18 replies to this topic

[moffspeed]

I'm just selling an ex-Jim Clark Lotus 18 (well OK it is in 1/43 scale rather than 1/1), his 1960 Portugese GP car in which Jimmy scored his first F1 podium. The model is by Spark so it is a faithful reproduction including the taped up nosecone following his practice crash. I had to check the archives, the model has no roll-bar but contemporary photos confirm that the real thing ran without any rollover protection during that race.

 

I understand that the FIA introduced a mandatory rear roll hoop for the 1961 season. Most versions looked pretty spindly and I don't think any sported rear stays. The Ferrari effort looked reasonably hefty, reaching above the driver's head and broadening out at shoulder level but, as history would prove, this would be OK if you were harnessed in and managed to stay within the car. Some of the other efforts looked very dodgy and little more than a token nod at the regs.  The Ferguson P99 shines out in this respect, a bent paper clip leaning aft over the rear fairing surely would have afforded no protection. The following year the top of Dan Gurney's helmet must have been a good 6 inches above the tip of his Porsche 804's bar.

 

So just a question, were there specific regs. as to the gauge of tubing, height of the bar etc or was it just a tick from the scrutineer to confirm the presence of some protuberant tubing ?

Edited by moffspeed, 27 January 2020 - 18:35.

[Geoff E]

I have a comment in a book by Eric Dymock (commenting on changes for the 1961 season)-

 

"The first roll-over safety bar was specified, but not its dimensions, and the frail little hoops which appeared would have been quite useless in the event of a car overturning."

[cpbell]

 

 

So just a question, were there specific regs. as to the gauge of tubing, height of the bar etc or was it just a tick from the scrutineer to confirm the presence of some protuberant tubing ?

AFAIK, it was the latter.  Whether there was any attempt from the CSI to mandate a certain specification, or whether it was more of a PR move than a serious attempt to improve safety I wouldn't know.

Edited by cpbell, 27 January 2020 - 22:47.

[Ray Bell]

It was a camel, obviously...

 

The result of the workings of a committee rather than someone who could create a horse.

[Tim Murray]

I have read that when roll-over bars were first being mooted, Colin Chapman tried to argue that the top chassis tubes on the Lotus 18 provided adequate roll-over protection. I’ve no idea whether there’s any truth to this.

[Ray Bell]

That would surely have been on the Lotus 16?

 

It had a hoop up there supporting the rear bodywork...

[Tim Murray]

The item I read was definitely about the 18, but ... who knows?

[RacingCompagniet]

I have read somewhere that this argument was used by Chapman at the first race of the Lotus 18 in Formula Junior guise.  The Formula Junior regulations specified roll-over bars from the very beginning, but the 18 FJ did not have any at its debut in 1960, just like the F1 version.

[Nemo1965]

I recently saw a youtube-video where David Brabham drove two of his father's ex-F1 cars, the 1966 and the 1967 cars, I believe. I was quite impressed how deep David sat in the cockpit and how sturdy the construction of the roll-bar hoop looked for cars from an ear, that was, well... not very good in that area of safety (or any!) Especially if you remember this car driven by Dan Guerney:

 

https://nl.motorspor...53424/38374278/

[moffspeed]

I have read that when roll-over bars were first being mooted, Colin Chapman tried to argue that the top chassis tubes on the Lotus 18 provided adequate roll-over protection. I’ve no idea whether there’s any truth to this.

 

Chapman being a bit disingenuous would not be unusual. Everything above shoulder height on the 18 was/is exposed, so I suspect that Chapman designated the driver's head to be a crumple zone or perhaps a stressed member.  If you look at an 18 space frame there is a very shallow hoop atop the engine bulkhead behind the driver -  but this is only to shoulder height again and I'm sure merely mirrors the profile of the forward perforated scuttle bulkhead to facilitate bodywork fixing. 

 

Interestingly Jim Hall ran his newly acquired 18 (chassis 907) at Riverside in November 1960 with a "proper" roll bar, I don't know whether it came from the factory like this - it may have cheered Hall up a bit, particularly when he realised that the Climax engine installed in the car may not have packed quite the number of cubic inches that he was expecting.

 

A bit like the halo in F1 we have become accustomed to retro-fitted roll bars in historic racing single seaters and I think this is no bad thing. I was unfortunate to be on-scene at Stephen Langton's dreadful 1985 Brands Hatch accident, even after this there was much debate amongst diehards (literally?) around whether 50/60's single seaters should be sullied by the fitment of contemporary safety equipment. 

 

Stephen Bond's Lotus 18 has a hefty roll bar, I'm sure he was thankful for this when he viewed Goodwood Aerodrome from an inverted perspective a few years back.

Edited by moffspeed, 28 January 2020 - 11:06.

[D-Type]

Not only Chapman - Cooper also incorporated hoops on each side of the cockpit as a matter of course.  But Copoper didn't tryt to argue the point with scrutineers.

[68targa]

Some FJ Lotus 18's did have a roll hoop fitted in 1960.

My father took this photo of some Formula Junior cars in the assembly area at the 1960 Oulton Park Gold Cup meeting. #38 is the Lotus 18 of Stephen Ouvaroff and a basic hoop is fitted without the brace. Just behind it and in front of the #44 Lola is another Lotus 18 which also has a basic hoop that can just be seen so they may have been factory fitments although not much use I suspect if tested to the full.

This meeting was held in September so maybe they had to fit the hoops sometime during the year.

 

[Roger Clark]

The Autosport report of the 1959 Boxing Day Brands meeting said the the 18 has “as yet” no roll over hoop. (They actually said anti-roll bar but that was a common mistake). The next appearance of a Junior 18 was (I think) Goodwood on 19 March when Jim Clark’s car had a substantial hoop. 

[Ray Bell]

A Lotus 18 Junior rollover hoop:

 

 

Was Clark's as 'substantial' as this one?


 

[Red Socks]

International Formula 1 regulations for 1961 valid until 31st December 1964 state in Article 9 :-

 

Compulsory anti roll bar complying with the following regulations;

a) not overhanging the drivers head

b) exceeding in height the drivers head when sitting at the steering -wheel

c) exceeding in width the drivers shoulders when siting at the steering wheel.

 

Intercontinental formula had the same regulation.

In 1964 the FIA regulations extended the same ROPS rules until 31/12/1965

[Sterzo]

b) exceeding in height the drivers head when sitting at the steering -wheel

It would be interesting to know whether scrutineers ever asked for a driver to come to the bay and sit on board so they could check it. One suspects not.

[moffspeed]

It would be interesting to know whether scrutineers ever asked for a driver to come to the bay and sit on board so they could check it. One suspects not.

 

If so perhaps Dan Gurney employed a body double who was 20cms or so shorter than the real thing.

[cpbell]

It would be interesting to know whether scrutineers ever asked for a driver to come to the bay and sit on board so they could check it. One suspects not.

Indeed, that seems rather ridiculous given the manner in which most roll bars were lower than the driver's helmets until the end of the decade.

[raceannouncer2003]

Some FJ Lotus 18's did have a roll hoop fitted in 1960.

 

 

Pat Pigott's new Lotus 18 had a reinforced one at Westwood in 1960.

 

 

Vince H.

Edited by raceannouncer2003, 29 January 2020 - 06:26.