40 replies to this topic

[Jops14]

I’ve been mulling this over after listening to some BBV10’s

In the 90’s, we saw lots of Barnard rocking up to a team, getting a suitcase of money and leaving with nothing to show for it.

So my question is, looking back on his career, was he overrated and unable to move with the times, or genuinely a designer at the level of Newey

[Bloggsworth]

There was Mansell's Ferrari win in the first car to have a "Seamless" change gearbox which has changed racing and road gearboxes for ever...

[Charlieman]

Although many of us moan about how big manufacturers transformed F1 into what it is today, I'd also point a finger at John Barnard's influence.

 

"The Perfect Car" biography describes how JB was a difficult man with whom to work, a perfectionist as well as an original thinker. I admire his original thinking -- the McLaren MP4/1 was brilliant -- but get the feel that his demand to do things properly got in the way of anything at all. I like that JB created a "design book" or style guide, explaining the materials processes or thinking for design elements; I understand that every team does something similar today.

 

JB's perfectionism pushed F1 from the romantic era into one of precision technology, more like aircraft manufacturing with processes and change management. 

[Steve L]

As far as modern F1 cars go, I don't think the Barnard 639/640 has ever been bettered?  Maybe with the exception of the first Jordan.

 

There were some super looking cars in that period before all of the aero add-ons came into play...

[john aston]

Agreed - nobody is at the same level of achievement as Adrian Newey - but brilliant designer though he is , few have remained as active  as he has over such long period . I don't doubt Adrian misses the  opportunity once bestowed by lighter touch regulations than the uber prescriptive rules which now make F1 closer to a spec formula than ever before - we now see teams spending huge amounts on tiny gains . 

 

As for Barnard , I think his record might be subject to discussion but  the wording of OP's  question almost  seems to invite sneering more than appraisal , as if JB might have been just a carpetbagging con artist. He had hits , misses and quantum leaps forward - and was paid well for it , as he should have been. He was a great - of course he was. 

 

On a personal and subjective note - anybody who created the best looking Grand Prix car I have ever seen , the Ferrari 640, is just fine by me .  

[Nathan]

Personally, I find him more innovative than Chapman.  Maybe not Newey level, maybe not quite Brawn, but certainly if one made even a short a book of the most important engineers in F1 he'd be in it.

[2F-001]

... looking back on his career, was he overrated and unable to move with the times, or genuinely a designer at the level of Newey

Oh - the latter, without a shadow of doubt. Overall, I might well rate him above Newey. Newey’s ‘influence’ has been on the results sheets of the teams he’s worked for rather than on the sport and technology in a wider sense.

 

Leaving teams with nothing to show for it? Hardly!

 

He left McLaren having been an essential part of rejuvenating the team and paving the way for multiple successes. His approach to materials science, and design and construction methodologies changed all ‘professional’ levels of motor racing for ever; techniques that were then picked up in other sports and industries. He left in part because he didn’t feel he was adequately recognised or rewarded - even sponsor Marlboro told him he he ought to be being paid very much more by the team.

 

He dragged Ferrari into the modern age - somewhat against the odds, since the team was riven with factional disunity and, apparently, no clue how to work cleanly and effectively with composites. And introduced the transmission operation system that again changed the face of racing car (and other car) construction. Given the challenges and politicking he faced at Ferrari, I’m surprised he went back!

 

He was instrumental in setting Benetton on the path towards being a powerhouse, despite more restrictive budgets and opposition from within - and we are led to understand that he only left because the team reneged on his contract.

 

I’ve no doubt that Newey could innovate, but given that much of his work has been in very much more restrictive times, more detail-based than game-changing, so there is less evidence for it - or what there is is rather less open to scrutiny. However, one can only be hugely impressed Newey’s ingenuity, consistency and longevity; he’s won more races and doubtless moved rivals to try harder, but Barnard changed the face of the sport/business. 

 

With regard to wider influence (and perhaps legacy too?), Barnard is recognised as an RDI (Royal Designer for Industry) - I’d contend that’s an honour harder to achieve than OBEs, which seem to be given away like sweets at Halloween...

(Although, as a professional designer myself - albeit not of racing cars - you may think I’m biased.)

Edited by 2F-001, 06 March 2024 - 22:15.

[Risil]

In the 90’s, we saw lots of Barnard rocking up to a team, getting a suitcase of money and leaving with nothing to show for it.

 

I think you're overemphasizing his time working with Arrows! He improved almost every team he worked for.

 

Reading his Wikipedia, somehow I'd remained ignorant that 1980's dominant Indycar, the Chaparral 2K, was one of his.

[Michael Ferner]

... and the M24 McLaren! I, too, was puzzled by the opening post, as I couldn't recall a team he left "with nothing to show for". When was he at Arrows, during the Walkinshaw/Hill episode? If so, those were the best times the team had enjoyed in two decades!

 

As an aside, I chuckle a bit at seeing the Ferrari 640 called "the best looking Grand Prix car ever", since at the time I thought it was the ugly duckling of the grid! Which goes to show, I guess. 

[Jops14]

Agreed - nobody is at the same level of achievement as Adrian Newey - but brilliant designer though he is , few have remained as active as he has over such long period . I don't doubt Adrian misses the opportunity once bestowed by lighter touch regulations than the uber prescriptive rules which now make F1 closer to a spec formula than ever before - we now see teams spending huge amounts on tiny gains .

As for Barnard , I think his record might be subject to discussion but the wording of OP's question almost seems to invite sneering more than appraisal , as if JB might have been just a carpetbagging con artist. He had hits , misses and quantum leaps forward - and was paid well for it , as he should have been. He was a great - of course he was.

On a personal and subjective note - anybody who created the best looking Grand Prix car I have ever seen , the Ferrari 640, is just fine by me .

Lol its not meant to be sneering, that might be a reflection of how you interpret things…


I get the influence he had on McLaren, and i’ve heard great thing about his book, and yes he pioneered semi-auto gearbox, but his cars never won another championship despite going another 10 years.

Benetton were set on the right path, but Brawn and Byrne tend to take the credit, same with Ferrari. Was his mid 90s Ferrari let down by the Drivers (as Schumacher showed what could be done in 97)

The 98 Arrows let down by poor engine, and 3 years at Prost… limited influence?

Or is the reason he never touched those heights again because he never stayed long enough in one place?

[blackmme]

I think if anything JB is hugely underrated!

 

The Comparisons with Adrian Newey are a little 'apples and oranges' in my opinion but if you take a Formula 1 car in 2024 he introduced a number of features that became definitive.

Working from front to back, Carbon Fibre chassis (1981, McLaren),  ''Coke Bottle" Rear aero to feed the diffuser (1983, McLaren), Semi-Automatic Gearbox (1989, Ferrari). His impact is absolutely immense.

 

His innovations were brilliant but the way he approached their application was also absolutely brilliant (much more refined that Colin Chapman IMHO).  For me he is the greatest designer in the history of F1.

 

Regards Mike 

[Michael Ferner]

Ah so. Never won another championship, so that's your definition of "nothing to show for". We don't speak the same language, so I'll exit this discussion stage left

[2F-001]

Reading his Wikipedia, somehow I'd remained ignorant that 1980's dominant Indycar, the Chaparral 2K, was one of his.

And, as Barnard himself puts it, it never saw the inside of a wind tunnel.

(I didn't mention the 2K in my post above as I thought someone might infer a fan-boy bias on my part!)

 

As Mike and Michael, above, have indicated we are not really counting the same things - the legacy of a designer vs. the tally of a world championship competitior. They are not really the same thing.

Had my design field been that of racing car engineering, I think I'd be more satisfied had I John's achievements than Adrian's.

 

As for Barnard moving on frequently, yes... and to some extent Newey's incredible tally of success is a product of him sticking at it for so long. I figure that Barnard moved out of 'F1' when the sport and its restrictions no longer gave him the freedom to do what motivated him. It was no longer interesting enough.

 

Was he not able to move with the times? Well, clearly Adrian could and did, to considerable effect. But I feel that Barnard wasn't looking to move with the times, he 'made' the times.

 

I wonder how relevant to their success it is, that both also worked in the US racing scene - as indeed did Frank Dernie, who was really the man who lifted Williams into the top echelon. I have concentrated on Newey and Barnard as they were the subjects of the Opening Post, but someone also mentioned Ross Brawn; I'd put him up there with those two (and possibly Dernie), but they all have different skills, interests, styles and employment situations - perhaps as hard to compare as drivers of different eras, or as hard as comparing these to Chapman.

Edited by 2F-001, 07 March 2024 - 10:29.

[Charlieman]

An earlier discussion here about the JB biography:

 

211762-the-perfect-car-john-barnard

[Doug Nye]

JB has his place in motor racing history and it is a prominent one.  Perhaps his greatest achievement apart from the headline Chaparral 2K ground-effect Indy car, the moulded carbon-composite McLaren MP4/2-series chassis, the fly-by-wire gearchange which freed chassis design of the need to house a rigid linkage run, etc etc - was his uncompromising insistence upon consistency of manufacture to intolerant tolerances, and total perfect-fit interchangeability of parts between individual chassis.  Oh and of course there was his signature insistence upon engine design integration into overall chassis design, a la Lotus 49/Cosworth DFV V8 but with knobs on...

 

Not the easiest technical director to work for, he was given to fiery verbal detonations should anyone dare to go off-piste in carrying out instructions or especially in presenting a modified interpretation of parts he had drawn instead of those he had specified, and which he uncompromisingly demanded.

 

At least once a JB verbal storm had blown out it was in most cases past and forgotten where he was concerned...apart from an inevitable small mental mark on someone's card.  Working with, or for, JB it was a question of my way or the highway.  Some understood his philosophy and his vision target, had faith in his design objective and worked very successfully with it.  Others could not accept his way of working, nor the restriction upon their own habitual freelance contributions (as many had in the pre-Barnard past at McLaren, Ferrari and Benetton) and most of those people - unconverted - would quickly depart for pastures new.

 

Between explosions, and in my experience, JB was a good guy, a highly impressive figure, ferociously bright and an uncompromisingly independent spirit who knew what he wanted (admittedly including the credit for his own innovations - and why not?) and, while sparing time for his family which was a major factor in his insistence upon remaining England-based, he always went for it, 100 per cent.  In that respect he was by no means unusual within the frontline motor racing world - but his personal commitment, intensity and drive pretty much set new contemporary standards for a team chief engineer/designer and later partner.  It was as a partner that I believe his split from Benetton occurred when he refused to sign-off the team's annual financial accounts, in face of Flavio Briatore's casual expectation of compliance.  

 

Sometimes being inherently as inflexibly straight as one of his chassis obstructed the perhaps more shady habits of some businesses...

 

DCN 

[john aston]

Lol its not meant to be sneering, that might be a reflection of how you interpret things…


I

I did indeed interpret "Rocking up to a team , getting a suitcase of money and leaving with nothing to show for it" as an invitation to sneer. It's hardly a dispassionate question .

[GTMRacer]

The fact that Ferrari pretty much built him a design studio in Surrey so he would work for them tells you everything, his concern for driver safety and precision engineered parts that fitted was a first.

Look at Gilles Villeneuve's fatal crash and then Bergers Imola crash, only 7 years apart but worlds apart in outcome. he is was a visionary, up there with the best.

[Jops14]

JB has his place in motor racing history and it is a prominent one. Perhaps his greatest achievement apart from the headline Chaparral 2K ground-effect Indy car, the moulded carbon-composite McLaren MP4/2-series chassis, the fly-by-wire gearchange which freed chassis design of the need to house a rigid linkage run, etc etc - was his uncompromising insistence upon consistency of manufacture to intolerant tolerances, and total perfect-fit interchangeability of parts between individual chassis. Oh and of course there was his signature insistence upon engine design integration into overall chassis design, a la Lotus 49/Cosworth DFV V8 but with knobs on...

Not the easiest technical director to work for, he was given to fiery verbal detonations should anyone dare to go off-piste in carrying out instructions or especially in presenting a modified interpretation of parts he had drawn instead of those he had specified, and which he uncompromisingly demanded.

At least once a JB verbal storm had blown out it was in most cases past and forgotten where he was concerned...apart from an inevitable small mental mark on someone's card. Working with, or for, JB it was a question of my way or the highway. Some understood his philosophy and his vision target, had faith in his design objective and worked very successfully with it. Others could not accept his way of working, nor the restriction upon their own habitual freelance contributions (as many had in the pre-Barnard past at McLaren, Ferrari and Benetton) and most of those people - unconverted - would quickly depart for pastures new.

Between explosions, and in my experience, JB was a good guy, a highly impressive figure, ferociously bright and an uncompromisingly independent spirit who knew what he wanted (admittedly including the credit for his own innovations - and why not?) and, while sparing time for his family which was a major factor in his insistence upon remaining England-based, he always went for it, 100 per cent. In that respect he was by no means unusual within the frontline motor racing world - but his personal commitment, intensity and drive pretty much set new contemporary standards for a team chief engineer/designer and later partner. It was as a partner that I believe his split from Benetton occurred when he refused to sign-off the team's annual financial accounts, in face of Flavio Briatore's casual expectation of compliance.

Sometimes being inherently as inflexibly straight as one of his chassis obstructed the perhaps more shady habits of some businesses...

DCN

Thank you thats a really well thought out response and helps with some extra context.

I was then going to ask what could he have achieved had he been given more time at a Benetton/Ferrari, but i guess it moot in a way as that would have required compromising on his morals.

I’ve always wanted to ask because being a kid in the 90’s/early 2000s, i always heard about how amazing he was without the results lining up to the rep, but that gives so much context, and some of the other responses.

How down on power were the Hart engines in 98?

[kayemod]

Perhaps I could partly dispel the often quoted line about John Barnard being "difficult to work with", Doug has summed up the reality of the situation very well. I worked quite closely with John and Peter Wright when JB was involved with the T260 CanAm car during his time at Lola. I worked as Specialised Mouldings modelmaker and made scale models for the SM wind tunnel. We all got on well, never a cross word or disagreement, so on a shopfloor level I found him absolutely fine. The wind tunnel testing was less successful though, as was seen in the performance of the resulting car, which Jackie Stewart has often said was the "worst he ever drove", largely due to its designed-in aerodynamic deficiencies.

 

I enjoyed The Perfect Car, Nick Skeen's excellent Barnard biography so much that I've recently re-read it for a second time, very highly recommended. One interesting fact that I discovered was that at the time we met, SM were paying me more than Lola were paying John, but of course he more than made up for that in later years.

Edited by kayemod, 07 March 2024 - 12:35.

[nmansellfan]

Look at Gilles Villeneuve's fatal crash and then Bergers Imola crash, only 7 years apart but worlds apart in outcome. he is was a visionary, up there with the best.

While taking nothing away from JB's pioneering work with carbon fibre and Kevlar, I don't think Gilles would have survived his shunt in an '89 spec Ferrari either. The 126C2 landing nose first in the ground was a big impact, perhaps less of a hit than Gerhards contact with the Tamburello outside wall, but the fact the nose became effectively stuck in the soft ground for a brief moment and the rest of the car continued forwards just exponentially increased the forces going through the driver. An '89 640 chassis in the same situation might not have fractured apart but without a HANS device that came much later, I think the final outcome would have been the same for GV, even if the tub would have stayed intact and he remained in the car. Gerhards tub had split at the cockpit in the Imola shunt as well.

Like I said though, it takes nothing away from what JB has done. Even though I still lament the demise of the H-pattern gearbox! The way that Grand Prix racing breeds technical talent though, perhaps it wouldn't have been long before someone else would have engineered a paddle shift setup. Thinking about it now I'm sure I read years ago that GV himself had tested an early type of paddle shift in '80 or '81, designed by Forghieri?

Edited by nmansellfan, 07 March 2024 - 20:25.

[PCC]

The wind tunnel testing was less successful though, as was seen in the performance of the resulting car, which Jackie Stewart has often said was the "worst he ever drove", largely due to its designed-in aerodynamic deficiencies.

A brief tangent: JYS scored some exceptional results in that car, despite its deficiencies. It had been a long time since Lola had been that competitive, and they never would be again.

 

More on topic, I have a memory of an interview with Lauda many years ago in which he told of being asked for advice by a younger driver - I can't remember who, maybe someone here does - about which team to sign for. Lauda's response: "Go wherever Barnard goes; he's brilliant."

[chr1s]

I think it's entirely possible that without JB McLaren would have sunk without trace some time in the early 80's. Ron Dennis deserves a lot of the credit for creating the Mclaren of today and deservedly so, but without John Barnard I don't think it would ever have happened. 

[Doug Nye]

In fairness Ron I am sure agrees with that last observation. For much of their early period together he and JB were virtual brothers in arms.

 

DCN

[Bikr7549]

A brief tangent: JYS scored some exceptional results in that car, despite its deficiencies. It had been a long time since Lola had been that competitive, and they never would be again.

 

More on topic, I have a memory of an interview with Lauda many years ago in which he told of being asked for advice by a younger driver - I can't remember who, maybe someone here does - about which team to sign for. Lauda's response: "Go wherever Barnard goes; he's brilliant."

Not in CanAm (until the single seat rules) but they did dominate F5000 everywhere on the planet after this, and did well at Indy, winning a few times.

Edited by Bikr7549, 08 March 2024 - 20:10.

[MCS]

Just came across this: 

 

[When Ferrari opened it's Ferrari Guildford Technical Office for Barnard - not a huge amount of information, but I was always intrigued by this development]. 

[PCC]

Not in CanAm (until the single seat rules) but they did dominate F5000 everywhere on the planet after this, and did well at Indy, winning a few times.

Yes that's true, but as I was talking only about the T260 and the Can-Am.

[man]

The quality of his work at McLaren and Ferrari the 1980s speaks for itself. As for the early 1990's, his work is open to interpretation. Admittedly, the B191 was not as successful compared to later Benetton's, however it was equipped with Pirelli tyres and a jaded old Piquet. In early 1992, the same chassis with Goodyears in the hands of Schumacher (also late '91 with Pirelli) and Brundle, looked a better package than the slightly updated MP4/6 McLaren.

The 1994 Ferrari, though a significant improvement over the F93A was a bit iffy imo. Brunner had to address quite a few issues during the season. The 1995 chassis was a pearl according to all drivers.

I think his uneasy relationship with Alboreto in 1987/1988 and comments made by Michele in the press didn't help his image at large.

[kayemod]

Yes that's true, but as I was talking only about the T260 and the Can-Am.

 

The T260 is a difficult car to assess, Jackie has consistently said it was "the worst car I ever drove", even worse than the BRM H16 apparently, a little unfair considering he won with the Lola twice, but he claims that it was a struggle all the way, the classic drama out of a crisis. JYS blamed the "short wheelbase", though in fact the car was dimensionally almost identical to the dominating McLaren M8F with the same  98" between front & rear wheels, and front track the same within an inch, the M8F though was about 30" longer, aerodynamically balanced front and rear, which the blunt nosed T260 was not, they had to move the rear wing almost up to the injector trumpets to try to balance the lack of front downforce. That desperate "cowcatcher" front wing was an indication of just how bad things were, a real "bigger hammer" blunt instrument approach.

 

Much of this is well known, but according to Eric Broadley, the car had another in-built fault that was entirely down to JYS. At the eleventh hour, a day or two before the car's first scheduled track test, he flatly refused to drive anything with inboard front brakes, which were part of the car's original design. He was still badly affected by Jochen Rindt's recent death, though some dispute that a snapped driveshaft was in fact to blame for that.  This necessitated a panic rebuild of the entire front end, all-nighters at Lola and Specialised Mouldings, rocketing overtime costs at both. New outboard brakes and completely new front suspension, and larger front wheels to accomodate that, not a small job. The front bodywork comprised two completely separate grp wheel covers with only a superficial perforated metal sheet between them. As far as SM were concerned, it meant redesigned front wings, new patterns, new moulds and new body panels, poor Eric was tearing his hair out, but there would have been big penalties if the sponsors had been let down. I can't remember if John Barnard had much to do with all this, though probably most of Lola's workforce did. My only significant contribution to the car was Jackie's seat, which he loved, said it was one of the best he'd had, so at least he was comfortable during all his T260 struggles.

[2F-001]

I don’t know what early input JB had to the T260, (He did work on the 280 & 290) but ‘The Perfect Car’ suggests that everyone else was running around panicking over the last-minute redesign of that Can Am car, whilst he kept his head down, kept quiet and got on with work on his own. He does seem to have been afforded good deal of independence at Lola. It was also where he formed his close relationship with, and respect for, Patrick Head.

 

On the T260, I’m struggling to find the book** in which I found this claim, but I remember reading that Frank Gardner had done some initial testing/shaking down of it, which must have been in something like its original guise, and lapped Silverstone GP circuit in a time under the outright record of the day. Does that sound right to you, Rob?

 

(** it was actually, believe it or not, a contemporary issue of the Guinness Book of Records, which I’m thinking I might have disposed of. The ‘record’ must have been something like ‘fastest lap of an extant closed circuit in Britain’, or something arcane of that sort. I shall examine the nether reaches of my overburdened bookcases at some point…).

[2F-001]

I’ve always wanted to ask because being a kid in the 90’s/early 2000s, i always heard about how amazing he was without the results lining up to the rep, 

That is so often the way when there are only the headline results to go on - but you've had the savvy to investigate more deeply. (I wish more people would do the same as you!)

 

As you can see from the other posts, 'The Perfect Car' is a much-admired book - a highly recommended read if you can get hold of a copy.

Even allowing for it being essentially from JB's viewpoint, you might be left wondering how on Earth Ferrari managed to achieve anything at all...

 

I found it the most absorbing racing biography I'd read since 'The Unfair Advantage'.

Edited by 2F-001, 09 March 2024 - 12:07.

[kayemod]

 

On the T260, I’m struggling to find the book** in which I found this claim, but I remember reading that Frank Gardner had done some initial testing/shaking down of it, which must have been in something like its original guise, and lapped Silverstone GP circuit in a time under the outright record of the day. Does that sound right to you, Rob?

 

 

 

It sounds extremely improbable to me, and apparently completely unauthenticated, nothing more than hearsay. As far as I know, due to time constraints, largely as a result of Jackie Stewart's inboard brakes objections, the car had very little track time before it went to the US, little more than a shakedown, and this is the first suggestion I've seen of Frank Gardner testing the car in any meaningful way. In any case, in its early forms, the unmodified car must have been even more unstable than JYS reported, and Frank Gardner was the last driver on Earth to risk his neck pushing a tricky car to the limit, he's famous for his quotes along these lines about driving suspect cars, such as "heroing a time" etc.

Edited by kayemod, 09 March 2024 - 18:08.

[2F-001]

Well, indeed - I'd only seen that single reference to it, and knowing of Gardner's attitude to these things is why is raised the question. Though it seems a bizarrely specific thing for someone to have made up. I wonder what that particular publication was shown that they considered to be 'evidence'?

Edited by 2F-001, 09 March 2024 - 13:21.

[Collombin]

Iirc the Guinness book listed a 4 second pitstop in the 1976 Indy 500 as the fastest ever pitstop for many years, which made me wonder what terms of reference it was using.

[10kDA]

Mark Bisset has posted pics on primotipo of Frank Gardner testing the T260. Note original low front profile with 13" wheels and inboard brakes vs. the version raced by Stewart with 15" fronts/outboard brakes.

 

https://primotipo.co...60-chev-take-2/

[10kDA]

The T260 is a difficult car to assess, Jackie has consistently said it was "the worst car I ever drove", even worse than the BRM H16 apparently, a little unfair considering he won with the Lola twice, but he claims that it was a struggle all the way, the classic drama out of a crisis. JYS blamed the "short wheelbase", though in fact the car was dimensionally almost identical to the dominating McLaren M8F with the same  98" between front & rear wheels, and front track the same within an inch, the M8F though was about 30" longer, aerodynamically balanced front and rear, which the blunt nosed T260 was not, they had to move the rear wing almost up to the injector trumpets to try to balance the lack of front downforce. That desperate "cowcatcher" front wing was an indication of just how bad things were, a real "bigger hammer" blunt instrument approach.

 

Much of this is well known, but according to Eric Broadley, the car had another in-built fault that was entirely down to JYS. At the eleventh hour, a day or two before the car's first scheduled track test, he flatly refused to drive anything with inboard front brakes, which were part of the car's original design. He was still badly affected by Jochen Rindt's recent death, though some dispute that a snapped driveshaft was in fact to blame for that.  This necessitated a panic rebuild of the entire front end, all-nighters at Lola and Specialised Mouldings, rocketing overtime costs at both. New outboard brakes and completely new front suspension, and larger front wheels to accomodate that, not a small job. The front bodywork comprised two completely separate grp wheel covers with only a superficial perforated metal sheet between them. As far as SM were concerned, it meant redesigned front wings, new patterns, new moulds and new body panels, poor Eric was tearing his hair out, but there would have been big penalties if the sponsors had been let down. I can't remember if John Barnard had much to do with all this, though probably most of Lola's workforce did. My only significant contribution to the car was Jackie's seat, which he loved, said it was one of the best he'd had, so at least he was comfortable during all his T260 struggles.

IIRC Jackie Stewart described the T260 as "darty", causing him to be on top of it constantly even on the straights. Could have been caused by aero factors after the nose was changed to fit larger wheels & tires, could have had something to do with the revised/redesigned front suspension, or a combination of both.

 

Edit: Not wanting to stray off-topic, but wasn't Stewart known to prefer quick-handling cars? The T260 must have been quick to the point of unpredictability.

Edited by 10kDA, 09 March 2024 - 15:07.

[PCC]

 

Much of this is well known, but according to Eric Broadley, the car had another in-built fault that was entirely down to JYS. At the eleventh hour, a day or two before the car's first scheduled track test, he flatly refused to drive anything with inboard front brakes, which were part of the car's original design. He was still badly affected by Jochen Rindt's recent death, though some dispute that a snapped driveshaft was in fact to blame for that.

Thanks for your recollections and insights, Kayemod. I recall that story about Jackie's refusal to drive the car with inboard brakes - might have been in something by Pete Lyons, or it might have been in one of your posts!

 

One thing confuses me, though: if I recall correctly, the Tyrrell 006 had inboard front brakes. Yet Jackie drove that willingly, and quite handily. Do you know what changed his mind about driving a car with inboard brakes? Was it just his confidence in Tyrrell as a constructor (although Lola was hardly sloppy)?

Edited by PCC, 09 March 2024 - 15:59.

[kayemod]

Thanks for your recollections and insights, Kayemod. I recall that story about Jackie's refusal to drive the car with inboard brakes - might have been in something by Pete Lyons, or it might have been in one of your posts!

 

One thing confuses me, though: if I recall correctly, the Tyrrell 006 had inboard front brakes. Yet Jackie drove that willingly, and quite handily. Do you know what changed his mind about driving a car with inboard brakes? Was it just his confidence in Tyrrell as a constructor (although Lola was hardly sloppy)?

 

Maybe Jackie just had more faith in Derek Gardner's work as a car designer than he had in Eric Broadley's, perhaps also too many drivers he knew had the famous "Lola limp". JYS has often spoken on the subject of friends and colleagues' deaths and injuries, they clearly affected him deeply, and although Jochen Rindt's demise would have been still fresh in his memory, I've always believed that his 72's broken driveshaft was crash damage rather than the initial cause. On the original subject of this thread, not many drivers have been killed or injured in John Barrnard's cars.

[chr1s]

 I've always believed that his 72's broken driveshaft was crash damage rather than the initial cause. 

A belief which was shared by Peter Warr if I recall.  He maintained it was a combination of no rear wing, a tall top gear and Monza's predominantly right handers not allowing the right front to be up to temperature at the point of the first heavy braking zone on the circuit, at which point the car tuned sharp left. 

[MartLgn]

I always find it ironic that JB introduced the first moulded carbon chassis into F1 and then used basically the same basic design for 6 seasons and then went to Ferrari and penned the 639 and 640!

[chr1s]

Iirc the Guinness book listed a 4 second pitstop in the 1976 Indy 500 as the fastest ever pitstop for many years, which made me wonder what terms of reference it was using.

Iirc that was just a splash and dash, no tyres were changed so it may have been correct? 

[blackmme]

I always find it ironic that JB introduced the first moulded carbon chassis into F1 and then used basically the same basic design for 6 seasons and then went to Ferrari and penned the 639 and 640!

I’m not sure why that’s ironic, it’s testimony to the soundness of JB’s original thinking and application of theory into sound engineering practice.  The move to Ferrari coincided with a large upcoming rule change and therefore JB went to back to first principles again and created the next step forward that very quickly became the only way forward.

 

Regards Mike

Edited by blackmme, 12 March 2024 - 05:47.