Jump to content


Photo

Private owners of BRM V12 engines


  • Please log in to reply
48 replies to this topic

#1 Allen Brown

Allen Brown
  • Member

  • 5,401 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 04 January 2020 - 10:29

I have been researching the 1966-1968 period at BRM by browsing through the Rubery Owen Archive material at Warwick University.  One of the many things that surprised me was the prediction of sales of around 15-20 V12 engines to private customers.  I haven't found a list yet of actual sales, so I am hoping the collective brains here can help me.

 

So far, I can think of:

Cooper, for the T86B, maybe 4 engines - at least two engines sold off with the cars in 1969

McLaren, for the M5A, one or two engines - at least one engine went with car to Jo Bonnier

Tim Parnell, for his loaned V12 cars, one engine - probably returned to BRM

Bernard White, for his P261, probably only one engine - engine stayed with car when it went sprinting in 1970 

John Wyer, for the Mirage sports car project, maybe three engines

Max Wilson, for his Lola T70, probably only one engine

 

That gets to maybe 12 sales.  What have I missed?



Advertisement

#2 Charlieman

Charlieman
  • Member

  • 1,824 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 04 January 2020 - 10:55

Robs Lamplough?



#3 Tim Murray

Tim Murray
  • Moderator

  • 22,348 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 04 January 2020 - 10:56

In 1968/69 Ginetta were planning to build an F1 car using the BRM V12 engine. They negotiated a price with Wilkie Wilkinson of BRM of £3,000 per engine, and reckoned they would have needed two engines for one car. In the end they decided that F1 was a step too far and abandoned the project, but perhaps these potential engine sales might have been on BRM’s list?

Sources: Ginetta: the inside story by Bob Walklett

and

https://books.google...tta brm&f=false

#4 Allen Brown

Allen Brown
  • Member

  • 5,401 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 04 January 2020 - 11:39

In 1968/69 Ginetta were planning to build an F1 car using the BRM V12 engine. They negotiated a price with Wilkie Wilkinson of BRM of £3,000 per engine ...

 

Price is a recurring theme in the minutes of meetings at BRM.  The fantasy that BRM could make a profit included selling "not more than 12" F1 V12s at £5,000 each, and "50" (!) sports car V12s at £3,500 each.  If Wilkinson was negotiating a 40% off deal for a F1 engine, that can't have helped meeting the budget.



#5 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 67,178 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 04 January 2020 - 12:10

No wonder they were so determined that the Tasman team should use the V12s instead of the V8s during the 1968 series...

 

But the V8s must have been quicker on many occasions.

 

And they must have reckoned that Cosworth's V8 was either a bit of a flash in the pan or that Cosworth couldn't produce enough to meet demand.



#6 Allen Brown

Allen Brown
  • Member

  • 5,401 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 04 January 2020 - 12:53

No wonder they were so determined that the Tasman team should use the V12s instead of the V8s during the 1968 series...

 

But the V8s must have been quicker on many occasions.

 

And they must have reckoned that Cosworth's V8 was either a bit of a flash in the pan or that Cosworth couldn't produce enough to meet demand.

 

It was Stewart who insisted in his meetings with Sir Alfred Owen that the 1968 Tasman team must use the V12 engine, and have cars built specifically for the purpose.  That's why they went outside to Len Terry to build the cars.  It was not BRM's intention at that point that the V12 would be used in F1.  It was only later in the 1967 season that it became undeniable that the H16's problems were insurmountable.  Even in 1968, Rudd harboured the belief that the V12 was only a stop-gap until his lightweight 4-valve H16 was ready for the 1969 season.  



#7 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 9,721 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 04 January 2020 - 14:25

It got rather worse Allen - don't forget that some of those V12 engines would be returned to BRM and used for spares to sustain works team demand... And when it comes to 'selling' race engines for customers there is a continuing rebuild-parts commitment to be fulfilled...and charges for same barely (or never) covered production cost. At that period it was not 'a good business'... The benefits of brand promotion were perhaps - ahem - exaggerated as justification...

 

DCN


Edited by Doug Nye, 04 January 2020 - 14:27.


#8 Charlieman

Charlieman
  • Member

  • 1,824 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 04 January 2020 - 14:38

It got rather worse Allen - don't forget that some of those V12 engines would be returned to BRM and used for spares to sustain works team demand... And when it comes to 'selling' race engines for customers there is a continuing rebuild-parts commitment to be fulfilled...and charges for same barely (or never) covered production cost. At that period it was not 'a good business'... The benefits of brand promotion were perhaps - ahem - exaggerated as justification...

 

DCN

One presumes that DCN was never asked for commercial advice by Sir Alfred or Louis.  :yawnface:



#9 Allen Brown

Allen Brown
  • Member

  • 5,401 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 04 January 2020 - 14:50

It got rather worse Allen - don't forget that some of those V12 engines would be returned to BRM and used for spares to sustain works team demand... And when it comes to 'selling' race engines for customers there is a continuing rebuild-parts commitment to be fulfilled...and charges for same barely (or never) covered production cost. At that period it was not 'a good business'... The benefits of brand promotion were perhaps - ahem - exaggerated as justification...

 

DCN

 

The 1967 budget includes income for rebuilding the 10 engines they would have already sold, so - with the benefit of 2020 hindsight - the budget seems so extraordinarily over-optimistic.  

 

I haven't seen much yet about the fates of individual engines in 1968, but the works team were using engines 017 and 019 by the end of the 1968 season.  BRM and Lotus got through the H16 project with only six engines between them, so I was surprised that the V12 engine numbers had got so high so quickly.  



#10 D-Type

D-Type
  • Member

  • 9,158 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 04 January 2020 - 15:31

For comparison: how many DFVs did Lotus use in their first season?

But, back to the BRM V12,  Wasn't it originally to be a customer engine for sports cars and 2nd Division F1 teams to use and to finance BRM's own H16.  As such, they would have laid down more initially than if they were just for their own use.



#11 jaytee

jaytee
  • New Member

  • 23 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 04 January 2020 - 15:41

Anyone know anything about The Dennis Knott Escort that was fitted with a BRM V12 engine, later he switched to an American V8 engine



#12 Vitesse2

Vitesse2
  • Administrator

  • 34,609 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 04 January 2020 - 16:04

One presumes that DCN was never asked for commercial advice by Sir Alfred or Louis.  :yawnface:

Somehow I can't imagine Sir Alfred or - especially - Big Lou asking anyone for advice! :lol:



#13 Allen Brown

Allen Brown
  • Member

  • 5,401 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 04 January 2020 - 16:29

Somehow I can't imagine Sir Alfred or - especially - Big Lou asking anyone for advice! :lol:

 

This is basically Sir Alfred's correspondence file I'm reading, and it is interesting how much advice was offered to him on an almost daily basis.  He replied to virtually everything, whether it was repeating back whatever Tony Rudd had just told him about why some external suggestion was a bad idea, or simply telling Raymond Mays not to be so stupid.  What I don't see of course, is what he was hearing verbally from his sister.  

 

The absence of Big Lou from the correspondence is quite striking.  If it wasn't for the hotel room bookings at each race, you wouldn't know he was involved.



#14 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 9,721 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 04 January 2020 - 19:06

Sir Alfred was not "absolutely approving of" Mr Stanley...

 

DCN



#15 Charlieman

Charlieman
  • Member

  • 1,824 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 04 January 2020 - 19:21

An aside.

 

I once had a posh pot of tea in a posh London hotel. It was the only time that they were foolish enough to invite me. I am happy to make better pot at home.

 

Louis Stanley liked his tea at the Dorchester. Donald Campbell enjoyed tea there too.

 

Did others like the Dorchester?



#16 Roger Clark

Roger Clark
  • Member

  • 6,929 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 04 January 2020 - 23:29

For comparison: how many DFVs did Lotus use in their first season?

 

Graham Robson’s Cosworth book says that the initial Ford contract required five engines in 1967. 



#17 Bloggsworth

Bloggsworth
  • Member

  • 8,701 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 05 January 2020 - 08:29

An aside.

 

I once had a posh pot of tea in a posh London hotel. It was the only time that they were foolish enough to invite me. I am happy to make better pot at home.

 

Louis Stanley liked his tea at the Dorchester. Donald Campbell enjoyed tea there too.

 

Did others like the Dorchester?

I'm sure I would have had I been able to afford it...



#18 Roger Clark

Roger Clark
  • Member

  • 6,929 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 05 January 2020 - 09:30

I have been researching the 1966-1968 period at BRM by browsing through the Rubery Owen Archive material at Warwick University.  One of the many things that surprised me was the prediction of sales of around 15-20 V12 engines to private customers.  I haven't found a list yet of actual sales, so I am hoping the collective brains here can help me.

 

So far, I can think of:

Cooper, for the T86B, maybe 4 engines - at least two engines sold off with the cars in 1969

McLaren, for the M5A, one or two engines - at least one engine went with car to Jo Bonnier

Tim Parnell, for his loaned V12 cars, one engine - probably returned to BRM

Bernard White, for his P261, probably only one engine - engine stayed with car when it went sprinting in 1970 

John Wyer, for the Mirage sports car project, maybe three engines

Max Wilson, for his Lola T70, probably only one engine

 

That gets to maybe 12 sales.  What have I missed?

Unless I’ve misunderstood, I don’t think you’ve missed anything. We know from Vols 2 & 3 of Doug’s Saga that BRM were usually optimistic over commercial sales. To achieve 12 against a prediction of 15-20 seems quite good for them. 


Edited by Roger Clark, 05 January 2020 - 09:37.


#19 nexfast

nexfast
  • Member

  • 611 posts
  • Joined: August 12

Posted 05 January 2020 - 21:55

An aside.

 

I once had a posh pot of tea in a posh London hotel. It was the only time that they were foolish enough to invite me. I am happy to make better pot at home.

 

Louis Stanley liked his tea at the Dorchester. Donald Campbell enjoyed tea there too.

 

Did others like the Dorchester?

By no means challenging that your tea might be better but I  must say I had a pretty good one with scones at the Dorchester when I stayed there a few years ago.



Advertisement

#20 10kDA

10kDA
  • Member

  • 144 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 06 January 2020 - 15:57

Price is a recurring theme in the minutes of meetings at BRM.  The fantasy that BRM could make a profit included selling "not more than 12" F1 V12s at £5,000 each, and "50" (!) sports car V12s at £3,500 each.  If Wilkinson was negotiating a 40% off deal for a F1 engine, that can't have helped meeting the budget.

50 sports car V12s - was that quantity somehow related to number required for homologation purposes? Was there ever any indication some manufacturer was considering (or negotiating for) using BRM V12s in a run of, say, 25 cars+spares for then-current Group 4 regs?



#21 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 9,721 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 06 January 2020 - 20:00

That was the hope....rather than the carefully-assessed expectation...

 

DCN



#22 rl1856

rl1856
  • Member

  • 220 posts
  • Joined: November 03

Posted 07 January 2020 - 01:48

It was Stewart who insisted in his meetings with Sir Alfred Owen that the 1968 Tasman team must use the V12 engine, and have cars built specifically for the purpose.  That's why they went outside to Len Terry to build the cars.  It was not BRM's intention at that point that the V12 would be used in F1.  It was only later in the 1967 season that it became undeniable that the H16's problems were insurmountable.  Even in 1968, Rudd harboured the belief that the V12 was only a stop-gap until his lightweight 4-valve H16 was ready for the 1969 season.  

 

The V12 performed surprisingly well for McLaren in the last few races of 1967 and outperformed the H16 cars entered by BRM.  Some observers thought BRM may have been onto something with the new engine.   One wonders what would have happened had Stewart stayed at BRM, and instigated a full testing program.



#23 Roger Clark

Roger Clark
  • Member

  • 6,929 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 07 January 2020 - 07:16

50 sports car V12s - was that quantity somehow related to number required for homologation purposes? Was there ever any indication some manufacturer was considering (or negotiating for) using BRM V12s in a run of, say, 25 cars+spares for then-current Group 4 regs?

Who might have contemplated a 3-litre Group 4 car?  



#24 Stephen W

Stephen W
  • Member

  • 13,962 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 07 January 2020 - 09:16

Who might have contemplated a 3-litre Group 4 car?  

 

Chevron maybe. 



#25 Allen Brown

Allen Brown
  • Member

  • 5,401 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 07 January 2020 - 09:31

50 sports car V12s - was that quantity somehow related to number required for homologation purposes? Was there ever any indication some manufacturer was considering (or negotiating for) using BRM V12s in a run of, say, 25 cars+spares for then-current Group 4 regs?

 

I did not see any such indication in the correspondence.  McLaren had clearly had a discussion about building a sports car, but not a Group 4 car.  



#26 MCS

MCS
  • Member

  • 4,207 posts
  • Joined: June 03

Posted 07 January 2020 - 09:44

Maybe one of the smaller, independent sports car constructors looked at using the engine - for some reason South London resonates. 


Edited by MCS, 07 January 2020 - 09:45.


#27 Roger Clark

Roger Clark
  • Member

  • 6,929 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 07 January 2020 - 15:31

I think we should be talking about Group 5 rather than 4 - 50 were required in 1968, reduced to 25 in 1969.  As far as I know, nobody built a 3-litre car for that class.  Why would you?  There was no separate class in the world championship and no likely market for 50 cars.  You'd be racing against Group 6 cars of the same capacity and 5-litre GT40s.  Porsche probably built enough 908s but they had a better idea for Group 5.

 

JW Automotive ran a BRM-engined Mirage briefly in 1969.  In The Certain Sound, John Wyer said that the Mirage was "the worst with which I have ever been associated" but even if it had been the best "it could not have overcome the handicap of the terrible BRM engine.



#28 D-Type

D-Type
  • Member

  • 9,158 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 07 January 2020 - 16:03

I've seen pictures of a de Tomaso with BRM engine.  But I think it was the 2-litre V8 rather than the V12.



#29 Stephen W

Stephen W
  • Member

  • 13,962 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 08 January 2020 - 08:02

I've seen pictures of a de Tomaso with BRM engine.  But I think it was the 2-litre V8 rather than the V12.

 

Correct - saw a couple of snaps on the book of the face yesterday!



#30 Roger Clark

Roger Clark
  • Member

  • 6,929 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 08 January 2020 - 17:03

There was a picture on Facebook of a de Tomaso, said to have a 2-litre BRM engine but it was a Formula 2 engine. 



#31 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 9,721 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 09 January 2020 - 22:10

Aah, just spotted that rare animal - a spare moment...

 

August 4, 1967 - The prototype BRM P101 3-litre V12 engine 101-001  FIRST RUN - 352bhp @ 9,500rpm.

 

 August 14, 1967 - Engine 101-001powered the McLaren-BRM M5A during its first test at Goodwood.

 

August 14, 1967 - Engine 101-003 first run - 369bhp @ 9,750rpm

 

October 31, 1967 - Engine 121-002 (2.5-litre Tasman V12) first run - 309bhp @ 9,900rpm

 

November 8, 1967 - Engine 121-001 (2.5-litre Tasman V12) "first proving run" - 311bhp @ 9,900rpm on 18-inch megaphone exhausts - 318bhp @ 10,250rpm on 24-inch megaphone exhausts

 

November 16, 1967 - Engine 121-003 (2.5-litre Tasman V12) first run - 320bhp @ 10,500rpm

 

November 20, 1967 - Engine 101-003 (3-litre V12) first run - 365bhp @ 9,750rpm

 

-------

 

As of November 16, 1967 BRM had three complete P101 3-litre V12s and three P121 2.5-litre V12s 

 

101001 was for McLaren

 

101-002 was for Cooper

 

101-003 was for BRM's own use in the South African GP "on sea so no development engine available"...

 

---------------------

 

Engines taken to Kyalami for the South African GP on January 1, 1968

 

H16 7505 - 353bhp @10,500rpm

H16 7506 - 363bhp @ 10,000rpm

V12 101-003 - 366bhp @ 9,750rpm used in race by Pedro Rodriguez in car P126-03

V12 101-007 - 382bhp @9,750rpm (such a high figure probably a record-keeping error - more like 362 or 372???)

 

------------

 

March 17, 1968 Race of Champions Brands Hatch - Mike Spence used engine 101-007 in car P126-03 - Pedro Rodriguez used engine 101-009 in car P133-01

 

-----------

 

April 27, 1968 BRDC International Trophy Silverstone - Rodriguez ran 101-003 in car P133-01 - Spence ran 101-009 in car P126-03 - engine 101-006 was in spare car P133-02 - Piers Courage ran 101-004 in P126...and so on...

 

By May 26, 1968 Monaco Grand Prix - Pedro Rodriguez ran 101-019 in car P133-02 - there is much mention of engine 019 but no mention of engine not 010-018 until September 8, 1968 Italian GP - Pedro Rodriguez used 101-018 for the race in 

car P138-01.

 

-----------

 

On January 11, 1969 engine 101-019 produced 404bhp @ 10,000rpm on the dyno

January 18, 1969  - engine 101-006 produced 393bhp @ 9,750rpm

January 16, 1969 - engine 101-009 produced 393bhp @ 9,600rpm 

 

------------

February 18, 1969 - February 26, 1969 - BRM P142 prototype 48-valve V12 engine 142-001 produced 441bhp @ circa 9,300rpm FIRST RUN

 

February 26, 1969 - BRM P142 48-valve V12 engine 142-002 on first run produced 455bhp @ 10,750rpm

February 28, 1969 - BRM P142 48-valve V12 engine 142-001 produced 453bhp @ 10,350rpm on the dyno

February 28, 1969 - BRM P142 48-valve V12 engine 142-001 produced 453bhp @ 10,500rpm on the dyno when fitted with upstream fuel injection

March 22, 1969 - BRM P142 48-valve V12 engine 142-001 produced 453bhp @ 10,750rpm on the dyno when fitted with downstream fuel injection

 

-----------

 

The works team's P142 48-valve V12 engines used in 1969 were 142-001-006 inclusive. 

 

-----------

 

DCN


Edited by Doug Nye, 10 January 2020 - 20:54.


#32 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 67,178 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 10 January 2020 - 00:12

So why the comment from Wyer?

 

Those figures look reasonable enough, even the early ones. Though I must say that Tasman performances belied the horsepower figures.



#33 Allen Brown

Allen Brown
  • Member

  • 5,401 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 10 January 2020 - 09:00

Aah, just spotted that rare animal - a spare moment...

 

August 4, 1967 - The prototype BRM P101 3-litre V12 engine 101-001  FIRST RUN - 352bhp @ 9,500rpm.

 

------------

February 18, 1969 - February 26, 1969 - BRM P142 prototype 48-valve V12 engine 142-001 produced 441bhp @ circa 9,300rpm FIRST RUN

 

-----------

 

DCN

 

The contrast is striking between this leap in power and the performance of the 4-valve H16 on its first run in December 1968.  The 4-valve H16 only gave "about the same" power as a 2-valve.  Running it up to 12,000 rpm was "the next step", but I haven't found the report on that yet.  



#34 Alan Baker

Alan Baker
  • Member

  • 159 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 10 January 2020 - 10:28

So why the comment from Wyer?

 

Those figures look reasonable enough, even the early ones. Though I must say that Tasman performances belied the horsepower figures.

Didn't Bruce McLaren offer to eat every horse over 300?!!



#35 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 9,721 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 10 January 2020 - 20:53

What I have always found revealing is the comparative figures for the H16 and V12 engines tested in preparation for the South African GP, 1968...

 

H16 7505 - 353bhp @10,500rpm

H16 7506 - 363bhp @ 10,000rpm

V12 101-003 - 366bhp @ 9,750rpm used in race by Pedro Rodriguez in car P126-03

V12 101-007 - 382bhp @9,750rpm (such a high figure probably a record-keeping error - more like 362 or 372???)

 

The internal-friction power losses of the H16s proved eye-watering...especially since their additional weight then had to be considered.

 

DCN



#36 Allen Brown

Allen Brown
  • Member

  • 5,401 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 10 January 2020 - 22:00

What I have always found revealing is the comparative figures for the H16 and V12 engines tested in preparation for the South African GP, 1968...

 

H16 7505 - 353bhp @10,500rpm

H16 7506 - 363bhp @ 10,000rpm

V12 101-003 - 366bhp @ 9,750rpm used in race by Pedro Rodriguez in car P126-03

V12 101-007 - 382bhp @9,750rpm (such a high figure probably a record-keeping error - more like 362 or 372???)

 

DCN

 

I am in full "nerd mode" at the moment on the early V12s, so I had to look into that.  The 382 bhp must have been on 14 OR 15 December on the first engine fitted with the small combustion chamber.  When they completed Bernard White's engine (101-008) a week later (Thursday 21 Dec according to the Bourne Diary) also with the small combustion chamber, it gave the same 383 bhp.  A rare example of Peter Wright actually mentioning bhp in the Bourne Diary, so they must have been pleased.  Maybe an actual reproducible gain this time?



#37 rl1856

rl1856
  • Member

  • 220 posts
  • Joined: November 03

Posted 11 January 2020 - 22:49

I recall reading in Tony Rudd's / DCN book that he regretted not designing a V12 around the best version of the stretched 1.5L V8.  Would it have been feasible to have used the same pistons, rods etc, and create a package scarcely longer than the V8 ?  How close was their eventual V12 to the design of the V8 ?   Given the HP figures of the V12, it is a pity that in 1968-69 BRM lacked a chassis and program that could have exploited what the V12 offered.



#38 Bloggsworth

Bloggsworth
  • Member

  • 8,701 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 12 January 2020 - 09:25

BRM and Coventry Climax both had 1.5 litre V8s - Shorter con-rods and a turbo... Shoot me down and tell me it's not that easy.



#39 Tim Murray

Tim Murray
  • Moderator

  • 22,348 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 12 January 2020 - 09:50

Shoot me down and tell me it's not that easy.

From this earlier thread:

These earlier threads may be of interest:

1966 3 litre Formula One

Why did it take until 1977 for turbos to reach F1?

The main points emerging from those threads were:

In 1966 F1 engines had to run on pump fuel. Thus any supercharged engine would have been denied the internal engine cooling provided by the fancy alcohol brews used in the previous supercharged era. This would have considerably restricted power compared to the earlier supercharged engines.

The engines used in the 1.5-litre formula were getting toward the limits of their development by 1965 and would have had difficulty withstanding the extra stresses provided by supercharging without a significant amount of redesign and redevelopment (see DCN’s post quoted below).

All engine development over the previous fifteen years since 1951 had been on unsupercharged engines. Anyone planning a supercharged engine for 1966 would have had to relearn supercharging technology.

And, as DCN said in the latter thread above, BRM did seriously consider supercharging, but rejected the idea:

... BRM ran an investigation on a possible 1.5-litre supercharged V8 for the 3-litre Formula - half of the original V16 engine tidied up with more sensible crankshaft arrangements - but no way could they make the calculations look as promising as a true 3-litre naturally-aspirated unit. Seeking maximum revs to burn maximum fuel/air mixture, they adopted the 16-cylinder idea and packaging considerations led Tony Rudd (fatally) down the coupled-crankshaft H-layout route. A straightforward blown version of the small P56 V8 was a non-starter due to head seal (against internal pressures) and other considerations, and a supercharged engine was always going to be less fuel efficient and probably less drivable...they thought.

DCN



Advertisement

#40 moffspeed

moffspeed
  • Member

  • 170 posts
  • Joined: March 17

Posted 12 January 2020 - 12:16

Just as an aside, in November '68 Bianchi raced his T86B in Mexico, within 6 months Martin Brain debuted the car at Barbon, a true privateer with BRM motivation. Later that year I watched him score a class win at Pontypool, a long way from Mexico City !

 

Did MB have any connection with Cooper to enable this transaction or was he simply the "highest bidder" at the sell-off ?

 

 

(This thought prompted by the fact that a few years later David Render appeared in British Speed events in his "loan car" - Lotus 76/2 - apparently courtesy of his long-term friendship with Colin Chapman).


Edited by moffspeed, 12 January 2020 - 13:09.


#41 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 9,721 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 12 January 2020 - 13:09

Highest bidder - a keen and compliant, willing 'victim' I suspect...who saw true potential in the car for his particular branch of motor sport.  The Chipstead Motor Group, the Cooper Car Co's sellers, would I am sure have greeted him with open arms.

 

DCN



#42 Roger Clark

Roger Clark
  • Member

  • 6,929 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 12 January 2020 - 23:20

I’d like to thank everybody, but particularly Allen and Doug, for some fascinating information on this thread. 
 

in It Was Fun, Tony Rudd says that he was told that there would be no money to spend on improving the V12 until they had generated income equivalent to the sale of 23 engines. Clearly the Owen Organisation purse strings were tightening; in addition Sir Alfred was able to give less time to BRM after the death of his brother Ernest. This had the side effect of increasing Louis Stanley’s influence. 
 

Tony Rudd also says that he spent £40,000 on the 4-valve H16 - 40% of his budget. 



#43 Allen Brown

Allen Brown
  • Member

  • 5,401 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 13 January 2020 - 07:52

I’d like to thank everybody, but particularly Allen and Doug, for some fascinating information on this thread. 
 

in It Was Fun, Tony Rudd says that he was told that there would be no money to spend on improving the V12 until they had generated income equivalent to the sale of 23 engines. Clearly the Owen Organisation purse strings were tightening; in addition Sir Alfred was able to give less time to BRM after the death of his brother Ernest. This had the side effect of increasing Louis Stanley’s influence. 
 

Tony Rudd also says that he spent £40,000 on the 4-valve H16 - 40% of his budget. 

 

The correspondence in the Rubery Owen archive shows a lot of discussion during 1967 between Rudd, Sir Alfred, Mays, Villiers and others about the development of the V12.  I had read Rudd's book before I waded into the correspondence, and I was quickly struck by how the letters and minutes I was reading gave a different picture than "It Was Fun".  Rudd put a lot of time and effort into stopping any development of the V12, arguing that it was too long to be used in F1, and would not be able to produce enough power.  He was convinced by the H16, despite the efforts over the 1966/67 winter to make it more reliable having actually reduced its power output, and was successful in convincing Sir Alfred that it was the only viable future.  When Mays stuck his head above the parapet suggesting more resource should be put into the V12, he was quickly shot down by Sir Alfred.  Stewart's unhappiness with the H16 and his desire for a car to be built for the V12 led to the external Len Terry project to create the P126 for the 1968 Tasman series, but it was only after McLaren's impressive debut with the engine at the Canadian GP that any plan was made to run a P126 in F1.  A lot of work was being done by Villiers and by Frank Stark on new engine heads for both engines, but Rudd actively opposed time being spent on a 4-valve V12 as his forthcoming lightweight 4-valve H16 would blow it away.  I have not read every letter and every set of minutes, and of course I cannot see the direct conversations that took place, but I do not see Rudd asking for resource to spend on the V12 and Owen refusing it.  

 

I am still missing quite a few files, including everything about the P132, which has only been mentioned in passing so far, and the Wyer project.  My next day in the archives should tell me more.



#44 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 67,178 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 13 January 2020 - 12:23

Prompted by the question posed by rl1856...

 

Did the bore centres on the V12 increase compared to those on the V8s?

 

And was there provision for taking the V12 to larger capacities than 3-litres?



#45 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 17,540 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 13 January 2020 - 15:31

And was there provision for taking the V12 to larger capacities than 3-litres?

There were some rumours about 4 litre engines.  But as I recall, DCN stamped on those stories rather firmly.



#46 Roger Clark

Roger Clark
  • Member

  • 6,929 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 13 January 2020 - 16:46

The correspondence in the Rubery Owen archive shows a lot of discussion during 1967 between Rudd, Sir Alfred, Mays, Villiers and others about the development of the V12.  I had read Rudd's book before I waded into the correspondence, and I was quickly struck by how the letters and minutes I was reading gave a different picture than "It Was Fun".  Rudd put a lot of time and effort into stopping any development of the V12, arguing that it was too long to be used in F1, and would not be able to produce enough power.  He was convinced by the H16, despite the efforts over the 1966/67 winter to make it more reliable having actually reduced its power output, and was successful in convincing Sir Alfred that it was the only viable future.  When Mays stuck his head above the parapet suggesting more resource should be put into the V12, he was quickly shot down by Sir Alfred.  Stewart's unhappiness with the H16 and his desire for a car to be built for the V12 led to the external Len Terry project to create the P126 for the 1968 Tasman series, but it was only after McLaren's impressive debut with the engine at the Canadian GP that any plan was made to run a P126 in F1.  A lot of work was being done by Villiers and by Frank Stark on new engine heads for both engines, but Rudd actively opposed time being spent on a 4-valve V12 as his forthcoming lightweight 4-valve H16 would blow it away.  I have not read every letter and every set of minutes, and of course I cannot see the direct conversations that took place, but I do not see Rudd asking for resource to spend on the V12 and Owen refusing it.  

 

I am still missing quite a few files, including everything about the P132, which has only been mentioned in passing so far, and the Wyer project.  My next day in the archives should tell me more.

What was P132?



#47 Allen Brown

Allen Brown
  • Member

  • 5,401 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 13 January 2020 - 17:29

Apparently it was the new car being built for 1968 to take the new lightweight H16 engine. I don’t know what became of it.

#48 Bloggsworth

Bloggsworth
  • Member

  • 8,701 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 13 January 2020 - 19:03

Apparently it was the new car being built for 1968 to take the new lightweight H16 engine. I don’t know what became of it.

 

Somebody thought better of it?


Edited by Bloggsworth, 13 January 2020 - 19:04.


#49 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 9,721 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 13 January 2020 - 23:19

Tony's light was fading within the boardroom at Darlaston...even before John Surtees hit the switch that extinguished it...

 

DCN