51 replies to this topic

[Roger Clark]

We have had a number of healthy threads recently tracing the stories of F1 and F2 Coopers. I don't want to interfere with any of those; my purpose here is to understand the differences between the types, how they developed and, if possible, how we can distinguish one from another. I do realise that these were simple cars, designed, built and maintained by practical men who were capable of modifying cars between races, if not between practice sessions. It is therefore quite likely that any individual car would be modified to incorporate the latest developments, or the mechanic's own ideas of improvements.

My understanding, derived mainly from Cooper Cars and contemporary magazines and pictures is:

T41/Mark 1 The 1956 prototype F2 car. Leaf spring and lower wishbone suspension front and rear. most of the fuel carried in a scuttle tank. Easily recognisable by a raised nose.

T43/Mark II. 1957 car. Suspension the same as the Mark I, drooped nose, bulkier bodywork to accommodate pannier fuel tanks.

T43.Mark III 1958 car, coil spring and wishbone front suspension Alford and Alder front uprights. Lowered engine enabled by use of (Tauranac inspired?) drop gears. Rear leaf spring relieved of stress by transverse link. From the Monaco Grand Prix the works cars had upper rear wishbone to relieve the spring of all its locational responsibilities. Walkers cars had an upper rear radius rod.

T51/Mark IV 1959 car. As far as I know, the Mark IV was identical to the Mark III. One respected authority says that the Mark IV is distinguishable by the fin on the tail, but another says that the fin first appeared on the Mark III at the 1958 Monaco Grand Prix. I've been unable to confirm this by looking at photographs. The colour scheme adopted in 1959 certainly made the fin more prominent. Walker's car had coil spring rear suspension from late 1959, allegedly designed by Moss. Works cars didn't have coils at the back until 1960.

There was also progressive strengthening of the gearbox to cope with the torque of growing Climax engines, but I'll leave that until later.

Can anybody confirm, correct, or add to this?

NOTE: in the original post I said that an authority (actually Cooper Cars) said that the fin first appeared at the 1958 British GP. In fact, Doug said it was the Monaco GP.

Edited by Roger Clark, 05 February 2010 - 01:01.

[Ray Bell]

I can confirm that the drop gears were a Tauranac item...

There's a story around somewhere (AMC Clubsport?) that mentions how he drew these for Jack.

And wouldn't the coil suspension have been an Alf Francis addition?

[David McKinney]

I wish I could confirm your points or otherwise, Roger

Only mistake is calling the MkIII a T43, but you knew that

I do remember reading somewhere - and I don't think it was in the Cooper book - that the 1957 works cars were T45s and customer cars T43s, and the 1958 works cars were T51s and customer cars T45s

That would explain developments appearing on works cars one year and customer cars the next

[Dick Willis]

I could be wrong here but I thought the rear upper wishbones didn't appear until the Mk IV, and then it seems not all had them or some chose not to use them thinking they preferred the handling without them.

I have seen the fins on T51's adopt various shapes and heights, maybe it varied according to the whims of the bodybuilder on a particular day.

[Barry Boor]

I would like to see documentary evidence to support the appearance of T.51s in 1958.

[Dick Willis]

There isn't any.

[Barry Boor]

[Roger Clark]

And wouldn't the coil suspension have been an Alf Francis addition?

i don't think so (assuming you mean the front). The 1958 car had front coils fro the time it was first presented by the factory in January. The rear coils on the Walker car (late 1959) may have been an Alf Francis addition.

[Roger Clark]

I wish I could confirm your points or otherwise, Roger

Only mistake is calling the MkIII a T43, but you knew that

I do remember reading somewhere - and I don't think it was in the Cooper book - that the 1957 works cars were T45s and customer cars T43s, and the 1958 works cars were T51s and customer cars T45s

That would explain developments appearing on works cars one year and customer cars the next

Typing let me down again!

I haven't seen that explanation of the type numbers before. It's certainly not in Cooper Cars. More importantly, was there really a specification difference between the works cars and those sold to customers? Modifications may have appeared on the works cars during the year but I don't think there were any differences as presented.

Edited by Roger Clark, 05 February 2010 - 00:57.

[Roger Clark]

I would like to see documentary evidence to support the appearance of T.51s in 1958.

Depends on what you think are the differences between a T45 and a T51, which was part of the original question.

[David McKinney]

Perhaps it would have been clearer if I'd used the MkII/III/IV terminology

There is certainly no evidence of the factory running T51s in 1958 because the term hadn't yet been applied to the model

I'll try to remember where I read it - I have a sneaking suspicion it might have been an article by D Nye in Autosport...

[Allen Brown]

I think the T numbers get in the way here. As far as I've been able to determine, the T numbers were devised in 1963 and retrospectively applied to previous models of Cooper. Even the Mk I, Mk II designation does not appear in contemporary reports but at least it does appear in Cooper records (as reproduced in Doug's book) so we know they were intentional.

If you look at 1960, it's clear that cars of different specification (customer "old style" and works "lowline") were listed alongside each other so we can't be certain that all the cars listed for 1959 were the same specification. As a further problem, the 1960 cars are called the Mk VI in the Cooper listing, implying that Cooper saw the 1960 customer car as a different model to the 1959 Mk IV. So maybe whoever drew up the list of T numbers simply missed out the 1960 customer cars? If so, calling the 1960 cars T51 is even more misleading.

So I think that looking for differences between the T45 and T51 is actually the wrong place to start. I fear that there are many different specifications here and we have to examine the difference between works cars and customer cars and between F1 cars and F2 cars. The fin, as a simple example, may have appeared on a works F1 car but that doesn't mean it could be used to identify customer F2 cars. You may find that the 1959 customer car is identical to the 1958 works car despite one being called a T45 and the other a T51.

[Peter Morley]

It can't help that they weren't all assembled by Cooper.
Teams like Rob Walkers used to build their own cars, so they would have incorporated their own tweeks while they were building them.

[Doug Nye]

Peter makes the crucial point here. While production road car practises should never be assumed where even quantity-built racing cars are concerned, Coopers in particular do NOT comply with neat book-keeping rules of model designations and 'standard spec'. Most privateers merely acquired a kit of bits from the Hollyfield Road works. Some sent their own mechanics to build-up their car in the factory. Others had their mechanics build-up the kits in their own premises. So what comprised the 'kit'? Again, how long is a piece of string? Some bought a rolling chassis, body panels and assembled and finished it all off. Others just began with a chassis frame and suspension corners and did their own freelance finishing, and in some cases body panelling too. This explains the great variety of detail finishes, though all essentially using the same general theme. So what set the theme? Really, what was proving quickest round a circuit. The works watched their rival factory teams. The privateers watched the works - with the exception of Walker Racing, who ploughed their own furrow by watching everybody, works and privateers alike, and always confident they had the magic ingredient in their driver(s).

I believe the broad parameters recorded in my Cooper book to be correct re transverse leafsprings both ends/only on the rear/coils at the front/coils all round from the Walker T51 (Sebring) and T53s forward, etc etc. But do NOT regard any of those specs as having been cast in stone, or in this case in aluminium, steel and sometimes iron. Don't forget, for example, that double rear wishbones in the 1958 F2s proved slower round Brands Hatch than a reversion to lower rear wishbones only, permitting the rear wheels to take on more camber and work the tyres more effectively. So even a factory 'spec' could change on the same model from one race to the next...and then back again. If you regard Cooper model stereotyping as - at best - a broad brush generality, you are very close to the truth.

That's why I have always had a soft spot for these things, and for those people. Minimum rules, mostly ignored.

DCN

[Lee Nicolle]

Peter makes the crucial point here. While production road car practises should never be assumed where even quantity-built racing cars are concerned, Coopers in particular do NOT comply with neat book-keeping rules of model designations and 'standard spec'. Most privateers merely acquired a kit of bits from the Hollyfield Road works. Some sent their own mechanics to build-up their car in the factory. Others had their mechanics build-up the kits in their own premises. So what comprised the 'kit'? Again, how long is a piece of string? Some bought a rolling chassis, body panels and assembled and finished it all off. Others just began with a chassis frame and suspension corners and did their own freelance finishing, and in some cases body panelling too. This explains the great variety of detail finishes, though all essentially using the same general theme. So what set the theme? Really, what was proving quickest round a circuit. The works watched their rival factory teams. The privateers watched the works - with the exception of Walker Racing, who ploughed their own furrow by watching everybody, works and privateers alike, and always confident they had the magic ingredient in their driver(s).

I believe the broad parameters recorded in my Cooper book to be correct re transverse leafsprings both ends/only on the rear/coils at the front/coils all round from the Walker T51 (Sebring) and T53s forward, etc etc. But do NOT regard any of those specs as having been cast in stone, or in this case in aluminium, steel and sometimes iron. Don't forget, for example, that double rear wishbones in the 1958 F2s proved slower round Brands Hatch than a reversion to lower rear wishbones only, permitting the rear wheels to take on more camber and work the tyres more effectively. So even a factory 'spec' could change on the same model from one race to the next...and then back again. If you regard Cooper model stereotyping as - at best - a broad brush generality, you are very close to the truth.

That's why I have always had a soft spot for these things, and for those people. Minimum rules, mostly ignored.

DCN

And as all good race cars they changed from meeting to meeting, sometimes day to day and defenitly team to team.

[Roger Clark]

Peter makes the crucial point here. While production road car practises should never be assumed where even quantity-built racing cars are concerned, Coopers in particular do NOT comply with neat book-keeping rules of model designations and 'standard spec'. Most privateers merely acquired a kit of bits from the Hollyfield Road works. Some sent their own mechanics to build-up their car in the factory. Others had their mechanics build-up the kits in their own premises. So what comprised the 'kit'? Again, how long is a piece of string? Some bought a rolling chassis, body panels and assembled and finished it all off. Others just began with a chassis frame and suspension corners and did their own freelance finishing, and in some cases body panelling too. This explains the great variety of detail finishes, though all essentially using the same general theme. So what set the theme? Really, what was proving quickest round a circuit. The works watched their rival factory teams. The privateers watched the works - with the exception of Walker Racing, who ploughed their own furrow by watching everybody, works and privateers alike, and always confident they had the magic ingredient in their driver(s).

I believe the broad parameters recorded in my Cooper book to be correct re transverse leafsprings both ends/only on the rear/coils at the front/coils all round from the Walker T51 (Sebring) and T53s forward, etc etc. But do NOT regard any of those specs as having been cast in stone, or in this case in aluminium, steel and sometimes iron. Don't forget, for example, that double rear wishbones in the 1958 F2s proved slower round Brands Hatch than a reversion to lower rear wishbones only, permitting the rear wheels to take on more camber and work the tyres more effectively. So even a factory 'spec' could change on the same model from one race to the next...and then back again. If you regard Cooper model stereotyping as - at best - a broad brush generality, you are very close to the truth.

That's why I have always had a soft spot for these things, and for those people. Minimum rules, mostly ignored.

DCN

That's more or less what I was trying to say in he first paragraph. I'm sure that Cooper Cars, and Chapter 8 of Doug's 1945-65 History, is the best source for information on these cars.

I have a question (or two) about gearboxes. The 1956 and 57 car used Citroen gearboxes from the Traction Avant, modified by ERSA to have four speeds. These were becoming unreliable as power increased. Early in 1958, at the instigation of Jabby Crombac, Jack Brabham visited the ERSA factory and persuaded the to build stronger casings, designing the strengthening ribs with the aid of plasticine. John Cooper flew to Paris to collect the first of the strengthened casings, returning with three in his baggage. After being detained by Her Majesty's Customs he got home in time the assist with the assembly of Walker's car for its dispatch to Argentina and Moss's historic win in the Grand Prix.

Into 1959. It has often been recounted how Cooper said to Walker that he would supply the latest car, he was sure that Climax would supply the latest engine for Moss but Walker would have to find his own gearbox. Alf Francis visited his old friend Valerio Colotti and the World Championship was decided (perhaps). The point I will eventually get to is that I can find no mention of Cooper strengthening their gearbox for 1959. If that is so, it raises the question of whether Walker used the Brabham modified ERSA gearbox throughout 1958. Doug says: "...clearly the standard Citroen-ERGSA-based unit was not really suitable for Grand Prix racing even with 2-litre power, never mind 2.5-litres" Did Cooper modify their gearboxes in 1959?

Moss stalled at the start of both the Glover Trophy and the International Trophy in 1958. Was this because of concern about the reliability of his transmission and an attempt to get away with too few revs?

Another Brabham-inspired tweak in 1958 was the use of a ZF limited-slip Diff. Was this available to (and used by) private owners?

[Ray Bell]

Originally posted by Roger Clark
i don't think so (assuming you mean the front). The 1958 car had front coils fro the time it was first presented by the factory in January. The rear coils on the Walker car (late 1959) may have been an Alf Francis addition.

I was referring here specifically to the part of your opening post where it says:

Walker's car had coil spring rear suspension from late 1959, allegedly designed by Moss.

Clearer now?

[Roger Clark]

Perhaps it would have been clearer if I'd used the MkII/III/IV terminology

There is certainly no evidence of the factory running T51s in 1958 because the term hadn't yet been applied to the model

I'll try to remember where I read it - I have a sneaking suspicion it might have been an article by D Nye in Autosport...

Doug published an article in Autosport, 3 January 1969. His allocation of Type and Mark numbers is the same as in Cooper Cars for the 1956, 57 and 58 cars. However, he says that the T51was Mk1 F1/F2. the T53 was Mark 2, the T60 Mk 4. Mark numbers don't appear for F1 cars after 1962. He says that the two works T45s were built in 1957 and that the T51 was used by the works in 1959 and put into production in 1960.

I post these things for the record and not in any expectation that there is anything like a right answer to any of this.

[David McKinney]

He says that the two works T45s were built in 1957 and that the T51 was used by the works in 1959 and put into production in 1960

That may have been my source, and I may have jumped to the conslusion that the works T45s had been run in 1957, not just built. I didn't have the wisdom then that I hope increased with age. The second part's interesting in that it suggests that, apart from the works cars, the 1959 customer cars were T45s...

Pity Coopers didn't incorporate a model number in their chassis numbers

I'll look at a couple more possible sources this afternoon

[molestrangler]

I think the Moss, Argentine car was using the early type ERSA with single point gear selection and am doubtful it had the strengthened
case. ERSA boxes had no positive engagement to hold them in gear, it was always an external mechanical device.
In 59 Brabham had his own development box which had needle roller bearings and an external oil pump and tank. Just about
everyone had ZF diffs before 59 and in fact the CWP`s were made by ZF.
The one feature which will normally show the difference between T45 and T51 is the cross tube in the oval bulkhead behind the driver.
T45 is welded in T51 is bolted.

[Doug Nye]

All the following unchecked - straight off the top of my head, and from the Cooper photo box - superficially, these photographs might help a little when it comes to judging more or less a Cooper's elusive 'Type' numbering:



MARK I - T41 - Here's one of the earliest batch of rear-engined Climax-engined F2 cars - the Walker Type 41 (Fairman, Goodwood, 1957)



MARK II - T43 - This is the more bulbous body profile - yet similarly basic, agricultural transverse leafspring front suspension - of the 1957 works Type 43 - Blackie in a hurry at the same Goodwood meeting, 1957.



MARK III - T45 - A decidedly more finished look to the 1958 works Type 45 - Roy Salvadori, Belgian GP, 1958.



MARK IV (ish) - T51 - The definitive profile of the 1959 works Type 51 - Blackie on his way to winning the British GP at Aintree.



Not ever referred to - so far as I know - as the 'Mark V' - one of the three 1960 works T53 cars - Blackie winning 1960 Belgian GP at Spa



T53P - Definitive 1960-61 production Type 53, the 'straight-tube' all coil-sprung 5-speed 'C5S' Cooper gearbox car - in this case Walker's ICF version, Moss, Warwick Farm 1962.



...so this one is...?

All Photos Strictly Copyright: The GP Library



The famous reinforced Cooper Citroen-ERSA gearbox casing - without which they "wouldn't have won a single race..." (JAB)

Photo I believe by Jabby Crombac via The GP Library



And here's a final one, just for the pot - the engine bay of a Walker Cooper-Climax, 1957. Note Continental tyres...

DCN (framing prints of all action shots available to order...)

PS - "Molestrangler"? - Not Dame Celia Molestrangler, of Binkie Huckabuck fame?

Edited by Doug Nye, 05 February 2010 - 23:18.

[Barry Boor]

I think I can see where the 'fin' conundrum comes from looking at the Salvadori T.45. Just not as pronounced as on the T.51.

[Allen Brown]

...so this one is...?

All Photos Strictly Copyright: The GP Library

I thought for a moment that it was the car David and I have been debating elsewhere, Lex Davison's ex-Brabham mystery lowline, but then I saw the filename. If that's right and you're not naming your files to trick me, it's Davison's first lowline, an ex-Yeoman Credit customer lowline believed to be F1-2-61. It was crashed into the pub at Longford in March 1962 and was replaced by the car I hoped it was.

[David McKinney]

The different coloured nose-band certainly smacks of Bowmaker

[David Beard]

Great thread : well started, Roger!

[Roger Clark]

Many thanks for the pictures Doug. The one of the stripped Walker car certainly brings home how curved some of those tubes were! Is that te famous Francis upper rear radius arm we can see? It must have appeared late in 1957 - not at the British GP, present at the Boxing Day Brands - pictures of both in Cooper Cars. Does anybody know when it first appeared? Walker had a new car at German GP. Could it have been then?

[Barry Boor]

Nothing wrong with your eyesight, D.M.

[Roger Clark]

I think the Moss, Argentine car was using the early type ERSA with single point gear selection and am doubtful it had the strengthened
case. ERSA boxes had no positive engagement to hold them in gear, it was always an external mechanical device.
In 59 Brabham had his own development box which had needle roller bearings and an external oil pump and tank. Just about
everyone had ZF diffs before 59 and in fact the CWP`s were made by ZF.
The one feature which will normally show the difference between T45 and T51 is the cross tube in the oval bulkhead behind the driver.
T45 is welded in T51 is bolted.

Many thanks. Cooper Cars says that Moss had the strengthened gear case in Argentina. May I ask your reasons for saying otherwise?

I think this is the first time I have heard that Brabham had his own development box in '59. Did he have it all season and did McLaren and Gregory never have one?

[Roger Clark]

Very interesting that Doug's picture of the stripped Walker car shows Continental tyres. I started a thread recently about them but it didn't get anywhere. Did Walker use them extensively in '57?

[David McKinney]

I believe, but no longer remember why, that the Walker car driven by JB at Brands Hatch Boxing Day 1957 was new for that event and was the one that went on to Argentina for Moss. It could have been the German GP debutant, described by the Brands reporter as "new" because of its unfamiliar livery

I have heard (indirectly) from JB that his 1959 gearbox was unique

Edited by David McKinney, 06 February 2010 - 09:42.

[Doug Nye]

Unique in the sense of during a brief time span, and unique in having a pressure fed lubrication system with its own pumps in search of race-duration life for the gear set. Gearboxes for Bruce and Masten Gregory were similarly modified that same season. And I am having cold feet over the '1957' caption on that Walker car picture...might be early '58... Aintree or Silverstone?? Not at all sure without a lot of dredging. And apologies Allen for posting a photo of the wrong Davo T53P for you. No satisfying some people. And Dave I suspect - again from memory - that the Brands Hatch Boxing Day Walker Cooper was described as 'new' for its enlarged engine.

DCN

Edited by Doug Nye, 06 February 2010 - 09:53.

[David Shaw]

The different coloured nose-band certainly smacks of Bowmaker

Apparently Davison drove for Bowmaker-Yeoman along with Surtees and Salvadori in the NZ and Australian races in 1962.



PS Or am I missing something again?

Edited by David Shaw, 06 February 2010 - 10:01.

[cooper997]

Brilliant thread you've started Roger.

Allen Brown mentioned the retrospective application of 'T' numbers to Cooper from around 1963. He is definitely in the correct time frame.

It's certainly true Cooper never made it easy for anyone, but themselves to identify their cars in a simple coded manner. David McK has already mentioned how easier it would be if they had a type number in the chassis number. It would indeed, but you could also imagine old Charlie Cooper complaining on the cost of a new plate to fit the extra stamping in (tongue in cheek)!! Whether you talk air-cooled, or the later predominantly Climax engined variations to the Cooper theme there has been a lot of MkI, MkII type Coopers.

In some of the Cooper published literature I've had a dig through, the earliest brochure that I can find is for the '1964 Cooper-Austin Type 72 Formula III' with a 'T' or 'Type' listing. Then again the same applies for the '1965 Cooper-BMC type 76 formula III'. Jumping back to late Nov 60 there's 3 separate Cooper letterheads for pricing structures and their respective brochures for the 1961 range. One letterhead is headed, '1961 FORMULA 1 COOPER-CLIMAX Mark 1 - as at 3rd November 1960'. Another, 'COOPER "MONACO" SPORTS CAR 1961 - As at 17th November 1960'. With finally '1961 FORMULA JUNIOR COOPER-AUSTIN MKII - As at 3rd November 1960'. No Type numbers there.

Looking at the broader picture, in the write-up for the Cooper Car Co Ltd stand at the 1963 Racing Car Show's programme it states, "On this stand is shown a Cooper-Austin Formula Juniour Type 65, a Cooper Monaco sports Type 61 and a Mini Cooper, while a Formula 1 Cooper Coventry-Climax Type 60 car will be exhibited on the Grand Prix contenders stand."

So delving back further I've found Autosport's Oct 5th, 1962 issue has a brief feature - Two New Coopers. This covers Bruce McLaren's cars for the Winter season (that being the northern hemisphere's Winter). Covering 3 cars Bruce McLaren was taking to either the US or 'downunder' (late Spring/Summer) races. There is 3 photos shown featuring Mini Cooper, Intercontinental and Monaco sports car. Finally for the separate photo of the Monaco it quotes, "Rear view of the interesting new Cooper Monaco, the Type 61, which has a 4-cylinder, 2.7 litre Coventry Climax engine." The intercontinental is of course the Atkins T62. There is no reference as such to 'T62' in the feature though.

I've had a look in earlier magazines, but this is currently the earliest that I've seen the press of the day use 'Type' to describe a Cooper model. That however doesn't mean there either is or isn't something listed in an earlier magazine somewhere.

Stephen

[David McKinney]

Doug -
The unique feature of JB's 1959 gearbox was apparently the positioning of the oil-pump. At least that's what he told the bloke who owns the car now
And, yes, the 2.2 engine could make it a "new" car
Also, Fairman didn't drive for RW in 1958

David (Shaw) -
Yes he did. But I think he probably already owned it...
The contentious point is that he crashed it and replaced it almost immediately with an ex-Brabham T53 (which I think had the same chassis number)

Stephen -
Thanks for carrying out that exercise, which I've never quite got around to doing myself

[cooper997]

I thought for a moment that it was the car David and I have been debating elsewhere, Lex Davison's ex-Brabham mystery lowline, but then I saw the filename. If that's right and you're not naming your files to trick me, it's Davison's first lowline, an ex-Yeoman Credit customer lowline believed to be F1-2-61. It was crashed into the pub at Longford in March 1962 and was replaced by the car I hoped it was.

Allen,

In the programme for the Feb 4th, 1962 Warwick Farm International '100' - Bowmaker Yeoman Racing Team was the entrant for the #4 Davison Cooper. They're also listed as entrants for the #2 Surtees & #3 Salvadori Coopers too. Salvadori didn't start the race, having crashed out in his practice session. Injuring himself and some officials.

Stephen

[Allen Brown]

Brilliant thread you've started Roger.

Allen Brown mentioned the retrospective application of 'T' numbers to Cooper from around 1963. He is definitely in the correct time frame.

It's certainly true Cooper never made it easy for anyone, but themselves to identify their cars in a simple coded manner. David McK has already mentioned how easier it would be if they had a type number in the chassis number. It would indeed, but you could also imagine old Charlie Cooper complaining on the cost of a new plate to fit the extra stamping in (tongue in cheek)!! Whether you talk air-cooled, or the later predominantly Climax engined variations to the Cooper theme there has been a lot of MkI, MkII type Coopers.

In some of the Cooper published literature I've had a dig through, the earliest brochure that I can find is for the '1964 Cooper-Austin Type 72 Formula III' with a 'T' or 'Type' listing. Then again the same applies for the '1965 Cooper-BMC type 76 formula III'. Jumping back to late Nov 60 there's 3 separate Cooper letterheads for pricing structures and their respective brochures for the 1961 range. One letterhead is headed, '1961 FORMULA 1 COOPER-CLIMAX Mark 1 - as at 3rd November 1960'. Another, 'COOPER "MONACO" SPORTS CAR 1961 - As at 17th November 1960'. With finally '1961 FORMULA JUNIOR COOPER-AUSTIN MKII - As at 3rd November 1960'. No Type numbers there.

Looking at the broader picture, in the write-up for the Cooper Car Co Ltd stand at the 1963 Racing Car Show's programme it states, "On this stand is shown a Cooper-Austin Formula Juniour Type 65, a Cooper Monaco sports Type 61 and a Mini Cooper, while a Formula 1 Cooper Coventry-Climax Type 60 car will be exhibited on the Grand Prix contenders stand."

So delving back further I've found Autosport's Oct 5th, 1962 issue has a brief feature - Two New Coopers. This covers Bruce McLaren's cars for the Winter season (that being the northern hemisphere's Winter). Covering 3 cars Bruce McLaren was taking to either the US or 'downunder' (late Spring/Summer) races. There is 3 photos shown featuring Mini Cooper, Intercontinental and Monaco sports car. Finally for the separate photo of the Monaco it quotes, "Rear view of the interesting new Cooper Monaco, the Type 61, which has a 4-cylinder, 2.7 litre Coventry Climax engine." The intercontinental is of course the Atkins T62. There is no reference as such to 'T62' in the feature though.

I've had a look in earlier magazines, but this is currently the earliest that I've seen the press of the day use 'Type' to describe a Cooper model. That however doesn't mean there either is or isn't something listed in an earlier magazine somewhere.

Stephen

Thanks for that Stephen - a far more detailed analysis than I had ever done.

This is only conjecture but perhaps the sports car world expected model numbers in a way that the formula car world didn't. So the Cooper Monaco Type 61 may have been trigger for attaching T numbers to the rest of the range. The Brabham BT5 may have played a similar role over at MRD.

Edited by Allen Brown, 06 February 2010 - 12:50.

[Roger Clark]

Doug -
The unique feature of JB's 1959 gearbox was apparently the positioning of the oil-pump. At least that's what he told the bloke who owns the car now
And, yes, the 2.2 engine could make it a "new" car
Also, Fairman didn't drive for RW in 1958

I assume that doug was referring to the unclothed picture when he said it might be 1958. THe picture of Fairman is surely the 28th September Goodwood meeting. Interestingly, it appears to be Cliff Allison's Lotus following. He finished well ahead of Fairman. Walker entered two cars for this race, the newer one being driven by Tony Brooks.

I thought the first 2.2-lire engine appeared in Brabham's car in the New Zealand GP, htis one created by Jack himself with help from Repco. Alf Francis built an over 2-litre engine in early 1958 - I'm not sure when it appeared, but the first Climas-built 2.2 didn't arrive until hte Monaco GP (I think).

[David McKinney]

Brabham entered a 2.2 car in the 1958 GP, but said later that the engine he ran was in fact a 2.0.
The Walker team's Boxing Day 1957/Argentina 1958 engine was said to be 2.2, presumably built in-house (and very likely the one JB thought he'd take to NZ)
Without checking, my memory too is that the factory's first 2.2 did not race until Monaco

[Allen Brown]

Allen,

In the programme for the Feb 4th, 1962 Warwick Farm International '100' - Bowmaker Yeoman Racing Team was the entrant for the #4 Davison Cooper. They're also listed as entrants for the #2 Surtees & #3 Salvadori Coopers too. Salvadori didn't start the race, having crashed out in his practice session. Injuring himself and some officials.

Stephen

Indeed he did, but it was part of a deal whereby he bought the car - only to wreck it at Longford shortly afterwards.

By the way, I don't have that program. Any chance you could send me a scan of the entry list? (To allen@oldracingcars.com) This is what we've done on 1962 Australian racing so far: http://www.oldracing...australia/1962/

The car Davison then bought from Jack Brabham to replace it is something of a mystery. David and I have been trying to get to the bottom of it but have yet to reach a theory we are both comfortable with. But I won't elaborate as I'm getting too far off-thread.

[molestrangler]

Many thanks. Cooper Cars says that Moss had the strengthened gear case in Argentina. May I ask your reasons for saying otherwise?

I think this is the first time I have heard that Brabham had his own development box in '59. Did he have it all season and did McLaren and Gregory never have one?

Think I have now changed my tune. Thought the strengthened case was later than that but have now found a cutaway
and photos from Autosport 21/2/58 showing said case. This is probably the definitive T45 albeit with drum brakes.

[Doug Nye]

1 - The Walker 1958 Argentine GP-winning car used a 1.96-litre Climax engine - the Trintignant Monaco GP-winning engine was nominally, I think, out to 2016cc - the 2.2-litre Climax variant followed on.

2 - Thank you Roger - the '1957' pic which is making me feel uncertain is the unclothed engine-bay shot, not the action pic of Jolly Jack in the Mark I car.

When it comes to earliest use of a Type number system - as in so many things Cooper - don't rely upon published reference to same...I have seen all kinds of T scrawls on some drawing copies. When I publicised manufacturer type classifications in a 'Motor Racing' magazine article reviewing the 1-litre F2 seasons 1964-65-66 that was one of the first detailed references that many people had seen to some model classifications which are now used as common terms. I was not the first - but I think at least amongst the first - to present such nerdy detail. Race reporters had seldom used even Brabham BT model classification before then. From memory, I think Brian Jordan had previously produced a little booklet essentially for model makers which included type number detail. I also seem to recall Paul Watson - freelance reporter/entry fixer of the 1960s having on a few prior occasions cited a type number.

Many years later I was given a pretty firm rollicking by one manufacturer's contemporary PRO for using a book platform to "present motor racing in greater detail than was ever recorded at the time...". Since I had not knowingly invented any of that stuff, and had merely quoted it from internal team paperwork sources, I was able to respond - after a quite enjoyable and significant pause - "Yeeesssss - and your problem is?".

DCN

Edited by Doug Nye, 06 February 2010 - 19:04.

[monoposto]

Mention has been made in this thread of "Cooper Cars" by DCN

Is it commonly known that this ( or at least some of it ) is able to be read on-line ?

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ggr9YfWQxLgC&pg=PA7&lpg=PA7&dq=cooper+cars+nye&source=bl&ots=3su59JO8qk&sig=7i2plAk3jsK9HtIZLdjj1eJZE2c&hl=en&ei=vb5tS8HyAo7r4gaQ1sGqBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CAoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=&f=false

There is also the advantage of being able to search within the book, so even if you own it - which you should - it may act as a more comprehensive index.

[Roger Clark]

Brabham entered a 2.2 car in the 1958 GP, but said later that the engine he ran was in fact a 2.0.
The Walker team's Boxing Day 1957/Argentina 1958 engine was said to be 2.2, presumably built in-house (and very likely the one JB thought he'd take to NZ)
Without checking, my memory too is that the factory's first 2.2 did not race until Monaco

Doug says in Cooper Cars that Climax's history says that Brabham used a 1.96 in the NZ GP: "but today Sir Jack cinfirms that it was indeed a 2.2 which he had made up himself". Is the statement that you quote a later correction?

Edited by Roger Clark, 06 February 2010 - 19:24.

[David McKinney]

Later than the event, but not later than Cooper Cars

Auckland Star motoring editor Des Mahoney, interviewing JB before the 1959 race, made reference to the fact that he was using the same-sized engine - viz, 2.2 - both years. At which point JB made the statement about the 1958 engine I referred to above

The NZ Grand Prix Annual 1960-61, which Mahoney wrote, cites Brabham's 1958 engine - contrary to the programme listing - as a 1960cc unit. I questioned Mahoney on this a year later, when we were working on a subsequent project, and that's when he related the tale

Edited by David McKinney, 06 February 2010 - 20:27.

[Doug Nye]

Mention has been made in this thread of "Cooper Cars" by DCN

Is it commonly known that this ( or at least some of it ) is able to be read on-line ?

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ggr9YfWQxLgC&pg=PA7&lpg=PA7&dq=cooper+cars+nye&source=bl&ots=3su59JO8qk&sig=7i2plAk3jsK9HtIZLdjj1eJZE2c&hl=en&ei=vb5tS8HyAo7r4gaQ1sGqBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CAoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=&f=false

There is also the advantage of being able to search within the book, so even if you own it - which you should - it may act as a more comprehensive index.

First I've heard of this, and I cannot say I am pleased...

DCN

[monoposto]

. . . I did wonder, but assumed copyright and royalty law was watertight these days . . .

[Allen Brown]

You would think, wouldn't you - but Google doesn't believe copyright law applies to it. It's just trying to help, you see...

[Doug Nye]

Internet giants think themselves above opposition...and even the most basic common courtesies.

When YouTube infringed our Motorfilms Quarterly rights on a pre-WW1 archive movie edit it took an inordinate amount of sweat, time, blood and guts to correct the situation.

Now Google Books have taken it upon themselves to post my favourite piece of personal work not only without asking me first, but also despite the fact that a while back I signed an opt-out stating that I did not want any of my work to be presented by them... Now this is going to take up yet more time that I will never see again - which I really do not appreciate.

Thanks for the heads-up 'monoposto' - not your fault, but this has spoiled a lovely day in which we have been out celebrating publisher/motoring writer/track tester/good bloke John Blunsden's 80th birthday.

DCN

Edited by Doug Nye, 06 February 2010 - 21:33.

[cooper997]

Indeed he did, but it was part of a deal whereby he bought the car - only to wreck it at Longford shortly afterwards.

By the way, I don't have that program. Any chance you could send me a scan of the entry list? (To allen@oldracingcars.com) This is what we've done on 1962 Australian racing so far: http://www.oldracing...australia/1962/

The car Davison then bought from Jack Brabham to replace it is something of a mystery. David and I have been trying to get to the bottom of it but have yet to reach a theory we are both comfortable with. But I won't elaborate as I'm getting too far off-thread.

David McK & Allen,

My pleasure with that T number exercise. After all these years it would be nice to tie things like this together.

From my own conjecture, it makes me wonder whether it's as simple as Cooper finally deciding around the mid to late 1962 period, to follow the Lotus lead of regularly identifying their cars by number for the fans reading the popular press of the day. As Doug has mentioned the system was already in use on Cooper drawings. So all that meant, was to tell the journalists visiting, "This is our new Type 61, etc." They'd do the rest.

Is everyone sure the 'replacement' car Davo would later use after the Longford crash came from Brabham? Sandown was the weekend after Longford and he used the Aston Martin. Salvadori got to use a borrowed Davison Cooper T53 at Sandown, March 11-12, 1962 (given his WF crash car was obviously not easily repaired in the 5 weeks between both races). Was it an old one that Lex had lying around already? In SCW May 1962, there's a snippet (probably written by Mike Kable, who was editor of the mag at the time) on Davison having the ex-John Surtees Bowmaker Cooper and would debut it at the 1962 Bathurst Easter 'Gold Star' meeting. Photos suggest more 'slimline' than 'lowline'. If I'm on the right tangent that means Lex forked out for 2 Bowmaker cars. Isn't the Longford crash car, the one Tony Osborne rebuilt (or more likely had rebuilt in the early 1990's). I have photos of it sitting on display at a concours style event held at Domain Chandon winery in the Yarra Valley (out from Melbourne) in about 1993. Again, if I'm on the right tangent this is likely to be a car Don Thallon has.

Allen, shall scan the WF programme entry list for you.

Stephen

[Roger Clark]

A few questions about brakes - when did the works team use drums?

Doug says in Cooper Cars that Brabham's car in the 1957 French GP had them.

When the T45 was first presented to the press in early 1958 it had drums, see the Theo PAge cutaway drawing in Autosport, reproduced in Cooper Cars. Doug says that all three works cars at the British GP had discs. DSJ says the same of the French GP. Is this a case of a reverse Baskerville's hound?