20 replies to this topic

[JonnyA]

Does anyone know why the Lotus 38, so dominant when Clark won the Indy 500 with it in 1965, became such a handful to drive in 1966, causing Clark to spin twice? Was it due to new tyre compounds, having to cope with more power, maybe some small but ill-judged design changes? Or just that Jim was having to push harder as everyone else was going faster?

 

[Michael Ferner]

It was no longer green!!  

 

 

Or, maybe, the additional weight of the 'Spinning Takes Practice' paint job upsetting the handling?

[Porsche718]

I'm definitely not a Lotus or Indy speciallist, but two things of interest.

 

The 1965 car, chassis 38/1, had the offset suspension which the car was designed for, and most 38s had. But the 1966 car, 38/4, did not. It was one of the few built with "normal" symmetrical suspension.

 

The second thing to note is that immediately after Indy in 1966 it was sold to A J Foyt and the following week the suspension collapsed during practice at Milwaukee.

 

Perhaps there was undetected problems that caused some erratic handling  issues for Clark, and the collapse for Foyt?

[Collombin]

But the 1966 car, 38/4, did not. It was one of the few built with "normal" symmetrical suspension

Are you sure that wasn't a later change?

I will refrain from throwing my asymmetrical 1/18 Carousel model at the wall just yet.

Edit - just found a very helpful mid-spin photo, it was definitely asymmetrical in the race.

Edited by Collombin, 04 April 2024 - 10:53.

[Porsche718]

You're right.

 

Just found the same photo. So chassis history must be incorrect for 38/4.

 

Cheers

 

Steve W

[Michael Ferner]

Joking aside, perhaps Lotus was not really 'on the ball' after abandoning the Repco project (late in the day? Not really sure when the decision was taken to race the old car). I think practice was also curtailed by rain quite a lot, so maybe they just didn't get the car dialled in sufficiently.

[Collombin]

Just found the same photo. So chassis history must be incorrect for 38/4

Or maybe not? Andrew Ferguson's book says that 38/4 was the car used in the Swiss hillclimbs, so maybe it was built in symmetrical form originally.

Re Indy 1966, he mentions that they suffered understeer from the beginning of practice, possibly due to lack of time (due to the BRM episode?) to test the new lower profile Firestone tyres plus the fact that new regulations made the car 100lbs heavier.

[JonnyA]

This is all very interesting, thank you. Can anyone expand on the references to Repco and BRM?

[Collombin]

The original plan for 1966 was to run a 4.2 litre version of the BRM H16 engine in a Lotus 42.

[Glengavel]

This is all very interesting, thank you. Can anyone expand on the references to Repco and BRM?

 

Lotus had intended to use a 4.2 litre version of the BRM H16 in 1966, with even less success than the F1 engine.

 

https://www.oldracin...s.com/lotus/42/

[Allen Brown]

Michael meant BRM, not Repco.  The original idea was that the 1966 Lotus 42 would use an Indy version of the BRM H16 engine but it was late and hopelessly overweight.  There is something about the project here: https://www.oldracin...s.com/lotus/42/

 

So Lotus had to use old Lotus 38s at Indy in 1966.  

 

Chassis 38/4 was originally built with symmetrical suspension presumably because it was going to be used on road courses at first.  It was used by Jim Clark at St Ursanne and Ollon-Villars in August 1965.  It would have been converted to asymmetric suspension for the 1966 USAC season.  

[Michael Ferner]

Michael meant BRM, not Repco.  

 

*cough* Harumph! Egad! Well, obviously so...           

[Pullman99]

Coincidentally I came across an item from the BBC children's programme "Blue Peter" yesterday that features the Lotus 38 and the then co-presenter of the programme Christopher Trace.   See link below.    He and Valerie Singleton then take turns at driving the Lotus simulator from Brands Hatch.   The archive link is dated as having been shown on Monday 31st January 1966 but I remember seeing this item when originally broadcast and have always believed it to have been shown fairly soon after the 1965 Indianapolis 500.  Christopher Trace's comments would seem to support that suggestion as the story would have been less relevant a half-year later.

 

Which begs the question as to which car this is.   It is clearly an offset suspension car and the livery and decals seem to be identical to 38/1.   Trace describes it as the Indy 500 winner but I had always assumed that Ford took delivery of the car immediately after the race and that it basically stayed in the USA until its later arrival in the UK as part of its restoration programme and its Goodwood appearances.

 

Did Ford bring it to the UK in 1965 / 66 and, if so, is this actually 38/1 or one that has been with Lotus and then finished to represent the winning car?

 

Comments welcome!   This is a curious aspect of the Lotus Indianapolis saga that has always intrigued me.

 

https://www.bbc.co.u...mulator/z7qh7nb

 

BTW.  Blue Peter, along with other children's programmes of the day, clearly assumed a high level of technical awareness from its viewers.   Not sure you'd be able to do that nowadays...

[Collombin]

38/4 is apparently the one that was at the London Olympia racing car show in January 1966, so it would seem the most likely candidate.

[Pullman99]

38/4 is apparently the one that was at the London Olympia racing car show in January 1966, so it would seem the most likely candidate.

That's my conclusion too as it has also been reported as having been brought back to the UK for work by Team Lotus and was also (I think) toured by Ford as the winning car having been repainted to represent #82.   Mystery, presumably, solved and that would explain the broadcast date of 31st January 1966.  I'm just slightly amazed that this clip survives given previous BBC policy at the time of discarding almost everything else.

 

Now, I think that Tomorrow's World had a piece on the Lotus 56 testing at Hethel in 1968...

[Ray Bell]

I think we established that this one...

 

Hall of Fame. On display at Indianapolis in 2012 - is this the winning car or a ring-in?

 

...isn't what it purports to be.

 

But it's one of the line, so it can decorate the thread.

[Collombin]

What does it purport to be? It's dressed as 34/3 and I thought that's what it was, so a winning car alright - just not at Indy!

[Rupertlt1]

Whataboutery: The car in the Ford Museum, Dearborn, Michigan?

 

RGDS RLT

[Ray Bell]

That would be this one...

 

[Bloggsworth]

I think we established that this one...

 

Hall of Fame. On display at Indianapolis in 2012 - is this the winning car or a ring-in?

 

...isn't what it purports to be.

 

But it's one of the line, so it can decorate the thread.

This is the Lotus 34, the one wot I worked on in '64.

 

IIRC the transition from tread to sidewall was much sharper on the Firestone tyres than the Dunlop - Could this perhaps have contributed to the handling problem?

Edited by Bloggsworth, 05 April 2024 - 18:14.

[Porsche718]

 

IIRC the transition from tread to sidewall was much sharper on the Firestone tyres than the Dunlop - Could this perhaps have contributed to the handling problem?

 

Could the difference in "sharpness" where tread transitions to sidewall be because of a change from belted-bias sidewall to cross-ply?