]

USAC NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP HISTORY 1963 TO 1965. (cont.-6) THE REVOLUTION IN TRANSITION. 1964 SEASON (13 races).

The season's thirteen winners were:

1. March 22 Phoenix 100, Foyt, A. J., Offenhauser/Watson R, 107.536 mph, PO NTR.

2. April 19 Trenton 100, Foyt, A. J., Offenhauser/Watson R, 104.530 mph, PO NTR.

3. May 30 Indianapolis 500, Foyt, A. J., Offenhauser/Watson R, 147.350 mph, PO NTR.

4. June 7 Milwaukee 100, Foyt, A. J., Offenhauser/Watson R, 100.346 mph, PO.

5. June 21 Langhorne 100, Foyt, A. J., Offenhauser/Meskowski D, 102.552 mph, D.

6. July 19 Trenton 150, Foyt, A. J., Offenhauser/Watson R, 105.590 mph, PO, NTR.

7. Aug. 22 Springfield 100, Foyt, A. J., Offenhauser/Meskowski D, 95.238 mph, D.

8. Aug. 23 Milwaukee 200, Jones, Parnelli, Ford/Lotus RE, 104.751 mph, PO NTR.

9. Sept. 7 DuQuoin 100, Foyt, A. J., Offenhauser/Meskowski D, 97.800 mph, D NTR.

10. Sept. 26 Indianapolis Fairgrounds 100, Foyt, A. J., Offenhauser/Meskowski D, 89.056 mph, D.

11. Sept. 27 Trenton 200, Jones, Parnelli, Ford/Lotus RE, 96.415 mph, PO.

12. Oct. 25 Sacramento 100, Foyt, A. J., Offenhauser/Meskowski D, 91.451 mph, D.

13. Nov. 11 Phoenix 200, Ruby, Lloyd, Offenhauser/Halibrand RE, 107.736 mph, PO NTR.

Although the Ford Motor Company backed Ford-Lotus team of Jimmy Clark and Dan Gurney had appeared in only three 1963 contests, the cars had changed the USAC Championship division forever. Everybody (car owners, car builders, mechanics, and drivers) seemed intent on making the switch to rear engined equipment in 1964. It might not have quite seemed so at the two 1964 season's openers at Phoenix (March 22) and at Trenton (April 19), but both were staged before the "500", where the U.S. racing fraternity generally has its annual model changeover.

At the Phoenix 100, the inaugural championship event, now held at the Phoenix International Raceway, which replaced the old hitherto used Phoenix State Fair one mile dirt oval, only one rear powered vehicle appeared, a new Offenhauser/Vollstedt, in the hands of Len Sutton. The pair went only four circuits in the contest to finish last in a 22 car starting lineup. A. J. Foyt led all the way in a 1961 Offenhauser/Watson roadster. Next came the Trenton 100 where only two rear engined cars showed up. One was a new Offenhauser/Watson, Waton's very first rear powered racer, driven by Rodger Ward. The other rear motored entrant was an old Cooper chassis with a Maserati engine installed in it. The Maserati/Cooper didn't even start and Rodger Ward's new car hit the outside wall after 38 circuits, while trying to avoid the spinning cars of Mario Andretti (b. 1940) and Ed Kostenuck (1925-1997). While Ward was in the race he ran in 2nd place but was never a threat to Foyt who again led all 100 laps in a Watson roadster, this time a 1963 model. Then came Indianapolis.

The Ford Motor Company had resolved immediately after the 1963 "500" to continue its Indianapolis program and even expanded it greatly to win the 1964 event. Both Ford and Colin Chapman had underestimated the speed potential of the Meyer-Drake Offenhauser roadster at Indy in 1963 and they now definitely knew they needed more power. Ford started building and testing an "all out" thoroughbred type V8 racing engine with double overhead cams, for use during the 1964 USAC season. Like the pushrod V8 used in the two 1963 Ford/Lotus cars, it ran on gasoline. The horsepower rating on this new V8 255 cubic inch motor was given as 420 at 8000 rpm, compared to 375 horsepower at 7200 rpm for the 1963 pushrod job. With its loss at Indianapolis in 1963 and all the added expence of designing and developing the new four cam V8, Ford decided it would be a good idea to have a little extra insurance and firepower at Indianapolis in 1964, in the form of more vehicles using its brand new powerplant. Ford was just beginning to realize the audaciousness of its 1963 Indianapolis effort, of entering just two Ford powered cars in the "500", and actually expecting to win.

Ford officials also felt its image and prestige were on the line and so, rather naively, chose to loan its new four cam engine to the better teams only. So in addition to the "works" Ford-Lotus team, using Clark and Gurney as its pilots, four other "select" stables had Ford engined cars. The arrangement used by the Ford Motor Company at Indianapolis in 1964 for these other teams using its four cam engine was peculiar, to say the least! The four selected teans did not pay anything for their use of them or own the engines, and part of the deal was the Ford Motor Company alone had the full control by its own staff and personnel, of the assembly, maintenance, overhaul, and repair work on their motors exclusively! The individual teams, which included Lotus, were not allowed to alter, modify, or tamper with these Ford V8s. If a team had motor problems or blew an engine, Ford would simply replace it with a new one, completely free of charge!

The non availability of the new four cam Ford V8 racing engine, to most of the USAC Championship teams was at first anyway (i.e. early 1964), strictly academic because the existing Indianapolis car chassis were too narrow to accommodate a Ford unit. Totally new chassis were required. The Ford V8 was a much smoother running motor than the old and ancient Offenhauser 4 and had an advantage that it could be installed in a less heavy and hefty chassis. In the late 1960s a driver, who had hitherto run only Ford powered vehicles, switched to a turbocharged Drake Offenhauser. When he first got into the car he remarked, "Is this right? Why the damn engine is ready to jump right out of the car!"

There were nine Ford V8 powered vehicles at the Speedway in 1964; 3 team Lotus (Jim Clark, Dan Gurney, and a backup car); 3 Mickey Thompson machines (Dave McDonald, Maston Gregory, and a backup); a 1963 Lotus now owned by Lindsey Hopkins with a new four cam V8 installed in it (Bobby Marshman); a new Watson (Rodger Ward); and a new car built by by racing compentent parts manufacturer Ted Halibrand (Eddie Sachs). Ford tended obviously to loan its engines only to proven teams of the past who had winning drivers, good mechanics, and racing savvy. A notable exception here was the enfant terrible of hot rodding, Mickey Thompson, who somehow wound up with three Ford engines. Without doubt the fact that Thompson had fielded rear engined machines at the Speedway in both 1962 and 1963 (though rather unsuccessfully it should be noted) was probably used as evidence that he was among the engineering leaders in the design and construction of contemporary Indianapolis - USAC Championship cars; and this consideration proved decisive for Ford. All nine of the Ford powered cars were, of course, rear engined vehicles.

Edited by john glenn printz, 23 October 2009 - 11:49.

[ZOOOM]

An interesting piece of information about Indy that year was that Ford never admitted that any team had ANY problems with the Ford engines. The fact that freight trucks would appear at night picking up creights and dropping off creights was one of the (wink/nod) stories of the month of May. You are correct that nobody was allowed to touch any of the Ford engines. They were some of the first "plug and play" devices EVER!
ZOOOM

[john glenn printz]

USAC NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP HISTORY 1963 TO 1965 (cont.-7) A. J. Foyt was tentatively offered for his own use the third Lotus team car, i.e. the backup, but Chapman, who was in charge of the Lotus operation, would not release the car to Foyt until both Clark and Gurney had qualified. This arrangement was, of course, unacceptable to Foyt, who wanted the Lotus in his hands all month with no possibility of it being taken away from him. So the negotiations broke down and Foyt found himself without a Ford powered car to drive. Another top pilot who found himself without a Ford engined car was the 1963 Indianapolis winner, Parnelli Jones. Partly because of his victory over the Ford/Lotus of Jimmy Clark the year before, Ford was not overly extending itself to help him now, especially as he was still running for car owner, J. C. Agajanian. Both Foyt and Jones had Meyer Drake Offenhauser powered rear engined vehicles ready in any case, but both rather quickly and ultimately decided they had a much better chance to be competitive by using their time tested front engined Offenhauser/Watson roadsters. Foyt was quoted as saying, "Maybe the old Offy-Watson roadster has one more race left in her. Rear-engined equipment hasn't won here yet."

The whole Speedway scene was in a fervent molten state with everyone scrambling to learn the new state of the art. To show what the two 1963 Ford Lotus racers had wrought it was only necessary to point out that 24 of the 64 entries were rear powered machines. Of the rear engined equipment 14 were Offenhauser powered, while Ford had 9 machines, and Chevrolet a single example. The Ford/Lotus cars of 1963 started a lot of Americans thinking that with a new Indianapolis car design revolution in the making, it was perhaps a good time and an unique opportunity to go into Indianapolis-Championship car construction. Among the more significant new car builders at Indy in 1964, with new rear powered designs, were Fred Gerhardt, Ted Halibrand (1916-1991), Joe Huffaker, and Rolla Vollstedt (b. 1918).

The time trials quickly demonstrated new gods had displaced the former and older Titans. Rear engined machinery, all Ford powered, took the entire front row. The results were Clark (158.828 mph new track record), Marshman (157.867 mph), and Ward (156.406 mph). The fastest of the Offenhauser/Watson roadsters were in the hands of Jones (155.099 mph) and Foyt (154.406 mph), who would start in the second row with Gurney (154.487 mph), in the second team Lotus. When fully completed, the 33 car field consisted of seven rear powered Fords; three front engined Novis of which Bobby Unser's was a new four wheel drive Ferguson built in England; and 18 conventional Offenhauser front engined roadsters. The three Novis were now running under the sponsorship of STP with the three Granatelli brothers still in charge.

Most of the experts expected an easy Ford rear engined car win, wth Jimmy Clark favored above all others. Jones and Foyt, the best pilots still using the old roadsters, were not considered too seriously by most. Almost everyone (including me) expected Jones and Foyt to blow their motors in a vain attempt to keep up with the faster Fords of Clark, Marshman, and Ward, and perhaps even Gurney and Sachs. The speed gap between the fastestqualificer (Clark at 158.828 mph) and the slowest (Bill Cheesbourg at 148.711 mph) was more than 10 mph, the largest difference of any USAC sanctioned Indianapolis 500 up to that time. In addition, the Ford V8 powered cars were still all using gasoline for the race instead of methanol and thus, just as 1963, they had the added adavantage of having to make less pit stops than the methanol burning Offenhausers.

For the first time ever, the entire nation could watch the race live if they wished, via a closed circuit nation wide, theater TV network and setup. Thousands watched across the entire U.S. as Clark streaked into the lead as the green flag fell. After just two circuits completed by Clark, one could easily see, a whole new era had dawned. With so many new designs on the Speedway at the same time, and with their respective speed potential being so variant, the various competitors had very quickly spread themselves out. This was very unlike the old roadster days (1956-1962) when the difference between the best and the worst had never been anywhere so great.

Edited by john glenn printz, 02 November 2009 - 21:29.

[gbl]

I guess I found an interesting original article about the Ford engine on flickr:


http://www.flickr.co...57622562689710/

Interesting to see the Indy engine installed in a road car...

[john glenn printz]

USAC NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP RACING 1963 TO 1965 (cont.-8) As Jimmy Clark headed towards the first turn, after completing his second lap, chaos was about to erupt at the beginning of the main straightway. Dave MacDonald, a rookie in one of the Mickey Thomson Fords, lost it coming out of turn four. His red No. 83 then crashed into a concrete barrier, located on the inside of the mainstretch, at a 45 degree angle. The entire car instantly burst into red-yellow flame like a napalm bomb and bounced away from the inside wall like a billard ball, at again, a 45 degree angle. MacDonald's machine crossed the track as the latter two-thirds of the field was filing by, one by one, up against the outside concrete wall. Driver Bob Veith later said, "I'd just passed Sachs' in turn three and I was right behind MacDonald when he went into the wall and blew up. I got through it all right, but I didn't see how Sachs was going to make it."

MacDonald's Ford/Thomspon moved directly across the path of Sach's Ford/Halibrand and Sachs plowed right into MacDonald's burning vehicle at 185 mph. There was another huge fireball, an explosion, not unlike what had happened to MacDonald, two seconds before when he hit the inside wall. Both cars, MacDonald's and Sachs', were now engulfed in a flaming inferno fed by the gasoline leaking from their busted and ruptured fuel tanks. The fuel from both cars was now draining onto the track surface and running down across it, to the infield grass. The intensely hot inferno rose to a height of 15 feet and rapidly spread all across the roadway. The pack continued at this point to move through the flames on the inside at very high speed, to avoid being hit from the rear, there now literally being no other area for them to travel. The very high and oil-gasoline fed sheet of flame, you couldn't see through it, was now turning into a 60 foot high black and opague smoke screen. The pilots, driving blind, had to just grit their teeth and hope they wouldn't hit anything on the other side while moving into and out of the totally black smoke barrier. Most of them lucked out but some did not.

Bobby Unser nudged Ronnie Duman by hitting the rear of his car and Johnny Rutherford crashed into and over Unser just a moment later. The eight or nine vehicles that had been running ahead of the MacDonald crash had now come around again for lap 3, stopped and parked themselves on the inside grass located on the short shute between turns three and four. The entire track was totally blocked by fire and black smoke in the area of the accident. If my memory serves me correctly I believe about 12 cars in the back of the field managed to stop on the inside edge of the track on their second circuit, without traveling through the accident area at all. These vehicles, plus the eight or nine or so, which had come around again, made a collect of about 20 cars parked on the inside grass.The race had been red flagged by necessity, the first time ever at Indianapolis during a "500", because of an accident. The fire crews battled the hot blaze for 20 minutes and once or twice it appeared the fire was about out and under control, when it erupted again. Sachs was dead and MacDonald, though technically alive, would expire two hours after his wreck. Duman was seriously burned, Rutherford less so, and Norm Hall, Chuck Stevenson, and Bobbly Unser were basically O.K. Seven cars had been involved in the bumping spree, including the four wheel drive Novi/Ferguson of Unser. All seven were eliminated from further competition. After a one hour and 45 minute delay the race got underway again with the cars lined up single file in the order in which they had been running at the time of the acident.

Clark again jumped out in front but soon found himself in very serious trouble. The two official Ford/Lotus entries (Clark and Gurney) were using British manufactured Dunlop tires instead of the standard Firestones, at Colin Chapman's instigation and the Ford Motor Company's chagrin, and now Clark's tires began to come apart by throwing off their treads. Clark thus, had to slow down, and now a hard charging Bobby Marshman, in Lindsey Hopkins' 1963 type Ford/Lotus, took over the front position on lap 7. Marshman now began pulling away easily but was perhaps a little too anxious, for he much too rapidly approached a much slower entry, Johnny White, and to avoid a collision, Marshman had to move onto the infield grass between turns one and two. Here a rock sheared off an oil plug located on the bottom of the engine and the motor started bleeding to death immediately. So, after just 39 laps, Marshman, without any engine oil, was forced to pull off the track and park the car. Clark inherited the lead from Marshman (lap 40) but his left rear tire had now become so greatly unbalanced and it vibrated the chassis so roughly, that it caused the left rear suspension to come apart and collapse (lap 48). So now the pre-race favorite, Jimmy Clark, was out of the race also.

The number of Ford powered machines still moving was now, alarmingly enough, down to just two, Dan Gurney and Rodger Ward; as the second Ford/Thompson car (Eddie Johnson) was out after six laps with fuel pump failure. Gurney also soon began to lose the treads on his Dunlaps and he had to slow his pace accordingly and couldn't make a run at the race leaders. When the Dunlap tire technicians couldn't insure the safety of Gurney, upon consultation, the entry was withdrawn (lap 110).

After Jimmy Clark's retirement (lap 48) the lead came into the hands of Parnelli Jones in an antique 1960 Offenhauser/Watson roadster. In second place place was Foyt, dogging at Jones' heels, in another Offenhauser/Watson roadster which was a newer 1963 model. Jones and Foyt now staged a wheel to wheel duel (laps 48-54) until Jones stopped for fuel. Jones never got back out. His machine caught on fire during the refueling operation, and Jones, quite unaware that the car was on fire, pulled away from his pit area but when he began to feel the heat he made a rapid bail out along pit row. Jones suffered second and third degree burns on his left arm and both legs.

Edited by john glenn printz, 03 November 2009 - 19:59.

[ovfi]

John,

Congratulations for your excellent, precise, detailed and impartial description of the facts.
If it's permitted, I would like to make two considerations.

First one, is about the Offenhauser engine. You mention it as an ancient design engine, which is true. But, in my opinion, Offenhauser deserves more than being recognized by carrying an ancient design form 1913 to the sixties. The true truth is that Fred Offenhauser and Leo Goosen were the only engineers in the world to maintain the four valve design throughout the decades were the hemispherical combustion chamber two valve design (resulted from Harry Ricardo's theories in 1923) was reigning on motor racing. Mercedes, Auto-Union, Alfa-Romeo, Maserati engines were examples of the Ricardo theories. Offenhauser didn't followed this stream because he knew about the superior breathing capability of the four valve design. I know that because in 1968 I saw a mimeograph copy of a 1936 letter from Offenhauser to customers, were he supports not only the four valve design, but the construction of the cylinders in one block with the cylinder head instead of the crankcase, thus eliminating the head gasket, origin of many racing failures.

Second, the four valve flow superiority is the most important thing that Ford discovered when testing the Offenhauser engine (Flow box tests showed the Offy wasn't at its limit, RPM and Power could be extended much further), and Chapman promptly passed the information to Climax, which was able to make it's first four valve formula one design only by the middle of 1964. From the thirties to 1963 all formula one engines were of the hemispherical chamber two valve type, but in the next few years all were of the four valve design, and they are until today. The construction of the cylinders in one block with the cylinder head instead of the crankcase is another characteristic of the Offenhauser used by modern engines since the "turbo era". 1964 was the year when the world discovered what Offenhauser had discovered 50 years before, although he had not invented it (it was Peugeot, who abandoned this design).

In a nutshell, Offenhauser carried this design from 1913 to 1964, but he did that with a lot of knowledge, and after Ford discovered and accepted it, the ancient design became the modern design of our days.

[# 0]

The Miller engine that Offenhauser copied and developed was designed in 1931, not 1913, and there were lots of four-valve designs between 1931 and 1964 besides the Offenhouser. Only thing special about the Offy was the integral head.

[john glenn printz]

USAC NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP HISTORY 1963 TO 1965 (cont.-9) A.J. Foyt was now the new leader over the second placed Rodger Ward, who was soon to become the sole Ford powered driver remaining when Dan Gurney was withdrawn, but Ward was in no position to challenge A. J. Foyt now. The Ford Motor Company's consciously condescending attitute toward the teams using their loaned out four cam V8's had sometimes led to acrimony. A. J. Watson, Rodger Ward's mechanic and crew chief, had wanted to use alcohol instead of gasoline during the race, but Ford wouldn't hear of it. So the night before the race Watson and his crew had, unbeknown to Ford, snuck back to the garages and altered the V8 for alcohol use instead of gasoline. As there was no way these rather major and intricate adjustments could be track tested, everything had to be guessed at. Now, in the race itself, the engine was exhibiting excessive fuel consumption because the jets were set too rich, which made it impossible for Ward to keep pace with Foyt. Ward made a total of five pit stops to Foyt's two. So the contest ran itself out with Ward quite unable to make any impression on Foyt at all. Foyt led circuits 55-200. At the finish, Ward was the runnerup about one and 1/2 laps behind Foyt. The top five finishers were:

1. Foyt, A. J., Offenhauser/Watson R, 3:23:35.83, 147.350 mph NTR.

2. Ward, Rodger, Ford/Watson RE, 3:25:00.18, 146.339 mph.

3. Ruby, Lloyd, Offenhauser/Watson R, 3:27.52.31, 144.320 mph.

4. White, Johnny, Offenhauser/Watson R, 3:29:29.30, 143.206 mph.

5. Boyd, Johnny, Offenhauser/Kuzma R, 3:30:45.31, 142.345 mph.

USAC was naturally anxious to get the event over with as quickly as possible, with two drivers killed on the second lap, so instead of allowing the top ten cars to finish all 200 laps, the officials flagged everyone off the track after only the first five machines had completed the 500 miles. This was the first instance of the now current practice of letting only the first two or three position drivers complete the entire 500 miles, if not on the leaders' lap, before flagging off the remaining portion of the still moving field. This new 1964 procedure can, at times, greatly affect and alter the final order of the standings. For instance, in the 1967 "500" Parnelli Jones, in the STP turbine car, retired after 196 circuits and was ranked 6th in the official placements. Here the race was halted immediately after the winner, A. J. Foyt, completed his 200th lap. Had the other competitors still running, had been allowed to complete the entire 500 mile distance, Jones would have dropped down to 10th place.

In the post race analysis and commentary A. J. Watson was heavily criticized for furtively altering his borrowed Ford V8 engine to burn alcohol instead of high octane gasoline. Many claimed the Ford/Watson rear engined machine would have won but for this insubordinate tinkering by A. J. Watson and his crew. But here, at least, Ford could count its lucky starts for without the three W's, i.e. Watson, Ward, and Wilke, the Ford engined cars would have been completely routed. As it was, the three W's, had salvaged second place for Ford powered cars. The race also witnessed the last last appearance of Dan Gurney on the official Ford backed, Colin Chapman run, Ford-Lotus team. Ever since Jimmy Clark had become the No. 1 driver on the team, during the actual running of the 1963 "500", Gurney's status on it had greatly deteriorated.

Of the dozen rear engined cars that had started the event only two were still running at the finish, and they were listed 2nd (Ward's Ford/Watson) and 13th (Walt Hansgen's Offenhauser/Huffaker). The 1964 race also ended, for all practical purposes, Mickey Thompson's career as a viable car builder. Thompson, during the years 1962 to 1964, had entered 11 vehicles in all, of which five actually qualified. The final results spoke for themselves, a 9th, 20th, 23rd, 26th, and 29th. In 1964 Thompson had the added advantage of using Ford V8 power, but it didn't do him a bit of good. The three Granatelli STP Novis for 1964 were listed as finishing 11th (Art Malone), 21st (Jim McElreath), and 32nd (Bobby Unser).

The 1964 500 was one of the greatest Indianapolis races ever run, macabre and deadly though it was. It remains a great monument to the savvy, skill, persistence, and courage of A. J. Foyt and Parnelli Jones, who carried on largely unperturbed, in totally obsolute and outmodeled cars, in the face of seemingly impossible odds. Both Foyt and Jones displayed a greatness that has seldom been equaled at any race track. All the Ford engined equipment at the Speedway and the second lap accident didn't unnerve or upset them in the slightest. But rather everything seemed to conspire to make A. J. Foyt more determined than ever to win it.

On the other hand, the event was a total and complete disaster for the Ford Motor Company. Although its cars had completely dominated the qualifications, in the race it fared far worst than it had in 1963, when it had a lot less firepower. The previous year, with just two entries in the show, Ford engined cars placed 2nd (Clark) and 7th (Gurney). Now with seven machines in the contest it had a 2nd (Ward) and nothing at all. In addition, both Sachs and MacDonald, had been killed in Ford powered racers before thousands.

Foyt, the jubilant victor, claimed after the race that rear powered cars were unsafe and many others were against the further use of gasoline, maintaining rightly, that alcohol based fuels were much safer. The day after the "500" the Ford Motor Company reiterated its intention to stay in USAC Championship racing. Ford's 1964 game plan, in case of it failing to win at Indianapolis, just as it had been in 1963, was now to run the two official Ford/Lotus factory cars in the upcoming Milwaukee and Trenton 200 mile races. The Ford debacle at Indianapolis meant however, that the Ford Motor Company, had now to seriously to re-examine and re-evaluate its whole situation with regard to USAC National Championship racing.

Edited by john glenn printz, 09 November 2009 - 16:52.

[john glenn printz]

USAC NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP HISTORY 1963 TO 1965 (cont.-10) There existed problems in three major areas:

(1.) The entry of the Ford Motor Company into championship level U. S. automobile racing in 1963 was bound to be disturbing and a bit upsetting to the old guard. Since the mid-1920s, with the unusual exceptions of Studebaker in 1932-33 and a qusai-Ford V8 team in 1935, the U.S automobile manufacturers had stayed completely away from Indianapolis and AAA-USAC Championship racing. The sport was supported largely by wealthy and affluent sportsmen. All the competing cars were privately owned with the total resources, outlay, and facilities for the development and testing of new machines and design concepts being very severely limited in each individual case. Nor was there any real or genuine prospect of a return on one's investment, for even during an exceptionably winning season, a team could hardly break even. Owning an Indianapolis car or fielding a championship team was only an example of what economist-iconoclast Thorstein Veblen (1857-1929) called conspicuous consumption.

For these reasons almost everyone used the tried and tested unsupercharged Offenhauser 4 for an engine, and why America racing chassis design remained so static and confined mostly to small detailed refinements. Any attempt at real innovation, as the smarter teams knew, was the certain path to ruin. This was the situation in 1963, when the Ford Motor Company thrust itself on the scene with seemingly unlimited financial and technical resources all applied to totally new British designs and theories. After the 1963 "500", Ford decided to go all out and do whatever was necessary to win the 1964 event. Although no person, organization, or nation in the strict sense, has "unlimited" resources, Ford Motor's Indianapolis project, although it kept a generally low profile, must have certainly seemed to have that character to the more regular USAC Championship racing stables, who had supported the sport for years on their rather limited allowances and budgets.

Ford, it was publicly stated was by 1964, was spending close to a million dollarly annually on its Indianapolis program alone. Nobody else could even come close to matching that and, if Ford won say, the highest paying events on the Championship trail (i.e. Indianapolis 500, Milwaukee 200 and the Trenton 200) that prize money would no longer flow into the coffers of the private teams that the Ford Motor Company was competing against. Bob Wilke of Milwaukee, whose Leader Card team was first rate and the best stable in USAC during 1962, was probably spending about $75,000 annually. In contrast, Ford had a large group of expert personnel and engineers to draw on, as well as large technological resources and facilities.

One of the common shibboleths of the racing game is the eternal cry that the little guys are being forced out of the sport by the big money teams. Always the smaller money teams are complaining that urgent reforms are needed to keep them on the track and in the chase. A large cash outlay would appear, to this observer, to be a necessary, but not sufficient factor, in winning events on the Indianapolis car circuit, but whatever deficiency is caused by a lack of the green stuff is usually compounded and augmented in the actual practice as well.

The natural trend in motor racing is for the big money, the better drivers, the superior mechanics, the more acute and wealthy car owners and the faster car designs, to all gravitate towards each other. Thus, whatever single disadvantage initially exists, that deficiency in itself tends to attract other factors equally inimical to winning races. Given anywhere near a normal state of affairs there exists no way really in which the smaller financed teams can generally run up front and be competitive. But given these realities it is not necessary to add insult to injury and this the Ford Motor Company seemingly did. The 1964 "loan" arrangement at Indianapolis, whereby Ford gave its engines out to certain pre-selected stables under strict conditions was no longer feasible.

Was it fair that the big money teams were getting the new Ford V8 racing engines without cost, along with the free maintenance, repair, and replacement service; while the poorer competitors and the bulk of the entrants were getting no help at all? Many of these lesser teams too, had supported Championship racing for years but Ford, along with all its money and advantages, was a comparative newcomer. Here was a situation that needed rectification. And, on top of it all, was the fact that the Ford Motor Company had still not won at Indianapolis after two years, 1963 and 1964, of trying even with all its careful deliberations and detailed draconian policies.

(2.) Ford was and had been touching dangerous ground in another area also, namely putting the long established and meritorious firm of Meyer-Drake out of business. There wasn't much of a genuine tradition with regard to the manufacture of thoroughbred racing cars and motors in the U.S. but what there was, was largely linked up to this present company. Meyer-Drake could trace its lineage back to Fred Offenhauser and further back to Harry Armenius Miller, whose first major customers were Bob Burman and Cliff Durant. Miller was America's greatest race car constructor and manufacturer. In late 1963, the Meyer-Drake firm began receiving disturbing letters from its previous mainstay erstwhile customers, like Bob Wilke, cancelling their previously placed orders for new Meyer-Drake Offenhauser 255 motors, and requesting their deposit money on them returned. The Ford Motor Company, they all politely explained, was supplying and giving them new engines completely free of charge for use at Indianapolis and elsewhere.

Louis Meyer and Dale Drake toyed with the idea briefly of bringing an anti-trust suit against the Ford Motor Company, but soon dropped that idea. Instead Mr. Meyer wrote a tactful letter to Henry Ford II outling the exact situation and the economic trouble Meyer-Drake was now in because of Ford's involvement at Indianapolis. Meyer then asked if the Meyer-Drake company might somehow become involved with Ford in their Indianapolis and USAC Championship trail program. Less than a week later, Lee Iacocca phoned Meyer, and him Meyer-Drake could become the sole distributor, agend, supplier, and service dealer for the Ford four cam V8 engine. Probably the Meyer-Drake's problems had already been on the Ford Motor Company's mind. So a contract was drawn up and signed, and Dale Drake and Louis Meyer found themselves as the middlemen between the Ford Motor Company and the teams!

The exact chronology is a bit fuzzy but sometime after the 1964 "500", Ford started selling its four cam V8 255 engines, through the Meyer-Drake company, to everyone without restrictions or anything being said about their use. The price of each Ford engine was placed at $15,000 a copy (the Meyer-Drake 4 was selling for $12,500) but the actual production cost to Ford per unit was closer to $37,500. That figure didn't include either the cost of the design or its development. But Ford now adopted the philosophy that it would be very advantageous and beneficial to itself, to get as many Ford powered vehicles out on the USAC Championship paved ovals as possible; and its price therefore had to be within the range of its chief competitor and at a figure most of the teams could afford.

If the only way to win at Indianapolis was to fill up the entire 33 car starting field with Ford powered machinery, then the parent company would just have to go that route. Nor could Ford worry any longer about whether its engines would always be placed in totally competent hands. Had the Meyer-Drake company ever worried about it? It was odd indeed, that Meyer-Drake would be marketing, selling, and servicing both the Offenhauser 4 and the Ford V8, direct rivals, simultaneously during 1964-65, but the fact Meyer-Drake had been the sole supplier of thoroughbred racing engines for the Championship circuit before Ford entered the fray; and the fact that the Ford Motor Company now wished to fill up the starting fields with as many of its V8s as possible, necessitated an accommodation and settlement of some sort between the two. Actually it was a very good arrangement and deal for Dale Drake and Louie Meyer, as a huge commission was given to the pair for each Ford V8 unit sold. But Drake remained unhappy because he wanted to go further and develop the old Offenhauser design using a supercharger, and see if he could beat all the Fords once again, just as they had in 1963 and 1964.

Edited by john glenn printz, 06 November 2009 - 12:44.

[ovfi]

For better clarification, I have to make some comments:

1-I didn't said that the engine was designed in 1913, I said "Offenhauser carried this design from 1913 to 1964", meaning that the 1913 original four valve design of the Peugeot, conceived in 1912 by a French group nicknamed "Les Charlatans" , which Offenhauser and Goosen copied on many engines while working for Miller, was consciously choosen in 1933 when they bought the tooling, the patterns and the rights to make the 4 cylinder which they designed in 1926 for Miller as the 4C151 marine engine (not in 1931, as someone said). This Miller 4C151 of 1926 became the Offenhauser 255 engine of 1935.

2-From 1931 to 1964, as far as I know, few engines used the four valve design, most of them designed and made by Offenhauser and Goosen for third parties (Miller, Winfield's Novi, Lencki, etc), and the Novi was the only one which survived until 1964. All European leading machines of this period were of the hemispherical two valve type. If someone knows about others four valve engines of this period, I would like to know who were making them.

3-The integral head/cylinder was an invention of the XIX century which Offenhauser incorporated in his projects since he was working for Miller, and obviously maintained it in the engines bearing his name.

4-John, please consider my comments on Offenhauser simply as food for thought, I'm enjoying too much (I repeat) your excellent, precise, detailed and impartial description of the facts on this important period of racing.

Edited by ovfi, 04 November 2009 - 20:34.

[john glenn printz]

Dear Mr. "ovfi".

I will be dealing with the history of the Offenhauser 4 shortly.

Actually the material I'm posting here was written in 1984 and published in 1985. I had a "side-bar" dealing with the past history of the Offenhauser 4 with my main writeup.

In 1984, in dealing and describing the MacDonald/Sachs crash at Indianapolis in 1964, I had to relie on my memory. I was, in fact, right in front of this melee being seated in Stand J and saw MacDonald out of control before he hit the inside concrete barrier. I thought he would bounce off the wall, but did not expect his machine to be enveloped in a ball of flame when it hit. Now there are film clips available of this incident and from them it is clear that many cars running behind MacDonald and Sachs on their 2nd lap got by the two burning cars, by driving to the inside, before the fuel spread all across the track.

Glad you are enjoying the narrative! Sincerely, J. G. Printz

[john glenn printz]

USAC NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP HISTORY 1963 TO 1965 (cont.-11)

(3.) And lastly there were the Ford Motor Company's problems with regard to Colin Chapman and its own perhaps overblown expectations as to what was to happen. Although Ford had given Chapman a bundle of money during 1963 and 1964, the Lotus firm had not won at Indianapolis either year and Chapman's decision to use Dunlap tires in the 1964 event, against the Ford Motor Company's wishes, had probably cost a Ford victory in the race. Ford had now had enough of Chapman's rather nonchalant attitude towards the Indianapolis 500. Chapman and Clark, during the month of May, seemed to be more concerned about their European Grand Prix ventures than the Indianapolis 500. Luckily and acutely Chapman realized, after the 1964 fiasco, he would have to take the "500" on in an entirely different manner for 1965, and give it his full attention during the month of May. The simple fact was the "500" was not as easy as it had looked at first. But Chapman here was not entirely to blame for the lack of success during the 1963 and 1964. There were other considerations and factors involved which both Chapman and Ford had entirely and apparently overlooked. Both were surely guilty of greatly underestimating the skills of the indigenous American racing fraternity and the actual potentialities of the existing Offenhauser powered front engined roadsters.

Normal textbook theory and most regular engineering practices hardly ever apply, in a strict sense, to racing car design and construction. Thoroughbred type racing cars are all too peculiar and specialized for that. In racing, actual test experience is EVERYTHING. Behind the old Offenhauser or Meyer-Darke 4 (first actually drawn up by Leo Goossen for Miller in 1931-Consult the Historical Excursus below) lay eons of actual oval track experience, know-how, and testing. The Offenhauser 4 had been used and developed in race after race, season after season, unit for unit, for more than three decades (1931-1964). Some of its basic design concepts had been taken originally from the Ernest Henry designed French built Peugeot racing cars of 1912-1914 and the French constructed Ballots of 1919-1922, and were then further developed over another decade of use (1921-1930) by Harry A. Miller in the U.S. for high speed oval speedway use.

Scores of acute mechanics had used, worked, and played with the design over the years and had perfected it in the hard, tough, actual, factual arena of real competition. Nobody, no large organization, or even the Ford Motor Company, could certainly quickly equal or match that type of experience. Simple as the old Offenhauser looked on paper or even in the field, the design actually hid the vast race tested perfection the engine had attained. It was easy for Ford and others to underestimate its performance potential in the light of more modern and advanced engineering practices. Similarly, the chassis being produced by the leading American builders, like A. J. Watson, Quinn Epperly, and Eddie Kuzma, were simple and primitive in outlook but they functioned well because they all existed in an extreme state of tested perfection. Colin Chapman and Dan Gurney were totally correct in maintaining that these primitive and simple cars were far behind the times in conception, design, and engineering, but it would take time for that to be proven in actual practice. After looking over the existing contemporay Indianapolis equipment in 1962, Chapman concluded winning the "500" would be easy with a new modern monocoque rear powerd car. Both Chapman and the Ford Motor Company were of the opinion they could win at Indianapolis the first time out! That was naivete on a grand scale. What had been overlooked was something very closely akin to Pomeroy's dictum, i.e. "A law of automobile design is that the first concept of a superior principle is always defeated by the perfected example of established practice."

Pomeroy's maxim is worth discussing further because it is one of the most active and powerful factors, though unknown to the general public at large, operating in U.S. Championship-Indy Car Racing since the early 1920s. One of the main difficulties of any large firm or corporation, say an automobile manufacturer, who wishes to compete at Indianapolis with new cars and engines of their own origin and design, is they can't really expect to win the first or even the second time out, even with superior design or equipment. The Ford Motor Company got caught up in this at Indianapolis in 1963 and 1964. At a minimum, a company has to be willing to accept losses for the first two years or so, before it can put itself into a position to really win. It was even so for Harry Miller and the two Duesenberg brothers in the teens and early 1920s. The truth is, no entirely new design has ever won the Indianapolis 500 on its first time out, not even Ray Harroun's Marmon "Wasp" which won the inaugural 500 in 1911. The same exact car had competed at Indianapolis the previous year in a 200 miler (May 28) which it and Harroun won at an average speed of 73.5 mph. Legend has it that Harroun's special six cylinder Marmon was specifically built for the first 500 in 1911. This is quite untrue as this car made its first appearance at Atlanta, GA on May 5, 1910.

A race car is a complicated mechanism and even if, as a new design, it has great theoretical potential it takes time, extensive testing, modifications, and actual race experience to get it to live up to anywhere near its intrinic capabilities. One of the basic reasons why the American (GM, Chrysler, and Ford) and the foreign (Mercedes-Benz, Porsche, Ferrari, etc.) auto manufacturers stay away from Indianapolis and the Championship - Indy Car circuit in droves, is they cannot tolerate two to four years of losses before the possibility of a win emerges. And the losses as well may be very embarrassing defeats with of course, all the resultant bad publicity. The public's and fans' expectations are very great but the realities in this case is much more difficult and even extremely perilous. Anything short of absolute victory is totally useless for effective publicity and advertising.

It is certainly to the Ford Motor Company's credit that it stuck to its original goal, i.e, a win at Indianapolis, after two losses there in 1963 and 1964. On the other hand, Ford's Indy venture had come about in a particularly auspicious time. The rear engined racing car revolution was one of the biggest engineering shakeups ever to occur in automobile racing, both in the international Grand Prix scene and in the U.S. National Championship ranks and here clearly, Ford had backed the right side of the argument. Winning Indianapolis was almost inevitable for the official Ford-Lotus team, after its losses there in 1963 and 1964, and everybody knew it. So there was no reason for Ford to abandon the project after having come so far. But enough said about Ford situation after the 1964 Indianapolis race.

Edited by john glenn printz, 05 November 2009 - 21:26.

[ZOOOM]

Facinating....
I can say that at the time I actually knew all that John has said...
However, I've never seen it put down on paper as well as john has done.
I have never actually looked back and been able to put everything in the proper sequence.
Bravo, John, More, More!

ZOOOM

[# 0]

For better clarification, I have to make some comments:

1-I didn't said that the engine was designed in 1913, I said "Offenhauser carried this design from 1913 to 1964", meaning that the 1913 original four valve design of the Peugeot, conceived in 1912 by a French group nicknamed "Les Charlatans" , which Offenhauser and Goosen copied on many engines while working for Miller, was consciously choosen in 1933 when they bought the tooling, the patterns and the rights to make the 4 cylinder which they designed in 1926 for Miller as the 4C151 marine engine (not in 1931, as someone said). This Miller 4C151 of 1926 became the Offenhauser 255 engine of 1935.

All Marine Millers had two valves per cylinder. The forerunner of the offy was the 1931 4-valve Miller 200/220. There is a world of diiference between an Offy 255 and a marine Miller.

[# 0]

2-From 1931 to 1964, as far as I know, few engines used the four valve design, most of them designed and made by Offenhauser and Goosen for third parties (Miller, Winfield's Novi, Lencki, etc), and the Novi was the only one which survived until 1964. All European leading machines of this period were of the hemispherical two valve type. If someone knows about others four valve engines of this period, I would like to know who were making them.

As you correctly stated, most American race car engines had four valves per cylinder, and not only those designed by Leo Goossen. The Lencki was designed b Joe lencki, and not Goossen, for example, and other engines like the Fronty-Ford, DO Hal, McDowell, Dreyer and so on all had four valves per cylinder. I had to check on the European cars, but I found that all the Mercedes-Benz silver arrows and the San Remo Maserati had four valves per. Surely, Those were "leading machines of the period", no? I didn' check any further.

[bradbury west]

Just in case anyone missed the history by JGP for the immediately preceding period, National Championship Racing 1956 to 1962, it can be found here;
http://forums.autosp...w...114378&st=0
I think the link is a very worthy credit to Michael Ferner, "fines", no longer on TNF for providing the platform
Roger Lund.

[john glenn printz]

USAC NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP HISTORY 1963 TO 1965 (cont.-12) After Indianapolis, more and more rear engined "funny cars", as they were then called, were appearing in the paved oval USAC Championship races, but actual wins for them remained few and far between. A.J. Foyt won the next two paved surfaced events (Milwaukee 100, June 7 and Trenton 100, July 19) with his Indianapolis winning Offenhauser/Watson roadster and the first two 100 mile dirt classics staged in 1964 (Langhorne, June 21, and Springfield, Aug. 22) in a Meskowski dirt machine, to run his string of Chamapionship wins up to seven straight victories! Violence was a concomitant to the 1964 Championship season. At the Milwaukee 100 (June 7) Ward, Foyt, and Hurtubise were riding at close quarters to each other. Ward's car suddenly had its rear end gears collapse on the mainstretch (lap 51) and his machine instantly lost its speed. Foyt, to avoid hitting Ward, veered quickly to the outside. At the same instant, Hurtubise bounced up and over Foyt's right rear wheel and then slammed into the outside wall. Jim's car then skidded down the straightawa minus a wheel and stopped at the entrance to the pit area. Hurtubise had been knocked unconscious and the car was on fire. Before he could be extricated from the vehicle Hurtubise was critically burned over 40 percent of his body. Hurtubise later recovered but one of hands was just a bony, scarred, paralyed stump. At the Springfield 100 (Aug. 22) the 35 year old Bill Horstmeyer, in his first Championship start, was fatally injured on his 26th circuit. Horstmeyer's car hit the outside barrier off the northwest turn, leading into the mainstretch, lost a wheel and then flipped end over end three times. The machine then landed up against the fence,, trapping Horstmeyer inside it, and caught on fire. Bill died a short time later of extensive burns.

The next day, after the Springfield 100, at the more important Milwaukee 200 (Aug. 23), the Chapman run Ford-Lotus team made its first debut since its unsuccessful outing at Indianapolis. The Milwaukee date coincided with that of the Austrian Grand Prix, staged at Zeltweg, and both Clark and Gurney opted to run in it rather than at the West Allis, WI one mile oval. So who were piloting the two Ford/Lotus cars? Why A. J. Foyt and Parnelli Jones of course! Actually Ford now decided to let bygones be bygones and not to hold any grudges. Enough was enough. The Ford Motor Company's racing department had wised up considerably by this time and now wanted the best talent in its cars, at whatever cost. Foyt's Indy winning Offenhauser/Watson roadster was parked in the Milwaukee tracks' pit area and Foyt seemingly had his pick of it or the factory Ford/Lotus. The official "works" Ford-Lotus contingent arrived late at the Milwaukee Mile in two huge, new transport trucks which quite dwarfed the traveling facilities of the other teams. Chapman, who was in deep trouble with Ford Motor because of the Indianapolis fiasco, chose to accompany his two cars here in the U.S., than be with his Grand Prix team in Austria.

The top four qualifiers were all driving rear powered equipment. The results were Jones (Ford/Lotus, 111.012 mph, new track record), Ward (Ford/Watson, 110.487 mph), Foyt (Ford?Llotus, 109.900), and Ruby (Offenhauser/Halibrand, 109.137). Although Foyt went into this race with seven straight National Championship wins, a record, he never had a chance here. On the pace lap, his gearshift lever refused to move into high and Foyt was forced out after the completion of a single lap, to place last out of the field of 26 starters. Meanwhile, Jones in the sister Lotus works car, led the first 13 circuits before being displaced by Bobby Marshman in another Ford/Lotus for laps 14-19. Jones went back into the lead on the 20th round and was never headed after that. Marshman retired after 37 laps with a blown engine. Jones now led easily and, at the finish, was 2 1/2 miles ahead of Ward, setting a 200 mile Milwaukee record of 104.751 mph. And for the first time ever, rear engined equipment had finished one-two in a National Championship contest. A new rookie to the Championship division in 1964, Mario Andretti, took a very impressive 3rd, using a standard Offenhauser powered front powered Watson roadster copy, made by Henry "Hank" Blum. This was the very first occasion I saw Mario race, and I now expected to see him as one of the new rookies at Indianapolis in 1965.

The next 1964 paved oval race would be the Trenton 200 (Sept. 27), but in the intervening interval Foyt captured two more 100 mile dirt track races (DuQuoin, Sept. 7) and Indianapolis Fairgrounds, Sept. 26). Foyt had now won nine out of the first ten 1964 USAC Championsship contest! The offical team Ford/Lotuses were on hand for the Trenton 200 (Sept. 27) with the drivers on this occasion being Clark and Jones. The top four qualifiers were Jones (Ford/Lotus, 114.140 mph, new track record), McElreath with Jack Brabham's rear engine Indianapolis car (Offenhauser/Brabham 111.870 moh), Marshman (Ford/Lotus, 111.731), and Foyt in his Indianapolia winning roadster (Offenhauser/Watson, 111.420). Clark was having an off-day and clocked only 109.923 to start 7th on the grid. The only real challengers to Jones, who dominated the race, proved to be Foyt and Jim McElreath. Foyt, in the old style roadster, actually took the lead for two circuits, but didn't manage to finish. Foyt retired with an overheating motor (lap 90), while McElreath spun out after 155 laps. Clark wasn't competitive and retired after 96 circuits from a leaking radiator caused by flying debris. At the finish, Jones was a lap ahead of Don Branson in an Offenhauser/Watson roadster.

The 1964 season was about over now with only two more events left. At the Sacramento 100 (Oct. 25) Foyt was the victor in his Meskowski dirt car. The official Ford/Lotus works team did not appear at the last major event of the 1964 season, the Phoenix 200 (Nov. 22), but Parnelli Jones was present with one of the 1964 Indianapolis model Ford/Lotus cars. Jones won the pole at 118.382 mph while Foyt, now driving a rear engined Offenhauser/Halibrand, took the second fastest time with a 117.878. At the start, Foyt and Jones staged a red-hot duel for six laps before Parnelli clearly established his superiority. On the 55th circuit, Foyt spun trying to keep pace with Jones and then Foyt broke his gearshift lever while trying to restart. After that, it appeared Jones would have clear sailing to the finish until a broken fuel line sent him into the pits for good (lap 139). Jones ill luck gave the front position to Lloyd Ruby in a rear Offenhauser powered Halibrand and Ruby continued on for his first National Championship victory by averaging 107.736 mph which was a new track record for the distance. Rodger Ward was in the running up position with his rear powered Ford/Watson.

At the season's end, A. J. Foyt had won 10 of the year's 13 events. In 1951 Tony Bettenhauser, Sr. (1916-1961), had had quite a legendary year by winning 8 of the 15 Champ car events staged, but that was nothing compared to how Foyt had run in 1964. To this day, no one had come close to equaling Foyt's high percentage (77percent) of wins for a single Championship year. Foyt, of course, was the 1964 USAC National Champion going away and at the season's end, had accumulated four U.S. National Titles (1960, 1961, 1963, 1964) and 27 Championship wins. In 1964, it should be pointed out, that the paved oval Championship contests outnumbered the Championship dirt surfaced events for the first time.

Another tragedy ended 1964. While car testing at Phoenix, AZ, Bobby Marshman slammed into the outside wall (Nov. 27) and his Ford/Lotus burst into flame. Marshman, who had gotten careless here, had neglected to wear a fire proofed driving suit, was very badly burned, and he expired on December 4, 1964.

Edited by john glenn printz, 10 November 2009 - 15:27.

[TomSlick57]

1965 Indianapolis 500 Winner Jim Clark and Crew

[ovfi]

Mr. #0, you are correct about the Miller 200/220 and the silver arrows (I was thinking on the W196 when mentioning Mercedes).
It was my mistake, I had to rely only on memory because some of my books, including Gordon White's on Offenhauser, were stolen years ago.

When I said "All European leading machines of this period were of the hemispherical two valve type" I was referring to the entire period that ended before 1964 and began when Offenhauser was founded, I thought this was clear in my text, please excuse me if it was not. The Offy was the only successful 4-valve design that survived throughout this entire period, not in some part of it. The other 4-valve American designs weren't as successful as the Offy, and by the end of the fifties all of them have disappeared from Indy. After the War, in the fifties, even Mercedes abandoned the 4-valve design, and until the early sixties, most if not all formula 1 engines were of the hemispheric chamber 2-valve design, which seemed a better solution for small cylinders at this time.

In my opinion Offenhauser maintained its original design on purpose, they knew that the 4-valve design had an excess of flow capacity to feed the big cylinders, and the performance could be much improved throughout the years, but they had to search for new resources (materials and processes) to reach the full potential of the design: effectively this happened by the year of 1966. Ford, when testing the Offy in 1962/1963, discovered that the 4-valve design had yet potential for more power without major design changes, which really occurred in the next 3 years. Chapman, who had a close cooperation with Ford and was well informed by them, used the information about the Offy to order a 4-valve version of the Climax allowing more RPM's, which was delivered to Lotus only in the middle of 1964 season, if I remember correctly. This cannot be a mere coincidence, Chapman had contracts with both Ford and Climax at this time.

I brought this argument to the consideration of JGP because I believe he is the person who can find more concrete evidences to enlighten these facts, the men who made the Offy deserves this recognition, they successfully supported this design throughout 3 decades, in opposition to major engine builders who abandoned it at some point over this same period, for one reason or another.

Edited by ovfi, 08 November 2009 - 21:00.

[# 0]

Mr. #0,

Please don't, that makes me feel so old - jest call me Rick. And I'm sorry to hear about the theft of your books.

The question of two or four valves per is often a simple mathematical or, bettter, geometrical problem. All things being equal, an engineer would always prefer a Hemispherical combustion chamber over a pent-roof shaped one, but valve area is more important than that. In small cylinders, one big hole is sometimes more efficient than two small ones. Simple as that.

[john glenn printz]

HISTORICAL EXCURSUS I: THE MILLER, OFFENHAUSER, MEYER-DRAKE 4'S: What later came to be known as the "Offy" was first drawn up and designed by Leo Goossen in 1931, while still working for Harry A. Miller. The inspiration for this four cylinder engine came from the very successful adaptations for racing car use, of a 1927 Miller 151 cubic inch four cylinder marine racing motor, during the 1929 and 1930 AAA Championship seasons. Wilbur Shaw won the 1929 Syracuse 100 (Aug. 8) in record time with one of them using a supercharger; while at the 1930 Indianapolis classic no less than eight competitors utilized modified marine 151s. Most of thes competitors however, had bored out their units to a capacity of 183 cubic inches. In such form and normally apirated in conformity with the new 1930 AAA Junk formula rules, the Miller marine design placed 2nd (Shorty Cantlon), 7th (Phil Shafer) and 9th (Leslie Allen) at the big brickyard in 1930.

The first examples of the new Goossen designed Miller 4s were produced in 1931-1932 in the form of 200s and 220s. The specifications of the new Miller 220 were: bore 4 1/16, stroke 4 1/4, displacement 220.4, horsepower 190, and price $1,900. West coast car owner and promotor Bill White got the first 220 built and the recent new partners Art Sparks-Paul Weirick bought the 2nd one. This was in 1931. Others who purchased the new Miller 220 4s were Russell "Russ" Garnant, Earl Haskell, and Walt Harris, among others. During 1932-1933, before his July 1933 bankruptcy, Miller built a few units of this same basic type with a 255 cubic inch displacement, bore 4 1/4, stroke 4 1/2, displacement 255.3, horsepower 225, price $2,500. Drivers Frank Brisko and Louis Meyer built some 255 engines of this exact type during late 1933/early 1934. They both needed new motors for the upcoming 1934 Indianapolis event and as Miller had gone out of business in July 1933, they couldn't purchase any motors from Miller himself. So they decided to collaborate and manufacturer their own. Brisko traveled to Los Angeles and got the 255 blueprints from Leo Goossen and the engine patterns from the boat racer Dick Loynes, who had bought them for next to nothing, when Miller's estate and goods were auctioned off in October 1933.

Fred Offenhauser, after taking over Miller's engine building facilities in late 1933, continued to build and sell the 220 model, but didn't construct any to 255 cubic inch capacity until late 1935. However, in early 1935, Fred Offenhauser made two new Miller type 4's of 262.4 and 220.3 cubic inches, which were placed in the new Indianapolis machines of Kelly Petillo and Wilbur Shaw, respectively. In the 1935 "500" Petillo and Shaw placed one-two and the Offenhauser tradition was born. In 1937 Offenhauser upped the displacement to 270 cubic inches and this basic "270" engine became the mainstay of U.S. National Championship racing for the next two decades, i.e. 1937-1956.

As the late 1930s and 1940s wore on, the Offenhauser 4 found itself, more and more, in a very dominant position for it was no longer going to be easy for anyone to come up with a better, cheaper, or more competitive substitute. After the 1946 AAA Championship season, the Offenhauser 4, now being manufactured since April 1946 by the parnership of Dale Drake and Louis Meyer (i.e. Meyer-Drake), was virtually unbeatable on the American Championship Trail. When USAC, beginning with the year 1957, lowered the piston displacement limits allowed for Championship level cars, the Offenhauser 270 was scaled down to 250, 252, 251 and 255 versions which, if anything, seemed even more powerful and efficient than the older and more famous 270 model.

Until the Ford intervention at Indianapolis in May 1963, Offenhauser Meyer-Drake 4 was the undisputed king of racing engines for the American Championship - Indianapolis cars. Even the complex and more techically advanced supercharged Winfield/Novi V8's of 1941 to 1966, ultimately failed completely to effectively challenge the Offenhauser supremacy. No one had enough money and/or the necessary resources to develop a cheap or viable alternative. The Meyer-Drake company had no interest in designing, developing, and testing a more advanced or more modern design, for it already had all the U.S. National Championship - Indianapolis engine business sewed up as it was, with no serious rivals in sight. But even had it desired to do so it is doubtful if Meyer-Drake just on its own, could have built a more competitive design because the Meyer-Drake firm had neither the financial capital, nor the technical resources required for the job. So Meyer-Drake just kept manufacturing the old Offenhauser 4, and annually updated it as best it could.

Actually the Offenhauser 4 had a lot of advantages. A four cylinder motor will accelerate generally faster than a 6, 8, 12, or 16 cylinder job because it has less moving parts. And in oval or speedway racing, quicker acceleration off the turns is crucial for rapid lap times. The fact that the Offy had only four cylinders made for other advantages also. By having less total component parts, the Offenhauser was less prone to engine failure and a complete teardown and overhaul was less costly and time consumming. These were important considerations during the depression years of 1929-1939, when racing teams could ill afford to be replacing and repairing their engines very often. Even the inital price of the unit was cheaper than a more complex and more multi cylinder motor would have been.

The Offenhauser had always been known for its enormous torque output. As racing motor designer and expert Art Sparks use to always say (quote), "It's torque, not horsepower, that gets you around a race track." That the Offenhauser 4 motors were always known for their enormous torque output, was probably due, at least in part, to its having been derived originally from a marine engine where, due to the tremendous strain and inertia of water, torgue or twisting power is of more importance than brute horsepower. Marine engines are more heavily designed and constructed for these reasons and here again the Offenhauser profited. The Offenhauser was rather on the heavy side at first and was therefore very tough, rugged, and less prone to break or fly apart easily. Like the heavyweigh champion (1952-1956), Rockey Marciano (1923-1969) the old "Offy" could take much abuse and even a heavy punch and still not go down. In short the unsupercharged Offenhauser 4 was cheap, reliable, easy to service and maintain, and for almost two decades, it got the job done. Those are all good qualities for a competitive racing engine. The Offenhauser success was no accident.

Edited by john glenn printz, 11 November 2009 - 20:53.