28 replies to this topic

[Ray Bell]

I got a total surprise when I looked this up on Google:

http://www.uniquecar...bristol_405.htm

The Unique Cars and Parts site has always seemed to be pretty good to me, but this has me totally baffled. Note the engine capacity and number of cylinders?

Perhaps it's an April's Fool joke that someone forgot to correct when the second of April arrived?

What straight 8 engine could possibly be used in this, assuming there's some basis of fact in it? It does say only three cars built, but a supercharged 3257cc inline 8 is relatively small. The quoted horsepower could be right for such an engine. But I don't think it actually exists.

Anyone know more?

[john ruston]

It's nonsense.

405 has normal 6 cyl engine etc.Saloon and Cab.

may be a special dreamt up by someone.

[buckaluck]

Well 3257 cc is about 200 Cu. inch and with a supercharger it's doing 1 hp for each cubic inch which is nice.
Nose seems long enough for the straight 8 but I doubt they only made 3-4 of that engine so if you can find that motor
used somewhere else then maybe they did build it. Would seem like a fun car to drive light weight and plenty of go power.

Buck

[Geoff E]

Bugatti seem to have used 3257cc straight 8s http://www.autoviva....?page=1&id=1572

[Allan Lupton]

As has been said a 405 is a perfectly normal Bristol-engined Bristol and they made around 300 of them.
Even they have a real entry for the 405 (scroll down the page). which is more or less right.
Their search system doesn't lead to the offending page which must tell us something.
That certainly lives up to the "Unique Cars and Parts" title, don't it?

[werks prototype]

Maybe someone has managed to lever in a 'supercharged' Chrysler Straight 8 flathead? I only mention Chrysler because of the subsequent Bristol types.

[D-Type]

Somehow their database has copied Bugatti 57 details into the [adjacent?] Bristol data

[Tim Murray]

Bugatti seem to have used 3257cc straight 8s http://www.autoviva....?page=1&id=1572

Here's their entry on the Bugatti 57SC Atlantic. As Duncan says, the engine and transmission details and number produced are the same. I suspect someone had finger trouble when putting the entries together:

http://www.uniquecar...sc_atlantic.htm

especially if one then checks their other Bristol details, eg:

http://www.uniquecar...bristol_402.htm

It's a nonsense, and can safely be ignored.

[Ray Bell]

The Chrysler straight eight was much larger than 3257cc...

I can't think of any other that might have been used, even the Hudson was over 4-litres, though the very early ones were apparently around 220 cubes, as were the early Buicks. But you don't use an engine from the early thirties in a car built in the early fifties, do you?

A bit of a mystery, I think.

[Vitesse2]

Bugatti seem to have used 3257cc straight 8s http://www.autoviva....?page=1&id=1572

There were originally three T57G "Tanks", fitted with 3257cc engines. They were, however, unblown. A blown version, the T57C, won Le Mans in 1939. Other similar cars were the T57S45, which had a 4.5 litre T50B engine, and a hybrid T57/59.

You can pick the bones out of that, but I'd venture to suggest that somebody started a T57G page and then put the wrong title on it.

[Ray Bell]

But would a Bugatti 57 supercharged engine have had 200hp?

Good think we all like a mystery...

[Allan Lupton]

Here's their entry on the Bugatti 57SC Atlantic. As Duncan says, the engine and transmission details and number produced are the same. I suspect someone had finger trouble when putting the entries together:

http://www.uniquecar...sc_atlantic.htm

Even that has its howlers such as
The car sat on elegant 15" wire wheels, and was fitted with drum brakes.

T57 Bugattis were on 18" wheels and I doubt anything was on 15" in 1937/8 but if it were it would be a very small car. Also when writing of a 1937/8 car the drum brakes are not worthy of comment.
As for power, Conway quotes 57S at 170 and 57SC at 200 at 5-6 p.s.i. boost (not 3-4 as in car sand parts).

[Vitesse2]

Even that has its howlers such as
The car sat on elegant 15" wire wheels, and was fitted with drum brakes.

T57 Bugattis were on 18" wheels and I doubt anything was on 15" in 1937/8 but if it were it would be a very small car. Also when writing of a 1937/8 car the drum brakes are not worthy of comment.
As for power, Conway quotes 57S at 170 and 57SC at 200 at 5-6 p.s.i. boost (not 3-4 as in car sand parts).

And when you compare it to Barrie Price's book on the T57 it's obviously pretty much complete tosh! The writer may have been seeking to simplify, but has only succeeded in introducing confusion in what is already a complicated story. There was only one T57SC as originally built (c/n 57561, sold as a rolling chassis), although other cars were converted later and if I read Price correctly there was actually only one T57SC Atlantic - c/n 57591, which started life as a T57S.

I also discovered another T57 model of which only three were built - the Jean Bugatti/Walter-designed Aravis drophead coupé, constructed by Gangloff. Presumably unblown, though.

[Allan Lupton]

Not being much of a Bugatti person, I drew on Conway (writing in 1966). Barrie's book is much more recent and he could not only draw on Conway's work but a lot more done at the Bugatti Trust since (Barrie's a trustee and former chairman IIRC).
The car sand parts piece also seems to move seamlessly from Atlantic to Atalante without making much of the difference.

[BRG]

So most likely a bit of a c*ck-up on the website front. You had best break it to them gently, Ray.

[Ray Bell]

How come that's my job?

Do I have to do all of the dirty work?

[Roger Clark]

And when you compare it to Barrie Price's book on the T57 it's obviously pretty much complete tosh! The writer may have been seeking to simplify, but has only succeeded in introducing confusion in what is already a complicated story. There was only one T57SC as originally built (c/n 57561, sold as a rolling chassis), although other cars were converted later and if I read Price correctly there was actually only one T57SC Atlantic - c/n 57591, which started life as a T57S.

I also discovered another T57 model of which only three were built - the Jean Bugatti/Walter-designed Aravis drophead coupé, constructed by Gangloff. Presumably unblown, though.

Wasn't the Aravis car one of the many body styles available on a 57 chassis rather than a separate model? I haven't got Barrie Price's book, but I'm surprised that only one 57SC was built. Does he really say that?

Am I correct in thinking that the only difference between the 57 and the 57C, and between the 57S and the 57SC, was the addition of a supercharger?

[arttidesco]

I've had a scan through all the Bristol derivations listed in Christopher Balfours "Bristol Cars" no mention of any 8 cylinder supercharged cars there either and if there were 3 of them I'd expect him to know, I'll be going to the Bristol Owners Club Concours at Greenwich on Sunday I'll see if I can find any clues while I am there.

Edited by arttidesco, 18 August 2011 - 13:01.

[Vitesse2]

Wasn't the Aravis car one of the many body styles available on a 57 chassis rather than a separate model? I haven't got Barrie Price's book, but I'm surprised that only one 57SC was built. Does he really say that?

Am I correct in thinking that the only difference between the 57 and the 57C, and between the 57S and the 57SC, was the addition of a supercharger?

Yes, you are correct about the Aravis there, Roger, although it's really just semantics, given the large number of body styles on T57 mechanicals ;) The first Aravis was unblown, the other two were supercharged.

The 57S was a "sports" short-chassis version - 2.98m as opposed to 3.30m - and the C does indeed represent the presence of a blower: in the chassis list it seems that only cars which had them fitted as original equipment at Molsheim received the C designation. Regarding the T57SC, the exact quote from page 157 - discussing the T57S - is "One car was fitted with a supercharger and called Type 57SC. Several cars were converted by the factory to this specification during their early life." Although he doesn't detail all of those, the photo captions identify 57573 (an Atalante coupé) and 57602 (a Corsica-built Vanden Plas coupé).

The basic specification of the T57S - which incorporated De Ram shocks, a split front axle, dry sump lubrication and several other features - was much higher than the "ordinary" T57 and Price quotes a price of £1100 as against £590: it seems likely that this price disparity and the availability of the T57C at £745 were the main reasons why only 42 were built. Of the final ten T57S chassis, delivered between September 1937 and May 1938, seven (possibly eight) seem to have been sold to British customers and one to Italy - the presumed (by me) Italian being called Rovere: Gino of that ilk, perhaps?

[BRG]

How come that's my job?

Do I have to do all of the dirty work?

Well, it was your discovery.

And it's an Aussie website. You know they wouldn't take kindly to being corrected by some whingeing Poms.

[GMACKIE]

It may be a 405, that has picked up a 'bug'.

[Ray Bell]

You're thinking of the Peugeot 405...

It got MCD... 'Modern Car Disease', which afflicts the drivetrain and forces all the horsepower to escape via the front wheels.

[Dutchy]

What I find sad is the owner wanted to chop the roof and install a slush box in the first place.

 

Why bother?

[Guido22]

This is just typical of a short sighted lawyer. Demanding compensation and probably bankrupting the already fragile company in the process. It's no wonder insurance premiums are so high with this short sighted ness. If he is a member of the club, he should be thrown out...

[Allan Lupton]

What I find sad is the owner wanted to chop the roof and install a slush box in the first place.

 

Why bother?

Yes indeed, why bother as it says he bought a 405D.

If so, it is a drophead coupé to start with so he didn't need to "chop the roof" as you so happily put it.

Here's a 405D:

Edited by Allan Lupton, 20 November 2013 - 17:55.

[Sharman]

Can I ask a question please? I have always believed that the supercharged 57 was a C i.e. Compresseur, whilst the unsupercharged version was an SC i.e. Sans Compresseur, after all it is a French nomenclature. Why would they refer to "Supercharging" and abbreviate it to S/C, the Insitute Francaise would be going round fast enough to solve the new power station problem?

Edited by Sharman, 20 November 2013 - 20:02.

[Allan Lupton]

A little learning is a dangerous thing: the letter S can stand for Sport as well as sans.

 

Simply put (by one who doesn't necessarily know, but knows what to refer to!)

Type 57 was the original car in 1934 with 135 b.h.p.

Type 57C was the supercharged version of the 57 (from 1937) with 160 b.h.p.

Type 57S introduced in August '36 had a modified shortened (by 32 cm.) chassis and some engine refinements to give 170 b.h.p.

Type 57SC was a supercharged 56S (from '37) with 200 b.h.p.

[Sharman]

A little learning is a dangerous thing: the letter S can stand for Sport as well as sans.

 

Simply put (by one who doesn't necessarily know, but knows what to refer to!)

Type 57 was the original car in 1934 with 135 b.h.p.

Type 57C was the supercharged version of the 57 (from 1937) with 160 b.h.p.

Type 57S introduced in August '36 had a modified shortened (by 32 cm.) chassis and some engine refinements to give 170 b.h.p.

Type 57SC was a supercharged 56S (from '37) with 200 b.h.p.

56S? Typo or something else Allan?

[Sebastian Tombs]

A little learning is a dangerous thing:

 

Indeed it is Alan.  In Bugatti-speak 'S' stands for 'Surbaissé' or 'lowered'.  The 'S' chassis is completely different to the normal T57 chassis, notably at the rear where the axle passes through a 'hole' in deep side-members.

 

ST