40 replies to this topic

[HistoryFan]

There is a lot of critics about the current GP sport, but there were years in the past that were even worse.

 

From 1926 to 1931 there were just a few starters and many rules changes to get the sport more popular. The probleme were the high cost. Bugatti and Maserati sold their cars to other drivers but other automobile costumer didn't it. Why?

 

I also heard that there were no private drivers allowed. But on the other side there were private drivers as Eldrige with his Eldrige Special. So what's the story about that? Were they allowed?

 

What were the other reasons for that bad years in GP racing?

[Roger Clark]

Before 1927, Grand Prix racing was the virtually exclusive preserve of large manufacturers.  One-by-one they withdrew leaving organisers little choice but to open their races to private entries.  There were, I think, three reasons for the withdrawals.  First was the increasing cost of racing since the advent of specialised, supercharged engines and lightweight cars. It is difficult to imagine what the 1926/27 Delages must have cost.  Second, racing was becoming less valuable as a means of selling production cars.  Lastly, the rapidly worsening economic situation meant that fewer manufacturers could afford it.  These things didn't change until 1932 when fascist regimes began to use motor racing as a form of political propaganda.

 

There is, however, a counter argument to the view that 1928-31 was a low point in the history of grand prix racing.  Those years saw a huge increase in the participation of private owners and a similarly large number of races for them.  It is arguable that this formed the bedrock of racing that was to endure for fifty years. Organisers ignored the AIACR formula and ran formule libre races allowing a much greater variety of cars.  It may not be coincidence that those years also saw the emergence of a true golden age of drivers, the like of which has seldom been approached.  

 

1928-31 may be the most under-appreciated years in the history of motor racing.  An apparent doldrums caused by financial crisis led to a bottom-up revolution.  History has been known to repeat itself...

[ensign14]

They weren't necessarily that bad for racing.  Just that the AIACR had got a convoluted formula in which nobody was interested so everyone held non-GP events with healthy fields.  Often filled with private Bugattis that allowed the likes of Chiron and "Williams" to become racing stars, which would have been impossible a few years before. 

 

The biggest race in 1926 was probably the Targa Florio and Costatini won it in a Grand Prix car.  The Mille Miglia saw up-and-comers like Nuvolari and Fagioli in it, although it was almost entirely a domestic entry.  Le Mans in those years created the Bentley legend.  And Frank Lockhart meteored across the scene.

[Vitesse2]

A period which saw the production of a lot of Bugattis, the introduction of the Alfa Romeo 8C Monza and the Maserati tipo 26 - not to mention the Maserati V4 and Alfa Romeo tipo A - hardly merits the accolade 'worst'. As Roger says - under-appreciated. Possibly because the people who wrote the histories had been dazzled by the years that followed.

 

Added to which, the politics of motor racing in this period are absolutely fascinating. There's a direct line which can be traced from ideas originally floated in America in 1928 to the complicated 1938-40 Formule Internationale rules.

[63Corvette]

Well 41 thru 44 weren't very good years either.................

[Roger Clark]

A period which saw the production of a lot of Bugattis, the introduction of the Alfa Romeo 8C Monza and the Maserati tipo 26 - not to mention the Maserati V4 and Alfa Romeo tipo A - hardly merits the accolade 'worst'. As Roger says - under-appreciated. Possibly because the people who wrote the histories had been dazzled by the years that followed.

 

I think a large reason for the era being under-appreciated - in this country at least - is that the people who wrote the histories, epitomised by Pomeroy, were mainly interested in the technical progress of racing car design.  It cannot be denied that the end of the 20s was packing in this respect.  The new cars were largely stripped sportscars and the P2 Alfa, introduced in 1924 was still competitive in 1930.  The Type 26 Maserati was, possibly, the only exception to this.  Into the 30s, the twin-engined Alfa and Maseratis were clearly a blind alley that served only to frighten the AIACR into the 1934 formula, designed to exclude such monsters.  Technical development and good racing do not necessarily coincide.

[HistoryFan]

Thank you for all that posts. Interesting to read about that years.

 

Back to one of my questions: I also heard that there were no private drivers allowed. But on the other side there were private drivers as Eldrige with his Eldrige Special. So what's the story about that? Were they allowed?

[HistoryFan]

Another question: Why was Maserati originally disqualified for the 1926 season?

 

"Second, on March 19, 1926 the CSI of the AIACR met at the premises of the ACF in Paris [6], where amongst other things the AIACR Court of Appeals revoked the decision of the Maserati disqualification which had been declared in 1925 for the entire 1926 season"?

[ensign14]

Private entrants were not always banned.  Zborowski bought a Miller for his own use.  The 1926 British GP had a private entry from Malcolm Campbell, and Major Frank Halford's Aston-based Brooklands special which happened to conform to Grand Prix regulations.

[Rob29]

I was always under the impression that organizers made their own rules in that period? Championship did not start until 1934?

[Vitesse2]

I was always under the impression that organizers made their own rules in that period? Championship did not start until 1934?

That's the way it's usually painted. But - to continue the analogy - it's a broad brush approach. In theory at least there was always a Formule Internationale in place until 1930, although it took some very strange forms at times, and almost all organisers simply ignored it. For 1931-33 - after a failure to agree on rules based on a modification to the so-called 'Junk Formula' used at Indianapolis in 1930 - the CSI's mandate for Grand Prix racing was officially Formule Libre.

 

Regarding championships, Leif Snellman, Hans Etzrodt and others have done a lot of work to dig out details and it has now been established that - despite what you may have read - there was (again in theory) an AIACR World or European Championship almost every year between 1925 and 1939, the exceptions being 1933 and 1934. In practice, the 1928, 1929 and 1930 titles were never awarded. Hans Stuck is sometimes claimed to have been European Champion in 1934, but this is post-factual and probably based on unofficial tables published in the European press.

 

http://www.kolumbus....nellman/cha.htm

[ensign14]

There were championships before.  Alfa Romeo changed their badge when they took the 1925 title.  And withdrew from the sport.

[Roger Clark]

I think it was generally true that the controlling body (AIACR/CSI) specified the rules with which Grand Prix cars had to comply but that organisers specified their own race regulations, including which entries they would accept. If there were insufficient cars complying with the formula then race organisers would ignore it. I don't think there were rules about championships except the scoring system (and sometimes not even that!) until 1981.

There were exceptions, of course, but private entries were not usually accepted in the major races until 1928 which was a real watershed in this respect. The ACF may have wished that they made the change two years earlier. Zborowski's 1924 entry was interesting but the French were probably keen to be accommodating towards an American car. Mark Dees' Miller book contains the story of this car, including the recollections of SCH Davies who was Zborowski's riding mechanic.

The Maserati suspension was not something I had heard of but it would appear that it was Alfieri Maserati, when working for Diatto, not the Maserati company that was suspended. It seems that he fitted a 3-litre engine to a Diatto entered as a 2-litre, in a Spanish hill climb. I found this from the website below, but I can't vouch for the accuracy of the site.
http://www.diatto.co...e/maserati.html

[Vitesse2]

The hillclimb concerned is of course Rabassada rather than the quoted Rebassada. I checked the original (brief) reference to the lifting of the suspension in Automobil Revue and it does also mention Diatto. But without the exact date of the suspension I wasn't prepared to go through pages and pages of JPEGs to find it on the off chance!

 

I think the source for that website is probably one of Sergio Massaro's two books on Diatto, which are the imaginatively titled 'Diatto' (published 1999) and 'Diatto Story' (published 2001)

[Michael Ferner]

The view that the late twenties and early thirties were not the nadir of Grand Prix racing was first aired by Paul Sheldon in Volume 2 of his "Black Book" series in 1990, I believe, and even as a young student of motor racing it struck me as ahistorical at the time. Sheldon "streamlined" his version of events by elevating all Formula Libre events to Grand Prix status from 1928 onwards, to neatly fit into the 1931 scenario when all engineering requirements for Grand Prix cars were to be abandoned, and "true" Grands Prix distinguished themselves from other races merely by the duration of the event or, later, the distance to be run.

Looking back, it can be argued that this era represented merely a transitional period to "modern" aspects of Grand Prix racing, but at the time it was the very heart and soul, the raison d'etre of the Grand Prix that appeared to be at stake. Only two decades before, the event was born expressly as a contest between manufacturers, or constructors if you will, to supersede the failed experiment of a contest between nations, represented by the Gordon-Bennett races, as the pinnacle event of the then new sport. As such, it had waxed and waned over the years, often in accordance with the varying "exercises" (or challenges) presented by the technical rules of the International Formula. But to abandone this purpose in 1931 meant the total collapse, not of the sport, but of the idea of the Grand Prix!

Quite interestingly, this development was ultimately fore-shadowed by the events in the USofA about a decade before, when more and more manufacturers left the sport for various reasons, until only three (very small) companies were left: Duesenberg, Frontenac and Miller - how easy is it to find parallels to Alfa Romeo, Bugatti and Maserati here!! Economics soon dictated that these companies built their cars to sell, right off the factory floor instead of after usage as works cars; the birth of the production racing car, in effect. Grand Prix racing (and Indianapolis) survived, eventually, but as a completely different animal.

About private entries, Roger has already explained the Zborowski/Miller situation. Halford and Eldridge weren't "privateers", of course, they were constructors/manufactureres.

Edited by Michael Ferner, 19 July 2015 - 15:23.

[Vitesse2]

Funnily enough, Michael, I have seen a comment in the press of the time that after the failure to agree a formula for 1931-33 Count Florio suggested (via the RACI) a return to an inter-nations event along the lines of the GBT. Not surprisingly, nobody was all that keen.

[Roger Clark]

It was certainly in the Sheldon Black Book that I first saw the opinion that the late 20's did not represent such a low point in racing history.  It was certainly a different kind of Grand Prix racing from that envisaged in 1906 and practiced since then but it proved that top-level racing could prosper in Europe without major manufacturers, unlike 1909-11.  The original idea of Grand Prix racing was dead, only to return in 1934-39 and for a few years in the 21st century.

 

There is one minor mystery to me which others may be able to explain.  We are often told that there was one event in 1928 (the European GP at Monza) and two in 1929 (ACF and San Sebastien) that complied with the AIACR formula.  The 1928 formula included a minimum weight of 500kg and a maximum of 750kg.  The 1929 version had a minimum of 900kg.  This would mean that any car racing under both formulae would have to gain at least 150kg, which seems a lot.  Did they, or were blind eyes turned?

[Vitesse2]

I believe that - unlike 1928 - as part of the introduction of a fuel consumption element, the 1929 regulations included the weight of fuel and oil (possibly worked out as a nominal amount over and above dry weight as previously measured, based on a fuel weight of 14 kilos per 100km). The minimum distance for a Grand Prix was also specified at 600km, so that's presumably a minimum of 84 kilos of fuel. Weight of the oil isn't specified, but maybe 16 kilos, to give a round 100 kg minimum for fluids? In which case the heaviest cars - the P2s for example - would only have had to gain about 50 kilos dry weight. I'm not clear on whether the cars had to start with that amount of fuel on board, but maybe that's the reason behind those ugly bolster tanks used in the GP de l'ACF?

 

 

The original minimum weight proposal appears to have been 1000 kilos, but it was apparently lowered 'in order to allow lighter cars to compete'. The 14kg/100km rule had also orginally been proposed at 12kg/100km.

 

My technical German isn't good enough to get all the nuances of it, but there's a report on the new regulations in Automobil Revue 1928 issue 87 p2.

[HistoryFan]

Very interesting posts. Thank you very much! Nice to read about this exiting time.

[Michael Ferner]

My technical German isn't good enough to get all the nuances of it, but there's a report on the new regulations in Automobil Revue 1928 issue 87 p2.

The new formula was discussed in detail, with a focus on the technical shortcomings* of the proposed formula, which was said to favour obsolescent 4-cylinder engines. The English, American and German representatives voiced grave concerns, but the formula was accepted nevertheless, with concessions to the concerns in the form of an increase of the maximum allowable consumption of fuel and oil for 100 km from 12 to 14 kg, and a reduction of the term of validity from 3 to 2 years. Minimum weight was also reduced from 1000 kg to 900 kg, in order to allow lighter cars to compete. The distance for Grand Prix races was set at 600 km, and the 1929 GP of Europe will take place on September 8, again at Monza, with Belgium penciled in for 1930.
According to the new formula, all types of engines will be eligible for the international Grands Prix, and scrutineering will be restricted to fuel and oil tanks. Fuel is to be of the type in use today, with a density of 720 at 15 degrees centrigrade.
The bodywork has to be of the two-man type, and have a minimum width of 1 m at seat height for at least 25 cm. The fuel tank, the type of which will be prescribed, must be accessible and visible, and mounted behind the seats. It must be clearly seperate from the bodywork, and must not be streamlined in any form.

* probably meaning shortcomings of the technical regulations - not my bad english, but bad german in the source!

[2F-001]

This absorbing discussion is exploring an era about which my knowledge is particularly sketchy - so please bear with me...

Richard: the starting weight quoted for 1929 - that is still for 'car without driver', is it?
I assumed so, from the reference to a reduction from a proposed 1 tonne limit which otherwise wouldn't make sense, but it just struck me that with the increase, after an allowance for fuel, the weight of a slightly-built driver would put them safely over the limit. On the other hand, in your example the extra tank weight required would eat further into that 50kg shortfall.
Presumably then, it was intended that cars could go the distance without refuelling?

The '14kg/100km rule': that's what, roughly 15 miles-per-gallon? (in right-hand-drive money). That seems pretty good, efficiency-wise, though I'm not familiar with consumption rates for road-going cars of the era.

The sophistication of some race cars of that era is generally more impressive than many people seem to imagine. That even relatively simple cars might have been built down to a weight of half a tonne in those days, given the nature of componentry and castings, illustrates that.

It might be surprising to those with a present-day F1 perspective that Grand Prix racing was run to a fuel economy formula that long ago; but what was the background to that? Was is to discourage overly large and costly cars and engines or to encourage more interest from makers of smaller cars with a production-focused agenda? Or something else?

[Roger Clark]

I thought that:

 

(1) The 14kg/100km limit included fuel and oil

(2) The weight limits were dry - i.e. without fuel and oil

(3) The bolster tanks were provided by the organisers and had to include all the fuel for the race.  Possibly the oil too if point (1) is correct.  The tanks are also visible in the 1930 European Grand Prix (Spa) run to a very similar formula.

 

However, all these things are based on books written many years later so may be wrong.  Whether they were or not, the T35s would surely have had to gain more that 50kg.  The P2s are are not an issue because they didn't run in either of the 1929 formula races.

 

EDIT:  Michael posted while I was writing, but he indicates that point (1) at least, is correct.

Edited by Roger Clark, 20 July 2015 - 09:42.

[Roger Clark]

This absorbing discussion is exploring an era about which my knowledge is particularly sketchy - so please bear with me...

Richard: the starting weight quoted for 1929 - that is still for 'car without driver', is it?
I assumed so, from the reference to a reduction from a proposed 1 tonne limit which otherwise wouldn't make sense, but it just struck me that with the increase, after an allowance for fuel, the weight of a slightly-built driver would put them safely over the limit. On the other hand, in your example the extra tank weight required would eat further into that 50kg shortfall.
Presumably then, it was intended that cars could go the distance without refuelling?

The '14kg/100km rule': that's what, roughly 15 miles-per-gallon? (in right-hand-drive money). That seems pretty good, efficiency-wise, though I'm not familiar with consumption rates for road-going cars of the era.

The sophistication of some race cars of that era is generally more impressive than many people seem to imagine. That even relatively simple cars might have been built down to a weight of half a tonne in those days, given the nature of componentry and castings, illustrates that.

It might be surprising to those with a present-day F1 perspective that Grand Prix racing was run to a fuel economy formula that long ago; but what was the background to that? Was is to discourage overly large and costly cars and engines or to encourage more interest from makers of smaller cars with a production-focused agenda? Or something else?

I think that 14-15mpg is about right but the requirement would be better than that if the weight allowance included oil.  It seems very economical to me.

 

I've not seen any suggestion that weight limits included the driver.

[uechtel]

There is a lot of critics about the current GP sport, but there were years in the past that were even worse.

 

From 1926 to 1931 there were just a few starters and many rules changes to get the sport more popular. The probleme were the high cost. Bugatti and Maserati sold their cars to other drivers but other automobile costumer didn't it. Why?

 

I also heard that there were no private drivers allowed. But on the other side there were private drivers as Eldrige with his Eldrige Special. So what's the story about that? Were they allowed?

 

What were the other reasons for that bad years in GP racing?

 

Don´t you see the point, Eldridge built his own car so *on paper* he was to be considered as a *manufacturer*.

 

Some other sporadic private entries may have got through by placing the entry "in the name" of the manufacturer of the car they raced. But in general in "International Grands Prix" (which were the "Grandes Epreuves" and had to be run according to the "International Formula") private entrants were not permitted. This must not be confused with other races that had the title "Grand Prix" but were not of the same status and in general were de-facto rather Forumle Libre events.

 

So I agree absolutely with Sheldon on this, the "crisis" was restricted to Grand Prix racing in the "traditional" meaning (the French GP, Italian GP etc. open for manufaturers only) while at the same time the new, more liberal "style" of Grand Prix racing (= Free Formula events for everybody with Grand Prix cars) had a real boom time.
 

Edited by uechtel, 20 July 2015 - 10:04.

[Michael Ferner]

Don´t you see the point, Eldridge built his own car so *on paper* he was to be considered as a *manufacturer*.

Why the asterisks? Have I missed something?

[Vitesse2]

Roger, Michael: although we're accustomed to formulae being dry weights excluding fluids and (sometimes) other things like tyres, perhaps - in view of those apparently mandatory fuel tanks - we should assume that it was not the case this time? Most sources I can find regarding T35s suggest a dry weight somewhere in the region of 750-765 kilos, slightly more than a P2, which is usually quoted at about 748 kilos. I can't find a weight for the Peugeot 174S, but I'd guess it was in the same sort of range. 150 kilos of ballast would be an awful lot to add, but if we assume that the fluids were part of that, then - thinking laterally - the balance would be roughly equivalent to the weight of the recently-discarded riding mechanic.

 

Two examples which go against the norm:

 

1 The original proposal for what became the 750kg Formula of 1934-37 envisaged a maximum weight of 700kg, including wheels and tyres - but not fluids. As adopted, of course, it became a slightly more generous 750kg - including wheels but not tyres.

2 The ACF's first proposal for the successor to the 750kg Formula envisaged an all-up starting weight of 750kg - including tyres and enough fluids (fuel, oil and water) to cover the first 300km of a 500km race without replenishment - , which the French press estimated would mean a reduction in dry weights of anything up to 150 kilos. That proposal didn't get very far - more than one writer pointed out that a simple holed radiator in the first part of the race would mean retirement.

[Michael Ferner]

The Peugeot was certainly heavier, I've seen figures around 950 kg.

I understand your thinking, Richard, but I remain sceptical. I'd never given it much thought until Roger's post, so I really don't know what to think. It's odd.

[uechtel]

Why the asterisks? Have I missed something?

 My reply was to historyfan as he asked the question twice, while the answer seems very obvious. From our modern point of view Eldridge may have been an *amateur*, but technically, when you build your car you are a *manufacturer*.

[Roger Clark]

Serge Bellu's Blue Blood gives the Peugeot weight as 930kg. I had thought that the Type 35 was lighter than 750kg but that is the figure quoted by all the sources I have.

 

I agree that Vitesse's suggestion that the minimum weight included fuel and oil is plausible but I don't think we can assume that it was so without further evidence.  The maximum weight of fluids was fixed by the consumption regulations and the minimum race distance so it's difficult to see why such a change would be made.  

 

There was another example of cars weight being measured with at least some fluids as seen by the the notorious water-cooled brakes in 1981 but I wouldn't suggest that was relevant to this discussion. 

[Vitesse2]

Oddly, the French daily press don't seem to have reported the CSI meeting. However, El Mundo Deportivo came to the rescue! Their issue dated October 14th 1928 carries pretty much the same text as Automobil Revue, but if I'm reading Google Translate's version correctly it does apparently specify that the 900kg is dry weight, including tyres.

 

peso mínimo del vehculo, vacío, con una rueda de recambio guarnecida, será de 900 kilos.

 

Mr Google translates this as:

 

minimum weight of the vehicle, empty, with a trimmed wheel parts, will be 900 kilos.

That does of course raise the question of what the exact translation of vacio is in this context.    It's probably dry weight, but it could equally just be 'without the driver'.

 

[ensign14]

 My reply was to historyfan as he asked the question twice, while the answer seems very obvious. From our modern point of view Eldridge may have been an *amateur*, but technically, when you build your car you are a *manufacturer*.

 

I think Enzo would have called Ernest a garagiste, rather than a manufacturer. 

[uechtel]

But at that time Enzo was not even a garagiste...

[Michael Ferner]

I don't think Enzo Ferrarti knew how to hold a spanner, so his views must've been pretty meaningless to someone like Eldridge.

[D-Type]

I think Enzo Ferrari learned how to use a hammer during his military service shoeing mules.

[Roger Clark]

I thought it might be interesting to have a closer look at the 1928 season.  I started from Hans Etzrodt's List of Grand Prix Winners. http://www.kolumbus....ellman/gpw0.htm     Hans divides the races into three categories Grandes Épreuves, major races and others in which Grand Prix cars took part.  He explains the categories in the website.  In 1927 there were 5 Grandes Épreuves, 4 major and 27 others.  In 1928 the figures were 2, 8 and 16 and in 1929 2, 11 and 14.  In all three years, the Indianapolis 500 is a Grande Épreuve, which is correct but not relevant to this discussion.  We can see loss of several Grandes Épreuves but the rise of other races to replace them.

 

We can see the entry lists for most of these races from the Sheldon Black Book, Volume 2.  Hans includes all the races from Sheldon and a few more.  Most of the 1928 races were in France or Italy with very little overlap between them.  Louis Chiron was clearly the dominant driver in France; he raced eight times and won six of them.  The dominant drivers in Italy appear to be Nuvolari and Varzi; i haven't done an analysis to see whether this is really so.  Nuvolari raced 11 times, winning three.  He also raced in the Mille Miglia (not listed in Hans or Sheldon) and five times on a Bianchi motorcycle so he was a busy chap.  Chiron and Nuvolri only raced against each other three times:  Targa Florio (Nuvolari retired, Chiron fourth), Rome (Nuvolari retired, Chiron first) and Monza (Nuvolari third, Chiron first).   These were the only times Chiron raced in Italy.  Nuvolari does not appear to have raced outside Italy except for Tripoli early in the year.

 

Bugattis (Type 35 with various suffixes and Type 37) were the dominant cars in both countries.  In Italy there were several Maseratis (Tipo 26) and Alfas (6C-1500 and P2) but they don't appear to have crossed the Alps.

 

Chiron clearly deserved Hans' accolade of driver of the year.  It is quite difficult to find much information about this stage of his life.  His Wikipedia entry is woeful.  An article about him by Boddy (Motor Sport September 1999) seems to me to be strangely muddled.  He didn't race much in 1929.  He missed the early European races due to an unsuccessful attempt at the Indianapolis 500.  During his American trip he started an affair with Alice Hoffmann, the wife of his sponsor, which may have distracted him.  Madame Hoffmann later became Frau Caracciola, of course.  He did win two races in Europe: the German Grand Prix and the San Sebastien GP.  The German race was for sports cars but the Type 35s didn't need much modification for that.  Whatever the reasons for this, he certainly deserves to be ranked alongside Nuvolari and Varzi as the leading drivers of the time.

Edited by Roger Clark, 21 July 2015 - 15:35.

[Roger Clark]

Another curiosity from the period.

 

Sheldon says that the rules for the 1928 Gran Premio di Tripoli specified that a car had to carry a riding mechanic or 120kg of ballast.  This apparently caused Emilio Materassi to withdraw his Talbots in a huff as he refused to fit the ballast on the grounds that his cars were designed as single seaters.  120kg seems to imply a riding mechanic of Guiseppe Campari proportions, far from the juvenile jockeys usually employed in earlier days.  However, Alberto Redaelli says in Gran Premio di Tripoli (if Google's translation is correc) that the ballast had to achieve with the driver, a weight of 120 pounds "una zavorra tale da raggiungere (insieme al pilota) il peso di 120 chili".  If this really is 120lbs it is going to the other extreme.  120kg for two does seem more reasonable, unless one of them was Campari.

 

These were presumably local rules, although Sheldon does say that the organisers appealed to the RACI for a ruling over the Materassi affair, so the Italian club may have had some role.  Nevertheless, it could be an early example of the weight of the driver being taken into account.

[Michael Ferner]

Surely "chili" are kilograms, rather than pounds? Else I agree, a combined minimum weight for driver and mechanician is much more likely.

[Roger Clark]

It would certainly be more logical for an Italian book to quote weight in kilos!

[Vitesse2]

Found the announcement in Il Littoriale, October 13th, datelined as 'Paris, night of the 12th'. A long accompanying article by Corrado Filippini as well. But still no definite explanation of 'empty'.- although again it appears to be dry weight including tyres (and mandatory spare wheel!)

 

Tutti i tipi di motore saranno ammessi sotto riserva di verifica de carters, cambi di velocita serbatoi ecc, in generali tutti gli organi che possano contenere olio e benzina utilizzabile per la marcia del  motore. Sara accordato ad ogni concorrente una quantita per ogni cento chilometri di trasporto. La benzina sara del tipo comunemente usato nel commercio (densita 720 a 15.o).Il peso massimo del veicoli a vuoto, compresa la ruota di ricambio obbligatorio, sarà di novecento chilogrammi. Le vetture dovranno munite di carrozzeria a due posti all'altezza del sedile di una larghezza minima di un metro. Questa larghezza dovra essere sul un'altezza di almeno venticinque centimetri. Il serbatoio di benzina di modello imposto dovra essere visibile dietro il sedile, nettamente separata dalla carrozzeria che non sara prolongata da nessuna fusoliera.

 

Google translate version:

 

All types of engine will be admitted under reserve of verification of carters, gearboxes and reservoirs etc., in general all organs that may contain oil and petrol used for the motor is running.It will be granted to each competitor a quantity for each one hundred kilometers of transport. Gasoline will be of the type commonly used in business (density 720 to 15.O) .The maximum weight of the vehicle empty, including the spare wheel mandatory, will be nine hundred kilograms. The cars will come with body in two places.at the seat of a minimum width of one meter. This width will have to be at a height of at least twenty five centimeters. The gas tank of the model imposed will have to be visible behind the seat, clearly separated from the body that will not be The prolonged by no fuselage.

'Carters' confused Google, but Collins tells me it means 'oil sump'!

[Roger Clark]

MAXIMUM weight?

[Vitesse2]

That's what it says ...