72 replies to this topic

[D-Type]

The thread about the Lotus non-return to Indianapolis set me thinking.  After their successful "toe in the water" in 1961, why didn't Cooper return the next year? The Indianapolis venture had been profitable which would have appealed to Charlie Cooper.
I can think of a few possible reasons. Jack Brabham's departure had placed significant pressures on the team.  The 1.5 litre Formula 1 needed considerable effort to remain competitive with Lotus, Lola, etc.  Likewise, Coventry-Climax were committed to developing the V8 FWMW.  Did both Climax and Cooper feel that there was little development potential in the 2.7 litre FPF?  

I can't remember whether it has been discussed previously.

[StanBarrett2]

Nigel Roebuck's piece on John Cooper ................. 'we'd still have had trouble finding a suitable motor for Indy' 

https://www.motorspo...e/march-2001/16

[Charlieman]

I understand that Jack Brabham ran or influenced much of the Indy car project. The 1961 experimental car was limited by tyres -- would Dunlop have agreed to make special tyres? Did Cooper have a transmission that could have taken more power?

[Ray Bell]

I think it's a waste of time thinking of getting more from the poor old FPF...

It was really strained to near breaking point just to run at 2751cc (or was it 2752cc?). And as it was almost 1.5-litres short of the capacity limit it wasn't worth trying.

[Rupertlt1]

Cooper-Aston Martin from 1963:

 

https://library.revs...ion=p17257coll1

 

RGDS RLT

[Tom Glowacki]

I understand that Jack Brabham ran or influenced much of the Indy car project. The 1961 experimental car was limited by tyres -- would Dunlop have agreed to make special tyres? Did Cooper have a transmission that could have taken more power?

Mickey Thompson figured out the transaxle issue with his 1962 car. By the fall of 1963, Rolla Vollstedt was building a rear-engined Offy powered car with a Halibrand based transaxle.  The car qualified at Indy in 1964, and was copied by A.J. Watson for the Wilke team.  If Thompson and Vollstedt could do all that, Cooper could have easily done so as well.  They could have sold several Cooper-Offy cars in 1962.

[D28]

I understand that Jack Brabham ran or influenced much of the Indy car project. The 1961 experimental car was limited by tyres -- would Dunlop have agreed to make special tyres? Did Cooper have a transmission that could have taken more power?

Tire/wheel choice was a bugaboo of the foreign entrants going back to Ferrari's effort with Ascari in 1952. Lotus experienced problems in the 1964 race with Dunlop tires; their complete domination in 65 was achieved with Firestone rubber. Cooper was contracted to Dunlop in 1962 I believe, and a determined effort probably would have required a switch to Firestone, benefiting from their long experience at Indy. 

Edited by D28, 22 August 2018 - 19:05.

[JtP2]

Swapping tyres brands was no problem if running a Dunlop contract. The contract allowed the use of an alternate brand if that brand was superior. Lotus got caught out at the Nurburgring in 66 where Clark's Lotus went to the start on Dunlop wets and they were told by Firestone that their contract said Firestone only. The comment after Clark's off was that the only injury he suffered was when he kicked the car. Obviously B36 had not arrived.

[D-Type]

In an alternative universe: given that the FPF started life as "Half a Godiva" would it have been feasible for Coventry-Climax to make an "FPF-ised Godiva" and solve the engine problem?  Dial in the Mickey Thompson transaxle.  Then fit Firestones.
But who would drive it?  Obviously Bruce McLaren and Tony Maggs.  And as I'm in fantasyland how about Stirling Moss?

[Roger Clark]

The T60 was the last of the serious FWMV engined cars to appear in 1962, despite Cooper’s previous experience with the engine. Cooper seemed to be suffering from a reduction in customer car sales and it is possible that some Esso money left with Jack Brabham. I suspect that they were not in a position to consider another Indianapolis entry, even if another American sponsor was available.

[Charlieman]

In an alternative universe: given that the FPF started life as "Half a Godiva" would it have been feasible for Coventry-Climax to make an "FPF-ised Godiva" and solve the engine problem?  Dial in the Mickey Thompson transaxle.  Then fit Firestones.
But who would drive it?  Obviously Bruce McLaren and Tony Maggs.  And as I'm in fantasyland how about Stirling Moss?

I can believe that a US customer or distributor might know enough to organise the transaxle and Firestone tyres, and to buy a custom Cooper chassis. But I can't imagine the Cooper family investing money or time in such a speculative venture. I can't think of any European engine that would be lighter than the Offy, and nimbleness was an essential element to Coopers.

 

Jack Brabham had been around a bit when he lobbied for the Cooper-Climax Indy car. Bruce McLaren was a smart young man but I doubt that he'd built up enough contacts in 1961/62. A realistic attempt would have had to be put together by somebody from the USA racing scene, although not necessarily USAC. An interesting hypothetical...

[Tim Murray]

Interesting in hindsight that Dan Gurney went to Chapman, not Coopers, when he was looking to put together a European-influenced Indy package. If he had chosen Cooper, might they have ended up with the Ford V8?

[Ray Bell]

I don't think the Godiva V8 would have really cut the mustard...

At its original 2.5-litres with was smaller than the enlarged FPF. Enlarging it would have been more difficult than enlarging the four, and time was against it happening anyway.

Later the Shannon ran it at about 3-litres capacity, did it not? Any idea of what problems they struck taking it that first step?

Approaching Maserati for a destroked version of their 450S engine might have been a better option...

[D-Type]

Interesting in hindsight that Dan Gurney went to Chapman, not Coopers, when he was looking to put together a European-influenced Indy package. If he had chosen Cooper, might they have ended up with the Ford V8?

I think that a lot of the steam went out of Cooper when Jack Brabham left, coupled with John's accident and Charlie's death.  For example, they had a golden opportunity to develop the Monaco into something like the King Cobra but their efforts were half-hearted. 

[Charlieman]

Interesting in hindsight that Dan Gurney went to Chapman, not Coopers, when he was looking to put together a European-influenced Indy package. If he had chosen Cooper, might they have ended up with the Ford V8?

Lotus had demonstrated that they were capable of building a lot of racing cars but they didn't have a lot of connections (outside the UK) in 1962. Lola would have been another option for Dan Gurney. 

 

I think that a lot of the steam went out of Cooper when Jack Brabham left, coupled with John's accident and Charlie's death.  For example, they had a golden opportunity to develop the Monaco into something like the King Cobra but their efforts were half-hearted. 

 

The opportunity to follow up the 1961 Cooper-Climax Indy car had passed before Charles Cooper's death and Jack Brabham's departure. Bruce McLaren wasn't ready to fill Jack's role. It was 1963/64 when Bruce put together the Tasman cars and team for Cooper.

[cooper997]

This might be of interest - US R&T Competition Press'take from their front and second pages of the Jan 13, 1962 edition..

 

 

Stephen

[Peter Morley]

I don't think the Godiva V8 would have really cut the mustard...

At its original 2.5-litres with was smaller than the enlarged FPF. Enlarging it would have been more difficult than enlarging the four, and time was against it happening anyway.

Later the Shannon ran it at about 3-litres capacity, did it not? Any idea of what problems they struck taking it that first step?

Approaching Maserati for a destroked version of their 450S engine might have been a better option...

 

Increasing the capacity from 2.5 to 3 litres required less of a stretch for the V8 than it would have for a 4 cylinder (only +62.5 ccs per cylinder for the 8, compared to +125 ccs for a 4).

They bored it out and used Jaguar pistons - it used steel liners which made it a pretty simple job.

Most the problems the Shannon had with the engine related to the fuel system (carbs/injection plus the pannier tanks fitted overnight leaking in the British GP!) later it ran reliably in a saloon car and now the Kieft.

[Ray Bell]

I would have seen, Peter, some interference at the lower end of the bores of the V8 should it go out much larger than 3-litres...

If I recall, the deck height of the FPF was raised along the way. This would have been necessary with the Godiva too, but as a V8 it meant twice the job. Then there's the integrity of the bottom end, bearing webbing and room for sufficient big end sizes.

All in less than a year?

[bradbury west]

Back to Tim' s point about DSG and Lotus, Dan already had a relationship with ACBC as the 19B which Len drew up was a bespoke special, just for Gurney, but the cruncher was Dan's vision in realising just what a special concept the design of the 25 was and it was that which made him realise that that was the thing to have, plus ISTR he had raced the rear engined John Zink Trackburner Spl at Indy already so knew the merit of the engine behind you. I doubt Coopers could have done the job that he wanted.

Gurney possibly already had Ford connections, what year was his Lafayette Brothers stock car, and Ford were already embarking on their Fordsport Performance programme?. What year were the stock cars capped at four hundred bhp and engine capacity?. They may have been looking for new sales opportunities.
I recall cars running with x x x cu in on the bonnet decals etc.
I think most of this is in the Lotus books.
Roger Lund

On Peter's point about the Godiva, I was talking some years ago about something else to the chap who did the machine work and he said it was a straightforward job, although he worried about possible balance issues. One problem was that it was a shoestring job. I don't think Emery actually owned the engines. I heard from the man doing the work that John Willment was involved along the line, unconfirmed, as I have mentioned before, but I understood another chap owned them, name forgotten but would probably remember if I saw it and Emery never had any real money. Peter probably knows the name......

With the 2.75 FPF was it not fitted with a spacer plate under the block to accommodate the stroke or something? It is probably in Wally Hassan's book, so capacity will as very finite, money notwithstanding.
What did Bob King do for mods as I recall he offered those large FPFs mid 60s?

Edited by bradbury west, 30 August 2018 - 11:36.

[DCapps]

The first season that NASCAR put a limit on engine displacement in its Grand National Division was 1963. There was no cap on horsepower as such -- simply that the horsepower had to be displayed on the hood, using the upper limit of 427 cubic inches (seven liters) as a possible means to limit horsepower and curb the use of ever larger engines in its GN cars.

 

Ford initially introduced its "Total Performance" campaign in 1962, but really ramped it up beginning in 1963.

[Roger Clark]

Dan Gurney was quoted in Andrew Ferguson’s Team Lotus, the Indianapolis Years: “when I grew up in racing through the 50s you tended to be either a Ford guy or a Chevrolet guy. I was from the generation that learned about speed with the flat-head Ford”. And later: “I’d just driven a Holman & Moody Ford stock car Daytona, so I had fresh contact with Ford people”.

He paid for Chapman to fly to the ‘62 500 and the two of them presented their proposal at Ford HQ in Dearborn after the French GP.

[Roger Clark]

With the 2.75 FPF was it not fitted with a spacer plate under the block to accommodate the stroke or something? It is probably in Wally Hassan's book, so capacity will as very finite, money notwithstanding.
What did Bob King do for mods as I recall he offered those large FPFs mid 60s?

Not really related to the 2.7s but possibly of interest.

In February 1959, DSJ wrote: “By increasing the bore until the cylinder walls were wafer thick, and making new crankshafts with a longer stroke, the capacity was raised to 1,900 but the operation was in the nature of a bodge, rather than a piece of design, for this increased stroke necessitated fitting a 1/4-inch aluminium plate on top of the block, forming in effect a very thick gasket, in order to accommodate the increased travel of the pistons.”

This, and other remarks about Climax engines prompted a letter in May from Harry Mundy: “Not one of these engines has ever been fitted with a 1/4-in. aluminium plate on top of the cylinder block. This was an expedient used on the early versions of the 2,204-c.c. engine which came along much later.”

To which Jenkinson commented: “All the 2.2-litre engines I have ever seen have had the 1/4-in. plate "bodge" between the head and block, so I don't know what you mean by "the early versions" -- how many 2.2-litres did you make ? My apologies for suggesting that the 1,980-c.c. engine was" bodged" in this manner; that was an error on my part.”

[bradbury west]

Don, hi.
Was that around the time when they introduced the single carb rule on the stockers as a power limiting measure?
Roger Lund

Roger, I am probably thinking of the series of spacer plates below the block used on the Pacey Hassan IIRC as a handicap beater at Brooklands, but I am sure there was something akin to it on the big FPFs. I recall the mods on the smaller engines you mention. DCN or Philippe de Lespinay will know, no doubt, about the Inady Cooper engine, I must check in Climax in Coventry, as Hassan was always very honest in his writings.

For the Australian Contingent, how did they do the big FPFs down under.?I believe they did their own version.

Edited by bradbury west, 30 August 2018 - 18:38.

[Ray Bell]

By the time Repco started making them fresh the need was only for 2.5s...

In 1963 when the Tasman Cup was in the scheming stages, ANF1 for 1964 was announced as being limited to that capacity.

[Roger Clark]

Des Hammill’s Coventry Climax Racing Engines refers to a spacer plate between block and cylinder head on the 2.7s. He also refers to criticism by Denis Jenkinson and a defence by Harry Mundy which sounds like Hammill is confusing the earlier dispute I referred to above.

He goes on to say that: “after the first six 2.7 litre FPF engines had been machined, using 2.5 litre FPF blocks and supplementary spacer plates, the pattern was altered so that the block was taller as cast.“. From that time, new 2.5s had the same block and the excess material was machined off.

[Peter Morley]

I would have seen, Peter, some interference at the lower end of the bores of the V8 should it go out much larger than 3-litres...

If I recall, the deck height of the FPF was raised along the way. This would have been necessary with the Godiva too, but as a V8 it meant twice the job. Then there's the integrity of the bottom end, bearing webbing and room for sufficient big end sizes.

All in less than a year?

 

It seems that Climax designed the engine with some room for expansion, so 3 litres wasn't a problem but as you say anything larger could have been, as you say larger FPFs had taller blocks.

 

When Greg Snape & Bill Morris built an engine for the Kieft they had a problem with the oil scavenge system, which they resolved.

 

This is what Bill told me about the system:

The oiling system is difficult because the oil pump feeds oil directly into the engine so there is no oil filter on the engine. So we devised a system where the oil filters were on the returns to the oil tank. The dry sump was scavenged by 3 oil pumps driven one from the other. The main scavenge pump looked after the middle of the sump and the 2 smaller ones looked after the back and the front of the sump. The main scavenge pump fed through one oil filter and the 2 smaller scavenge pumps fed through the other oil filter prior to both feeding back to the oil tank. We also had a sandwich plate on the sump for taking the oil temperature gauge and we put a drain into the sump."" 

 

Incidentally Bill told me that he was around Paul Emery's workshop when the Shannon was built.

 

I think FPFs had a different system with two scavenge pumps and one pressure pump with the result that the engine effectively runs with an internal vacuum and doesn't leak oil until you turn it off.

Presumably that was based on problems they had with the FPE system.

[Peter Morley]

On Peter's point about the Godiva, I was talking some years ago about something else to the chap who did the machine work and he said it was a straightforward job, although he worried about possible balance issues. One problem was that it was a shoestring job. I don't think Emery actually owned the engines. I heard from the man doing the work that John Willment was involved along the line, unconfirmed, as I have mentioned before, but I understood another chap owned them, name forgotten but would probably remember if I saw it and Emery never had any real money. Peter probably knows the name......

With the 2.75 FPF was it not fitted with a spacer plate under the block to accommodate the stroke or something? It is probably in Wally Hassan's book, so capacity will as very finite, money notwithstanding.
What did Bob King do for mods as I recall he offered those large FPFs mid 60s?

 

Everything Emery did was a shoestring job, so he was pretty good at spending money carefully.

According to Bill Morris, Andrew Getley bought the engines and let Paul have one - no idea if he had to pay for it, I suspect he didn't and the idea was to get it running, prove that it worked (312 Bhp on Chrysler's dyno in Kew) and then sell the others.

Apparently one of the oil companies was going to back the project with 1,000s of pounds of money but that fell through so the Shannon F1 project died and the car went on to F3 and the engines ended up with Doc Murfield.

 

The low budget followed the Shannon, John Wilson who raced the Shannon as an F3 car said that it was a good car (he did win a race in it) but the preparation was awful - such as when the engine seized because of a rag left in an oil line...

[bradbury west]

Thanks Peter. Andrew Getley was the name I could not remember.
Roger Lund

[DCapps]

Don, hi.
Was that around the time when they introduced the single carb rule on the stockers as a power limiting measure?
Roger Lund
 

 

Roger,

 

It was not until the 1969 season that the single carb for all cars was implemented. Beginning with the 1966 season there were restrictions on the number of carbs for various engines, which continued with some changes during the 1967 & 1968 seasons, but 1969 was the first season it applied to all engines.

[bradbury west]

Thanks, Don
RL

[Rupertlt1]

Everything Emery did was a shoestring job, so he was pretty good at spending money carefully.

According to Bill Morris, Andrew Getley bought the engines and let Paul have one - no idea if he had to pay for it, I suspect he didn't and the idea was to get it running, prove that it worked (312 Bhp on Chrysler's dyno in Kew) and then sell the others.

Apparently one of the oil companies was going to back the project with 1,000s of pounds of money but that fell through so the Shannon F1 project died and the car went on to F3 and the engines ended up with Doc Murfield.

 

The low budget followed the Shannon, John Wilson who raced the Shannon as an F3 car said that it was a good car (he did win a race in it) but the preparation was awful - such as when the engine seized because of a rag left in an oil line...

 

AFAIK he was Doc Merfield, an exuberant Aussie dentist. He raced the Godiva motor in a Ford Cortina Mk2. RGDS RLT

[Peter Morley]

AFAIK he was Doc Merfield, an exuberant Aussie dentist. He raced the Godiva motor in a Ford Cortina Mk2. RGDS RLT

 

I was going to list all the spellings I found of his surname - I've also seen Mirfield & Muirfield!

Definitely an exuberant Aussie dentist though.

[Henri Greuter]

Another alternative being discussed only for a Cooper:  Andy Granatelli talked with John Cooper about him building one for one of Andy's Novi V8s.

 

Now: I have seen the real, one and only Cooper Indycar in real.

I have seen several Novi V8's in real: they are larger than about every V12 up till 7 liters capacity you can think of. And they weight up to a quarter of a ton.

 

How to fit in a Novi within a Cooper as well as the additional fuel tanks the Novi required is beyond me.....

The biggest problem however for any rear engined Novi was that at least at the time, there simply was no gearbox/driveline unit existing suitable for a rear engined car that could handle the torque and power of the Novi.

Had such existed, it might have been worth giving it a try to design a rear engined Novi from the drawing board up.

But using one of the then current Cooper desings and modify it for a Novi?

No way.....

Edited by Henri Greuter, 01 September 2018 - 14:28.

[Tom Glowacki]

Another alternative being discussed only for a Cooper:  Andy Granatelli talked with John Cooper about him building one for one of Andy's Novi V8s.

 

Now: I have seen the real, one and only Cooper Indycar in real.

I have seen several Novi V8's in real: they are larger than about every V12 up till 7 liters capacity you can think of. And they weight up to a quarter of a ton.

 

How to fit in a Novi within a Cooper as well as the additional fuel tanks the Novi required is beyond me.....

The biggest problem however for any rear engined Novi was that at least at the time, there simply was no gearbox/driveline unit existing suitable for a rear engined car that could handle the torque and power of the Novi.

Had such existed, it might have been worth giving it a try to design a rear engined Novi from the drawing board up.

But using one of the then current Cooper desings and modify it for a Novi?

No way.....

On the other hand, building a car around an Offenhauser would have been the simple, obvious, thing to do.

[Henri Greuter]

On the other hand, building a car around an Offenhauser would have been the simple, obvious, thing to do.

 

 

You're posting a comment my post contained initially.

But before hitting the post button I all of a sudden remembered two things.

 

First: the Offy was also way more powerful than the 2.7 liter Climax that the Cooper did and I doubt that the used gearbox for the Cooper could have coped with the power and torque of the Offy. Remeber that Lotus used an adapted Colotti gearbox two years later for their app. 350 hp Ford V8. That gearbox was not available yet in '62, let alone '61.

There was a gearbox exisiting for the front engined roadsters that could cope with the Offy power and torque, also a rear end spool. But a single unit of gearbox and final drive as required for a rear engined car, strong enough to deal with the power figures  as used at Indy at that time, it didn't exist yet.

The other thing was that the Offy ran on methanol and consumed quite large amounts of that fuel, most Roadsters had to stop at least twice if not three times for fuel and tires, tires due to the weight of the cars empty + loaded with the fuel quantities they needed for the stint. We're talking about up between 45-55 gallons for a stint.

I honestly have no idea how a car like the Cooper could store some way over 150 liters of fuel anywhere within the frame without ballooning out into something like a forerunner of the Mickey Thompson Rollerskates of 1963 but at larger wheels than the tiny 12 Inch wheels these cars used.

Edited by Henri Greuter, 01 September 2018 - 15:54.

[Tom Glowacki]

You're posting a comment my post contained initially.

But before hitting the post button I all of a sudden remembered two things.

 

First: the Offy was also way more powerful than the 2.7 liter Climax that the Cooper did and I doubt that the used gearbox for the Cooper could have coped with the power and torque of the Offy. Remeber that Lotus used an adapted Colotti gearbox two years later for their app. 350 hp Ford V8. That gearbox was not available yet in '62, let alone '61.

There was a gearbox exisiting for the front engined roadsters that could cope with the Offy power and torque, also a rear end spool. But a single unit of gearbox and final drive as required for a rear engined car, strong enough to deal with the power figures  as used at Indy at that time, it didn't exist yet.

The other thing was that the Offy ran on methanol and consumed quite large amounts of that fuel, most Roadsters had to stop at least twice if not three times for fuel and tires, tires due to the weight of the cars empty + loaded with the fuel quantities they needed for the stint. We're talking about up between 45-55 gallons for a stint.

I honestly have no idea how a car like the Cooper could store some way over 150 liters of fuel anywhere within the frame without ballooning out into something like a forerunner of the Mickey Thompson Rollerskates of 1963 but at larger wheels than the tiny 12 Inch wheels these cars used.

All valid points, but as I pointed out in my Post #6, Mickey Thompson and Rolla Vollstedt had the transaxle issue solved by 1962, and 1963, respectively.  The Cooper-Aston Martin, the Vollstedt, the 1964 Watson-Offy and Gerhardt-Offy, and for that matter, the Brabham BT-12 were nowhere near as bloated as the Rollerskates were.  Granted, a new transaxle would have been an effort, but Cooper had a competent designer on staff, and bigger fuel tanks were not rocket science

[Henri Greuter]

All valid points, but as I pointed out in my Post #6, Mickey Thompson and Rolla Vollstedt had the transaxle issue solved by 1962, and 1963, respectively.  The Cooper-Aston Martin, the Vollstedt, the 1964 Watson-Offy and Gerhardt-Offy, and for that matter, the Brabham BT-12 were nowhere near as bloated as the Rollerskates were.  Granted, a new transaxle would have been an effort, but Cooper had a competent designer on staff, and bigger fuel tanks were not rocket science

 

All valid points too! 

But from what I ahve understood, and people who know better than I do, please correct me: John Cooper was known to be cheap and not willing to spend a single penny more than absolutely necessary. If this is indeed true,would he have been willing to finance the construction of a new rear end?

 

Other then that, in the past week I have seen both the original 1964 Vollstedt and Watson cars and believe me, these cars were much and much larger that the 1961 Cooper was.

Any attempt with more engine power by Cooper would have required a virtually new design car, nothing like the F1 based car they used for '61. It could be done for sure, but how much that would have taken to finance it? Would Kimberley been willing to spend more on such a project than he did for the '61 adventure? I doubt that, based on what I know about him, John Cooper was willing to do so....

But I'll be happily stand corrected!

[Tom Glowacki]

All valid points too! 

But from what I ahve understood, and people who know better than I do, please correct me: John Cooper was known to be cheap and not willing to spend a single penny more than absolutely necessary. If this is indeed true,would he have been willing to finance the construction of a new rear end?

 

Other then that, in the past week I have seen both the original 1964 Vollstedt and Watson cars and believe me, these cars were much and much larger that the 1961 Cooper was.

Any attempt with more engine power by Cooper would have required a virtually new design car, nothing like the F1 based car they used for '61. It could be done for sure, but how much that would have taken to finance it? Would Kimberley been willing to spend more on such a project than he did for the '61 adventure? I doubt that, based on what I know about him, John Cooper was willing to do so....

But I'll be happily stand corrected!

You hit the nail on the head.

[cooper997]

It was usually Charles Cooper being tight fisted when it came to expenditure. To bypass his old man, John Cooper had to be a little creative to get things done.

 

Stephen.

[Henri Greuter]

It was usually Charles Cooper being tight fisted when it came to expenditure. To bypass his old man, John Cooper had to be a little creative to get things done.

 

Stephen.

 

Thank you for this update Stephen: I may stand corrected for some, I feel more being updated however.

 

Henri

[bradbury west]

I assume scaling up the Cooper would not have been beyond the skills of period engineers, to allow for extra weight and fuel. The transaxle would be another issue as presumably would the larger again tyres, so Dunlop may not have come on board. Just how much did Kimberley put in, as cash and as a percentage of the total cost.?
However, the John Zink cars for 1961 both had rear engines, the Offy car and the turbine, so a transaxle must have existed. Wasn't the Mickey Thompson 1961 car rear engined , and driven by Dan Gurney, so had a transaxle?
The crux of the piece is that Gurney had seen the concept and performance of the 25, so all else would have been irrelevant to especially with Ford money.
Roger Lund

[Roger Clark]

The last paragraph of bradbury west’s post is undoubtedly true, but regarding transmission for Coopers, weren’t Monacos running by this time with American V8s and the Cooper gearbox?

[Tom Glowacki]

The last paragraph of bradbury west’s post is undoubtedly true, but regarding transmission for Coopers, weren’t Monacos running by this time with American V8s and the Cooper gearbox?

Rodger Ward's Cooper-Buick had a Weisman/ McKee transaxle in 1962.  While I agree with Bradbury that none of this would have mattered by 1963, the point is that 1962 was Cooper's opportunity; stretch the wheelbase to 96", plug in an Offy, the McKee transaxle, and tap Jim Kimberly, his 1961 sponsor, to sponsor it.  Kimberly continued to play with Indycars in 1962 with Thompson, and in 1963 with his own Thompson copy.  Have Frank Faulkner round up somebody like Lloyd Ruby to drive a customer car, or the works car if Brabham would not have been interested.

[blueprint2002]

This thread has been dormant for a while, so I guess it's permissible to continue the discussion from a somewhat different angle.

I understand that the Cooper-Aston Martin driven by Pedro Rodriguez at Indy in 1963 was the ex-Brabham car, though not a lot of information seems to be available.

Presumably the new owner had good reason for fitting that engine; the in-line six, in general, not being well adapted to the mid-engine car. Of course, AM at the time had very recent and quite successful racing experience (sports cars) and the engine had the other necessary basic attributes, including suitable displacement, valve gear and so on, so that perhaps serious developments were mostly confined to the chassis. It would seem that these would include lengthening the engine bay, and thus the wheelbase, as well as increasing the fuel tank capacity.  A new transaxle would likely be needed as well.

Anyone have any information about this engine as installed in the car, and/or about the chassis modifications, and who carried out the work?

[Tim Murray]

In this earlier thread discussing the correct colour of the Indianapolis Cooper T54, Philippe de l’Espinay (who found and restored the car) posted the following:

Hi Rob,

Thanks for the added information. I really appreciate it.

The sole Cooper Indianapolis car ever built was finished April 28th, 1961 and was briefly tested the day after at Goodwood. It was then flown to Indy by Flying Tigers DC6B cargo plane and arrived in Chicago May 4th, 1961. It was trucked on an open trailer to the Indianapolis Motor Speedway and arrived on May 5th, before Jack Brabham even made it there. After the race, its engine and the spare were used in the Cooper Monacos of Bruce McLaren and Jack Brabham for their terrific battle at the LA Times GP at Riverside. The car, as can be confirmed by the Speedway Museum, remained there until late 1962 when Kjell Kvale bought the chassis from Jim Kimberly and had Joe Huffaker install the Aston Martin engine that eventually ended in Project 215 in it. After it failed to qualify due to the exagerated power claim of this engine, the car was sold to a local racer in San Jose, California. Since May 1961, it NEVER left the United States until June 1994 when Lord March invited it to Goodwood for the Festival of Speed. This is very well documented today.
Also, regarding the color, here is an original panel as found (the car was NEVER repainted before we did so in 1991) and a shot of Jack before qualifying:





Also there are two color pics of the car in the beautiful Doug Nye/Jack Brabham book, "The Jack Brabham Story" on pages 132 and 133. One especially is very telling because it is very well preserved.
Best regards,

T54
PS: I am curious to find out which Cooper you actually filmed. Is it possible that they hastily made a mock-up from a F1 chassis to celebrate their success? Why would John Cooper not have told me during the nearly all-day reminiscence of the event I had with him in 1994?
After all, the Indy Motor Speedway has done the same thing for many years... and sure enough, their mock-up car is... green.

(my highlighting)

[cooper997]

We should clarify that 2004 posting of  "Since May 1961, it NEVER left the United States until June 1994" excepting when it was at 8 July 1961 Silverstone British Empire Trophy meeting – photos could be found on shendy.co.uk (link I had is now dead) & 8/61 Motor Racing photo p284 Jack drove in reverse direction around track.

and

7 August, 1961 Brands Hatch (Bank Holiday weekend, Monday) International Guards Trophy meeting.

John Cooper showed off the #17 ‘Indy’ Cooper-Climax T54, described on the Motor Racing 60’s Style - 1961-62 video as “The Indianapolis Cooper is here too, for a tour of honour.” - refer 18:45 period of video  Youtube may have it somewhere??

 

Stephen

[cooper997]

This link might work to the John / Simon Hendy archive http://mydadsphotos....f8234c997f/2413

 

Stephen

[Ray Bell]

I saw the car at an early Surfers Indycar round, where it was 'demonstrated'...

 

But I can't say for sure that was before 1994. I think it was.

[Tim Murray]

Later in that ‘blue or green’ thread I linked to, T54 did admit he was wrong about the car never leaving the US until 1994, and that it had been demonstrated at Silverstone in 1961.

[cooper997]

Ray, finally found the appropriate programme and Sir Jack was Grand Marshall for the March 1996 Gold Coast Indycar. In the writeup it mentions he would do 2 laps each day in the Indy Cooper T54.

 

I have somewhere a Restored Cars mag with a feature on the car when in Australia.

 

Stephen