Jump to content


Photo

The Interscope project


  • Please log in to reply
52 replies to this topic

#1 McRonalds

McRonalds
  • Member

  • 444 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 21 January 2002 - 21:57

Again an Indy question: a car that never made it to the grid (or even the speedway) was the Interscope-Porsche from 1980.

There are different opinions whether that car had a chance at the speedway or not - but I heard there had been problems with the USAC-rules, that suddenly were changed in 1980 - and Porsche retired. Of course driver 'Danny-on-the-gas' Ongais was no bad choice at that time, the Parnelli-chassis looks good, and 4 cars and 10 engines (as far as I know) made sure that Porsche was serious about their try.

I wonder if that car (with or without change of the USAC-rules) had a chance at Indy. Difficult question for it never appeared there... any specialists out there with more info?

Posted Image

Publicity photo with Danny Ongais - nice car anyway!

Advertisement

#2 karlcars

karlcars
  • Member

  • 666 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 21 January 2002 - 22:32

I hate to be tantalizing on this one...but...all will be revealed in the update of my Porsche history, which will be published in 2003.

Let's just say briefly that USAC hit the six-cylinder Porsche with the same lower boost that was allowed the Cosworth V-8, instead of a boost midway between that and the higher boost pressure allowed the Offy four, as had originally been promised. Porsche concluded that it couldn't be competitive at the figure given it by USAC and withdrew its engines from Interscope. The interesting part concerns the experts that USAC sent to Stuttgart to assess Porsche's engine. One of them was AJ Foyt's engine guy! The program also had an interesting life after the Indy withdrawal that hasn't been mentioned so far.

The chassis shown was not bad but it was really only a cobbled-up test chassis.

The further interest in this project is that it provided the basic engine for the Porsche 936 that won at Le Mans in 1981 and also the engine for the fabulously successful Porsche 956. Porsche doesn't let much go to waste.

#3 Rainer Nyberg

Rainer Nyberg
  • Member

  • 1,768 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 22 January 2002 - 00:39

The '81 and '82 'Batmobiles' from Interscope were extremely pleasing cars but with Cosworth V8 as the Interscope Parnelli's also got.

Does anyone has more on these early '80s Interscopes?

Posted Image

#4 McRonalds

McRonalds
  • Member

  • 444 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 22 January 2002 - 10:47

Is that Ted Field the Interscope Records mogul? Well, the Logo on the cars and on the records seem the same. I really would like to hear more about him and his team.

Interscope ran cars in all kinds of series... (I remember his LeMans entries - most of them together with the German Kremer team, I'm not so common with US-series) and to me they are still the best looking 'black cars' in history (even better than the JPS) :)

Here's a 935 Porsche with the unusual #0...
Posted Image

...or a Lola T600, again with the #0
Posted Image

#5 fines

fines
  • Member

  • 9,647 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 22 January 2002 - 19:49

The first Indy picture is a regular Parnelli VPJ6B chassis, with the Porsche engine stuffed into it. As mentioned, it was only a test-hack, never meant to be raced. The intended race car was the Interscope, built by Ted Field, and later raced with a Cossie, seen in the second Indy picture.

Part of the problem was the impending USAC/CART split, which surely aggravated the problems Porsche had with the USAC technicians...

#6 bobbo

bobbo
  • Member

  • 841 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 22 January 2002 - 20:26

An earlier VERY unofficial Porsche (powered) entry at Indy was the Huffaker-Porsche 2 "Twin Engine" ( TWIN engine!??!?!?!?) driven by Bill Cheesebourg in 1966. Was DNQ,no surprise, must have been a real b***h to set up, tune and drive!! I don't even want to think about tweaking or maintaining the bugger! IRC, it was shown earlier in a thread of Ugly Cars.

Here's a pic:

http://www.motorraci...dy66/indy66.htm

Then scroll down to the entry, click on it.

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Bobbo

#7 Hitch

Hitch
  • Member

  • 117 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 22 January 2002 - 21:37

This is what Jurgen Schwartz wrote in an old Christopherus (the German Porsche Mag) about Porsche first Indy-try. A lot of hard work....

Porsche had been toying with the idea of having a go at the Indy since the mid-1970s. The Stuttgart sports car company had been winning trophies everywhere: in Formula 1 events, in the Le Mans 24 Hour Race and the Monte Carlo Rally. But the Indy was the big one, with its trophy which is so massive and heavy that a grown man can barely carry it, especially after driving 500 miles in a circle at an average speed of 320 km/h.

In 1977 the company's interest in the Indy began to take on a tangible form: the first plans were drawn up for a new engine based on the turbocharged flat-six unit. Initially, project leader Helmut Flegl and engine designer Valentin Schaeffer maintained a discreet silence about their intentions. Flegl had already earned himself something of a reputation in racing circles: it was he who had masterminded Porsche's assault on the CanAm sports car championship from 1971 to 1973. The company had won the title twice, but its participation in the series had ended with a major controversy: its obvious technical superiority over its American rivals had led the organizers to change the rules, outlawing the turbocharger which had powered the Porsche cars to victory. Thereupon Porsche withdrew from the series, whose attraction for the public and the media subsequently waned.

Hence Porsche already enjoyed a certain notoriety in the USA. When the company announced in December 1979 that it was going to take part in the Indianapolis 500 Miles Race the following year, its American competitors grew somewhat resentful, remembering the humiliations of the past in the CanAm series. Nobody said it in so many words, but the general fear was that the Germans were going to come over and mount a Blitzkrieg Operation to win the American race. The pre-war victories of Mercedes and Auto-Union may also have contributed to this anti-German mood.

However, Porsche's first Indy project was a relatively low-key affair. The thrifty Swabians had invested a mere two million dollars in the development phase - sum roughly equal to the prize money which Porsche cöuld expect to receive if it won the annual race. Two million dollars was not enough to build a complete car. Anticipating the successful Formula 1 partnership between TAG and McLaren a few years later, Porsche decided to team up with an experienced firm from the US scene. When the car was revealed to the public gaze for the first time at press conferences in Stuttgart and New York, the Porsche name was seen to be modestly stenciled below the windshield at the front of the cockpit. On the flanks of the car, in large letters, was the name Interscope.

The Interscope company was owned by a bearded and bespectacled 27-year-old whose appearance successfully disguised the fact that he was the wealthy heir to a chain of successful department stores. The Interscope racing team was Ted Field's spare-time hobby, which he pursued with exceptional zeal and devotion: his cars had taken part in a number of serious races, mainly in the IMSA series. In Jim Chapman he had hired one of the most experienced team chiefs in the Indy circus. And the chassis on which the Porsche engine was to be mounted had been desijzned bv Roman Slobodynskj, also a name to be reckoned with in the racing world.

Interscope and Porsche had already worked together on the American IMSA sports car series. In January 1979, for example, an Interscope Porsche had won the Daytona 24 Hours Race in Florida, the American equivalent of the Le Mans 24 Hours Race. In addition to Jim Chapman himself, the Le Mans winner Hurley Haywood and the 37-year-old Hawaiian Danny Ongais had taken it in turns to pilot the black Porsche 935, which at the express wish of the team owner Ted Field had been given the unusual number 0. lt was Ongais to whom most of the credit was due for the winning Porsche's lead of no less than 307 Kilometers over its nearest rival in the memorable Daytona Race.

At that time, 'Danny-on-the-gas' seemed a singularly appropriate nickname for the Hawaiian driver. He seldom spoke, letting his en-gine and accelerator do the talking for him. His opponents considered him the boldest and bravest member of the racing brotherhood. For twelve years he had been competing in the USAC championship, for which the 500 miles of the Indy are merely one of 15 events. But his success on that May weekend counted for more than his performance over the entire year. Ongais was under contract to Interscope, and in Porsche's view he was the right man for the j ob of making the initial assault on the Indy.

The first Porsche engine which was delivered to Interscope's Santa Ana headquarters in California was mounted on an old Parnelli chassis. The new car in which the engine was to be housed would not be ready until the start of the season in 1980. Since the Parnelli shell had previously been powered by an eight-cylinder Cosworth engine, the Interscope engineers had to build a sub-frame for the engine: unlike the "Cossie", the six-cylinder Porsche engine, which was similar to the unit used in the company's production cars, could not be fitted in the monocoque.

The Porsche engine was a tried and tested piece of automotive engineering which continues to perform sterling service on the roads in the 911 and 959 sports cars. The 935 and 936 had been successfully powered to victory in World Sports Car Championship events by the improved version of the 930 turbo, an engine which is still used today in the Porsche 962. Manfred Jantke, who at that time was Porsche's racing manager, described the 1979 Indy unit as "practically the last word in the development of our classic six-cylinder engine". With a displacement of 2,649.65 cc, the turbocharged engine was to deliver over 600 bhp. In accordance with the Indy rules, it had to use methanol instead of European high-octane gasoline.

Even at that time there was already a fuel limit for the Indy: the Maximum allowance was 1050 liters for the 500 miles. Long before the Formula 1 superstars began having to weave from one side of the track to the other in order to shake the last drop of fuel into the combustion chambers, the Indianapolis crowd had grown accustomed to the sight of cars grinding to a halt for lack of fuel.

With its aluminum block, the Porsche engine would have been one of the lightest on the circuit in Indianapolis. And it featured one particular detail which seemed to offer a considerable advantage over the cars of the Stuttgart company's more established rilvals: Cosworth and Foyt, with their eight-cylind.er engines and Offenhauser, with its four-cylinder unit. Porsche had come up with a new combined cooling system, using air, but dispensing with a fan, for the cylinders, and water for the cylinder heads. This system, albeit with a fan, had already been tested in World Sports Car Championship events and had been proved to be viable.

Hence, with its four-valve engine, the car seemed to offer solid grounds for optimism on the part of its constructors, as they pre@ared to embark on their adventure in the New World. "Indianapolis is a new and exciting challenge for us," racing manager Manfred Jantke declared, but added, on a more cautious note, "We are not coming to Indianapolis with expectations of instant victory." Instead, he emphasized the long-term nature of the Indy undertaking: "The project is intended to run for more than a single year. We are sure to need a good deal of time to catch up with our rivals - but with luck, perhaps we can even manage to beat them."

The stage seemed set for a successful attempt to compete at Indianapolis - only the timing of the venture was wrong. At the time of Porsche's secret preparations for the Indianapolis event, the American racing scene was skidding into a profound crisis. Since 1972, the USAC Championship series had been run on a stable set of rules. This era came to an end in 1977, when the participating teams founded a society to defend their interests against the all-powerful United States Automobile Club from which the USAC series took its name. The new group, which called itself CART, was modeled on the Formula 1 FOCA association, headed by the famous Bernie Ecclestone. His CART counterpart was the Businessman and racing equipe owner Roger Penske, with whom Porsche had successfully cooperated in the past. At the beginning of the 1970s, he had organized ]Porsche's participation in the CanAm series; in subsequent years he had become one of the most prominent team managers in the USAC Championship.

In 1979 CART - the acronym stands for Championship Auto Racing Teams - staged a rebellion. Under Penske's leadership the best teams organized a championship series of their own, in direct competition with the traditional USAC Championship. Only one member of the elite corps of US racing drivers remained loyal to the USAC - Anthony Joseph Foyt, who at that point had already won the In dy four times.

That same year, the Indianapolis event was the subject of a court case, when the USAC made an unsuccessful attempt to bar the rene-gade CART teams from the race, which was eventually won by - of all people - Penske's top driver Rick Mears. At the end of the year, Mears also became the first winner of the CART title. At the same time it became clear to all concerned that there was no room for two similar racing series in the USA. The spectators were staying at home, TV companies were canceling contracts, prize monies were dwindling, and the tire company Goodyear declared that it was only prepared to sponsor one championship. In view of all these factors, talks were initiated in the winter of 1979/80 with the aim of reuniting the two hostile factions. Thus the preparations for the premiere of the Interscope Porsche took place in a climate of extreme uncertainty. The rules governing what was allowed and what was banned in the construction of Indy cars had ceased to apply, and for several months the USAC and CART were unable to agree on a new set of regulations. In this muddled Situation, Porsche decided to stick by the traditional USAC rules. Jo Hoppen, who at that time was the company's US racing coordinator, explained: "We don't want to get involved in political controversy. We are here to compete at Indianapolis.

The car is built according to the Indianapolis rules, which means the rules of the USAC." In retrospect, Porsche's racing manager Manfred Jantke described how the company had been extremely worried about the Konfusion surrounding the rules: "However, we hoped that the two groups would reunite. And we had to decide one way or the other."

The uncertainty of that winter led to bizarre consequences. While the car was being tested on t he racing circuit in Ontario, the members of the Interscope Porsche crew noticed that helicopters kept appearing in the sky, hovering over the scene for several minutes at a time. This mystery was never conclusively solved, but everybody iavolved was certain that Porsche's anxious rivals were spying on the company in an effort to find out what sort of lap times Danny Ongais was clocking up with the new car.

Porsche had to put up with no end of prying and interference. In February 1980 the company received a highly unusual request from the USAC to allow an inspection committee to observe the testing of the Indy engine at Weissach. When the committee arrived, it was found to include one Howard Giert - an engineer with the rival engine manufacturer Foyt. However, the engine which these gentlemen saw at Weissach was unlikely to strike fear into the hearts of Porsche's American rivals: with a boost pressure of 0.8 bars, in accordance with the USAC rules, it delivered 574 bhp - a less than spectacular figure. In the preceding years, the USAC had instituted a handicapping system, stipulating different maximum boost pressures for the various engine sizes. The limit for eight-cylinder engines was 0.6 bars, for cars with six cylinders it was 0.8 bars, and for four-cylinder engines just over 1 bar. This rule was one of the controversial issues in the "peace talks" between the USAC and CART.

When the two rival bodies finally reached an agreement in March 1980, Porsche suddenly found its path to the Indy blocked by an insuperable obstacle. The old USAC rules had been changed: the boost pressure limit for cars with six-cylinder engines had been set at 0.6 bars, the same as for eight-cylinder engines. This new limit meant that Porsche would be giving away 80 bhp to its nearest rivals - a handicap which, nine weeks before the race, was impossible to overcome. To change the compression of the engine and develop a new fuel injection system and turbocharger would have taken four to six months.

This was the biggest setback caused by external factors which Porsche had faced in thirty years of competition. "The height of unfairness," Manfred Jantke protested: "The biggest disappointment I have ever experienced in motor sport." For several weeks Jantke attempted to negotiate with USAC and CART representatives, but his efforts were in vain. Thereupon the Porsche executive board took what was described in the official communique as "a grave and disappointing decision for the company." Porsche withdrew from the Indy before a single training lap had been driven. The ten engines and four cars which had been built to date were useless, fit only for a museum.

Even legal redress was out of the question. There would have been little point in suing the USAC for damages, since the club was longer responsible for the race, and Porsche's lawyers found themselves unable to put a case together. Driving an Interscope Cosworth, Danny Ongais eventually came seventh in what was one of the slowest races in the history of the Indy. Johnny Rutherford was the winner, with the low average speed of 230 km/h, because the race was repeatedly interrupted by accidents: for lap after lap the, drivers had to crawl round the circuit without being allowed to improve their position.

Eight years had elapsed since Porsche's first attempt at the Indy, when the company decided in 1987 that the time was ripe for a further assault. In the meantime, a number of things had changed. The CART had established itself as the organizer of the Indy and, following the unfortunate events of 1980, had done a highly professional job of managing the race and restoring its former luster. The rules had been stabilized, and Porsche had every reason to hope that, this time, it would not be subject to acts of official chicanery but would instead be welcomed into the fold of Indy competitors. The company had also enlisted the services of Al Holbert, a universally respected sporting diplomat who knew the American racing scene like the back of his hand. One former member of the 1980 team was missing when Porsche made its second attempt on the Indy: in 1982 Danny Ongais had suffered severe head injuries in an accident at Indianapolis and was no longer available to drive the new Porsche. Hence the driver question was once more wide open.

#8 McRonalds

McRonalds
  • Member

  • 444 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 22 January 2002 - 22:07

What a giant story!!!!!! I think I'll read it tomorrow. Thanks Hitch :) :) :) :)

#9 Hitch

Hitch
  • Member

  • 117 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 22 January 2002 - 22:32

An extra: an (useless!) Porsche-ad from 1980 :up: :up:

Posted Image

#10 Mike Argetsinger

Mike Argetsinger
  • Member

  • 948 posts
  • Joined: April 00

Posted 23 January 2002 - 02:11

The Jurgen Schwartz article posted above is mildly interesting but riddled with errors and misrepresentations. And I am not just referring to the chauvinistic and condescending tone (at which, of course, we shouldn't be surprised - considering who published it).

Just one example is the last paragraph. Schwartz's entire premise is blown away when we understand that CART was not (as Schwartz maintains) the organizer - nor even the sanctioning body - of the Indianapolis 500. Not in 1987 or at any date before or since. And this business about "restoring its former luster." Absolutely ridiculous.

#11 McRonalds

McRonalds
  • Member

  • 444 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 23 January 2002 - 10:40

Originally posted by Mike Argetsinger
The Jurgen Schwartz article posted above is mildly interesting but riddled with errors and misrepresentations. And I am not just referring to the chauvinistic and condescending tone (at which, of course, we shouldn't be surprised - considering who published it).

Just one example is the last paragraph. Schwartz's entire premise is blown away when we understand that CART was not (as Schwartz maintains) the organizer - nor even the sanctioning body - of the Indianapolis 500. Not in 1987 or at any date before or since. And this business about "restoring its former luster." Absolutely ridiculous.


Mike, CHRISTOPHERUS is the German Porsche-mag for Porsche customers. Never read one copy (for I never owned a Porsche!) - but I knew it and can't believe they write the untruth (or the half-truth?!). But I think it's no wonder that they want to gloss over a little bit when they realized that the car had no real chance at Indy. But who know... :rolleyes:

#12 McRonalds

McRonalds
  • Member

  • 444 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 23 January 2002 - 11:55

Originally posted by fines
The first Indy picture is a regular Parnelli VPJ6B chassis, with the Porsche engine stuffed into it. As mentioned, it was only a test-hack, never meant to be raced. The intended race car was the Interscope, built by Ted Field, and later raced with a Cossie, seen in the second Indy picture.


I remember Danny Ongais had a huge crash with that car in '81 - but I can't remember why. I hope it was no misconstruction - for the car really looked phantastic.

Posted Image
Picture from 8w.

#13 cabianca

cabianca
  • Member

  • 712 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 23 January 2002 - 22:18

To add to the inaccuracies, Schwartz describes Field as the heir to a department store fortune. It is true that the basis of the Field family wealth was the Marshall Field department store chain, but the family had sold it generations before Ted Field appeared on the scene. By the time Teddy came along, they were simply big time investors. And to answere an earlier question, Field was the founder of Interscope records. I think he may have sold his interest lately, because of criticism of the violent lyrics on the "rap" records the company produced.

#14 cabianca

cabianca
  • Member

  • 712 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 23 January 2002 - 22:23

Here's the latest on Ted Field. Notice there is no mention of Marshall Field, the department store.

ARTISTdirect, Inc. today announced that its stockholders have approved definitive agreements with veteran entertainment executive Ted Field to become Chairman & CEO of ARTISTdirect and form a new record label with ARTISTdirect.

"I am excited to be joining ARTISTdirect as we position the Company to participate more fully in the many opportunities we see in the music industry," said Mr. Field. "I join a team that combines pioneering efforts in online music with tremendous depth of experience in traditional music disciplines. Together, we hope to fully exploit the possibilities of an integrated approach to the creation and distribution of music."

From 1990 to 2001, Mr. Field served as co-Chairman of Interscope Records, which was one of the most successful record labels of the 1990s, with such acts as Tupac Shakur, Nine Inch Nails, Dr. Dre, No Doubt, Snoop Doggy Dogg, Limp Bizkit, and Eminem. As Chairman and CEO of Radar Pictures, Inc., a film production company and successor to Interscope Communications, which he founded in 1979, he also has produced a number of successful films, including "Runaway Bride," "Mr. Holland's Opus" and "The Hand That Rocks the Cradle." Until 1984, Mr. Field was co-owner of Field Enterprises, a media conglomerate that owned numerous television stations, the Chicago Sun-Times newspaper and Cabot, Cabot and Forbes, a large real estate company.

ARTISTdirect Records, the co-venture between ARTISTdirect and Mr. Field, recently announced that NAAM Brigade, through a venture with Tuff Break Entertainment, would be the label's first artist. The Philadelphia-based trio are currently in a Los Angeles recording studio with producers Big Demme and Stormy Day to record their debut album due out early in 2002.

"

#15 Gerr

Gerr
  • Member

  • 698 posts
  • Joined: April 00

Posted 24 January 2002 - 03:54

The attitude of Porsche in this matter has always bugged me. I have never understood how they expected to fit that w i d e engine into any Indycar chassis in the age of big-time ground-effects. My feeling is that the "boost" controversy gave Porsche/Helmut Flegl an excuse to exit from a potentially embarrassing situation. They should have been grateful for it and more gracious about it.
Later on,they did not use a boxer engine in the TAG/McLaren project or in the later CART/Indy project which supports my opinion(at least,I think so). The best quote in the Jurgun Schwartz article is by Manfred Jantke "The project is intended to run for more than a single year. We are sure to need a good deal of time to catch up with our rivals-but with luck,perhaps we can manage to beat them."
Well,they backed out at the first chance they got. ...what does that tell you.

#16 McRonalds

McRonalds
  • Member

  • 444 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 24 January 2002 - 11:56

Porsche had a similar dilemma in 1991 when their V12 F1 engine turned out to be a misconstruction. Much blame was given to Arrows at that time. :evil:

#17 fines

fines
  • Member

  • 9,647 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 24 January 2002 - 20:14

The Schwartz arcticle is crap. About Jantke, he disqualified himself with his recent commentary job on German Eurosport on CART races. Absolutely stinking! Just an example, for years he called Parnelli's son "P. G. Jones", no matter how often ESPN (the "mother" broadcaster) would list him correctly in the results or address him in interviews as "P. J." - Horrible!

#18 Hitch

Hitch
  • Member

  • 117 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 24 January 2002 - 20:27

Originally posted by McRonalds
Porsche had a similar dilemma in 1991 when their V12 F1 engine turned out to be a misconstruction. Much blame was given to Arrows at that time. :evil:


aaah... that was really a bad story with Arrows-Porsche. Nearly everybody exspected marvelous things from Porsche in '91, partly because they licked their rivals with their famous TAG engine in 84, 85, 86. I think it was only a very good package then, Porsche was no better than BMW, Honda, Renault etc. The myth is misplaced... :wave:

#19 fines

fines
  • Member

  • 9,647 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 24 January 2002 - 21:19

OT, but I'd love to see the original CRL dates on the Porsche poster... :(

Advertisement

#20 Hitch

Hitch
  • Member

  • 117 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 24 January 2002 - 21:33

Originally posted by fines
OT, but I'd love to see the original CRL dates on the Porsche poster... :(


Fines, try this one...
www.vpracing.com/Poster_Archives/poster_archives.html

#21 fines

fines
  • Member

  • 9,647 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 24 January 2002 - 21:41

Sorry Hitch, but I can't make that out (is it my eyes... ???? :eek: )!

The first five dates seem to be the actual ones (except for Texas instead of Ontario), but then it looks like "Road Atlanta" and even "Talladega" :eek: :eek: :eek: in the second column!!! Could this be true???

#22 Hitch

Hitch
  • Member

  • 117 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 24 January 2002 - 21:50

You're right - that's nonsense. The first race in '80 was at Ontario - not in Texas. And the next one (under the Indy 500) looks like the Rex Mays?!?!?!?

But you're able to order a print (or a reprint?!) of that poster on that homepage I gave you the link for.

The whole Porsche-Indy project is getting more and more mysterious :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

#23 Hitch

Hitch
  • Member

  • 117 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 24 January 2002 - 21:57

...but maybe there was only a change of events?! I think we'll have to ask someone who knows better... :rolleyes:

#24 karlcars

karlcars
  • Member

  • 666 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 27 January 2002 - 19:41

I think it's fair to say that the idea of using the flat six in an Indy car came up just before ground effects became such a big deal at Indy, so we shouldn't be too tough on Porsche in that respect. The first serious ground-effect car to race at Indy was the Barnard-designed Chaparral 2K of 1979.

The chassis meant to take the Porsche six was the exotic-looking one that was later raced with a Cosworth V-8, the car in which Ongais crashed. This was designed by Roman Slobodynskyj, who had done such good work for AAR. Porsche, it must be said, was not too hot on this design. They felt that they never really established a good working relationship with Interscope.

Don't be too hard on Manfred Jantke. He was often undermined by his management. In the later period -- just before the Arrows episode -- he left Porsche for just this reason.

#25 fines

fines
  • Member

  • 9,647 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 01 February 2002 - 18:42

Originally posted by Hitch
You're right - that's nonsense. The first race in '80 was at Ontario - not in Texas. And the next one (under the Indy 500) looks like the Rex Mays?!?!?!?

It's the Rex Mays Memorial Race, of course. I have all the actual dates, thankyouverymuch, I was just interested in that schedule which seemed to be the original CRL schedule. I think I have that one as well, buried in one of my magazines, I was just too lazy to search for it [read: hoping someone would jump in here with the information]. And I don't think they actually planned to race at Talladega, but just the thought of it... I mean, fascinating - gorgeous - thrilling - exquisite - mind-boggling - far out - what else? :lol:

#26 fines

fines
  • Member

  • 9,647 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 01 February 2002 - 18:46

Re Manfred Jantke: Just be gracious you never had to listen to the Eurosport CART broadcasts! It makes you wonder how such a stupid person ever got such a decent job (I mean the Porsche job, not the Eurosport commentary! The latter is constantly given to the most inept person imaginable...) :mad: :evil: :vomit: :puke: :&%**!§: :rolleyes:

#27 Rainer Nyberg

Rainer Nyberg
  • Member

  • 1,768 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 13 June 2002 - 16:59

Found this interesting shot of the 1980 Porsche powered car

Posted Image

#28 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 11,943 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 13 June 2002 - 17:25

When the TAG Turbo engine project was under initial development I saw quite a lot of John Barnard, McLaren's chief engineer and previously of course designer of the Chaparral 2K. Never a shrinking violet, JB was - and I believe still is - pretty disenchanted with Jim Hall having taken the credit for the 2K without passing on sufficient of it, publicly, to the English designer. John was pretty outspoken too about how much he had to crack the whip over Porsche to make them produce an engine within the cross-sections he demanded for his MP4/2 McLaren. His regular bleat was "Bloody engine men try to design all engines to fit easily on the dyno rather than to fit effectively into a competitive car!".

When the 3.5-litre atmo V12 engine project reared its head for Arrows/Footwork it looked in effect like two TAG Turbo V6s in tandem ... and it was huge. The notion of such an engine was run past Gordon Murray - then at McLaren in JB's place - and at first sight he simply could not believe it: "As I kept on unfolding the drawing they had sent me I thought at first it must be an enlargement!".

Engines for late-period F1 and Indy became Porsche's least demonstration of expected excellence.

DCN

#29 karlcars

karlcars
  • Member

  • 666 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 13 June 2002 - 19:58

OOps! Doug, this is an area in which historians can cross swords.

The "true story" of all these projects will be in my updated 'Excellence' which will be published next year. Suffice it to say that the V-12 used by Arrows was indeed disastrous -- although the much-improved version was never given a chance to show what it could do.

As for the Indy V-8, this did start out at a disadvantage but it gradually improved and was ready for a fresh challenge using Lola chassis when Porsche canned the program.

As for the Formula 1 V-6 and the vocal Mr Barnard, my book will explain the impact that your article written with his input had on the people in Stuttgart!

#30 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 11,943 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 13 June 2002 - 20:14

No question of crossing swords - 'cos a Brit will always win at that game - but in period Porsche contacts admitted to me that the TAG package size had been maintained largely by JB's intransigence, despite their having pressed him many many times to agree to ancillaries being moved outside his specified silhouette. Have stories been changed in the interim - while contemporary documentation told the story the author preferred? This has certainly been the case at BRM, Lotus and Ferrari - and I have absolutely no doubt the same will apply to Porsche memories, and paperwork. Indeed we have several times proved to them that their contemporary race records are in error...

DCN

#31 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 13,660 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 14 June 2002 - 16:32

Have been very interested in the Porsche Indyefforts myself over the years.
I must agree with the fact that use of the flat 6 made some sence back in '80. Ground effects had not taken over yet at Indy at the time when the project was worked on though it was coming.
And of course, there was hardly any factory effort going at Indy at the time. Thus: a superbly organised team effort and all Porche Power behind it, it may have worked.

I suppose all of that also `united` both USAC and CART to put Porsche off the track somehow. Don't forget Porsche's reputation of killing series by dominating them was there as well (Sportscars, Can-Am, Silhouettes...) How many Diehard Can Am fans ever forgave Porsche for ending the Bruce & Denny show?

Wingcar with flat 6 was difficult of course but hey, they made a pretty decent Gp C wingcar with that engine too!

I have had the privelege of attending Indy in 1990 and having seen the March-Porsche 90P from inches away, I still think that car to be one of the most innovative cars ever to appear at Indy, ever since wingcars ruled Indy, even if at Indy it wasn't very competive yet after all the chassis modifications needed after the last CART rule changes.
I don't believe it is fair to call that car and engine a failure. Who knows what might have happened if Porsche should have made customer engines available and the engine being used in Lola's that year. Because the 90P was truly hit by politics, very much inspired because Porsche was involved with it. As long as they didn't win too much they were welcome to be humbled by the chevy powered teams but it is still suprising to see how CART teams reacted when "the Ant-eater" started to come good in '89.
Porsche might have made errors with their late 80's Indy project, but they were also taken on very hard just because of being Porsche.

Curious to see what you will write about the Indy Porsche mr. Ludvigsen!


Sincerely,

Henri Greuter

#32 fines

fines
  • Member

  • 9,647 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 14 June 2002 - 20:13

Welcome here, Henri! It's great to have another published author in our midst... :)

I agree with most of what you said, although I think it needs to be added that most people at the time thought the March 90P was a jewel, hampered by its engine. Well, at least the March people thought so! :lol: As for some of the encouraging results, like Mid-Ohio '89, it was muttered that Porsche had found a way to circumvent the pop-off valve... Anyway, the bottom line is that Porsche decided to pull the plug - again! What does that tell you?

#33 Megatron

Megatron
  • Member

  • 3,688 posts
  • Joined: January 99

Posted 15 June 2002 - 12:09

The V6 was originally going to be put into a ground effects machine, but that never happened. The engine wasn't as powerfully as the BMW, and I don't think it was as fuel effecient as the Honda, but overall it was a very good medium of performance. Although late in life it began to suffer from unreliabilty and a growing defficit of power.

The flat six in the back of the 962 was good for a long while, but when machines with V angle engines came in such as Jaguar, Sauber, and Nissan, the 962 aged quite quickly. The 88 race was a race Porsche should have won (had they not ran it out of gas trying to get another lap out), but they were really doing it against the odds. After a unoffical factory style project for Joest in 1989 at Le Mans, the 962's days at the front were numbered. The cars were updated gradually, and some modified the original car almost beyond reconigntion, such as the dramatic carbon tubbed Richard Lyod or Dyson GTP versions.

Of course, from something out of a fairy tale, a thinly disguised factory, flat bottomed, slightly heavier 962 came out in 1994 to do battle with the old Group C cars and the no-show McLaren F1. The car, won in class and outright (shocking :rolleyes: ) after Eddie Irvine's gear leaver came off in his hands with but a few hours to go in the Toyota. Flat sixs also won in 1996 in the TWR WSC 95 loaned to Joest, as well as in 97, and finally, in 1998 the ultra expensive and revisded GT 1 took the victory after Toyota fell into problems.

The V12 that ran in 1991 in the Footwork was terrible, period. It made a wonderful noise, but it was complex and waaaaaaaay too heavy. At about 190 kg, it was far heavier than Honda or Ferrari's V12, and lightyears away from Ford's compact V8. It suffered from severe oil scavenging problems because of its complex layout for its drivetrain and camshafts. When the Arrows were quicker with a Judd-tuned DFR, it was the end of the Porsche F1 project.

The Indy car project from the late 80s was very promising. The original Porsche Indy car was pathectic. It was a spooky machine, and after Al Unser Sr washed his hands of the project, Al Holbert tested it briefly in practice in...(forgetting) before parking it. The March was much better, and Teo Fabi won in Mid-Ohio. After CART banned carbon tubs, the project went away.

About the engine that was to run in 1980, well what can I say? It was USAC. Their legacy is carried over into the IRL of today (you ain't using our chassis or engine formula).

#34 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 13,660 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 17 June 2002 - 09:06

First of all, thanks Michael for the warm welcome.
But author? That's too complimentary, I was a co-writer at best

About the rumor on the popoff valve, I have heard that one too but for some reason I doubt if that's true. Though many stated different, I don't believe that Porsche was that welcome within CART since they were a factory effort and the only true factory effort in CART. So if they had been cheating and cought redhanded, imagine the hurts that would have caused for them. Unless they were very sure that no-one would find out, I can't imagine Porsche daring to cheat.
I spoke Porsche boss Derek Walker at Indy in 1990 about the 90P and of course he was probably somewhat buyest in his statements. But no smoke without fire of course...
That centerturbo 90P was indeed a neat little jewel of a car, I don't think that there was any indycar built so low as that car, not even in later years before the IRL came into view. I am not entirely sure that the car would have worked all the time with the turbo in the middle but it was an ingenious, innovative design for sure. Whatever killed the concept, a pity that we never got the chance to see what the concept could have yielded.
It does remain one of my favorite Indycars of all time, simply because it was innovative in a period of time that cars became pretty much standard at Indy.

Yes, the 89P was a neat car too and surprisingly good, considering the bad cars March built in '88 and 87. I believe it was Alan Henry who made the remark about the 89P in his March book that it would have been interesting to see what the 89P could ahve done if it was fitted with a Chevy.
How March ever found the opportunity to produce that dreadful 90CA Alfa machine is still a mystery to me. Even a '87 Lola looked better than those 90CA contraptions.

Why Porsche withdrew from CART, I have my suspisions and thoughts about that but no approval to back up any of those.
That's why I can't help but being very curious about the updated Ludvigsen book about Porsche. Those Four Indycar types Porsche built must make some good copy on their own.


Henri Greuter

#35 McRonalds

McRonalds
  • Member

  • 444 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 17 June 2002 - 13:39

I thought the Interscope Thread was closed already - only to find out that the discussion is still alive. First of all thanks for all the comments. We recently discussed about the second Porsche Project in CART in a German Forum and I posted a picture of that radical car - or should I say radical car for CART rules. It's sad the car never should it's real potential. As far as I remember it was a tiny car (compared to other cars that raced at that time) built around two tiny drivers.

Posted Image

Here you can see some of the 'secrets' of the engine.

#36 LTC Mel Hull

LTC Mel Hull
  • New Member

  • 1 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 17 June 2002 - 14:13

McRonalds.

I was sitting in turn three at Indy and witnessed that crash, it was one of the worst hits I have ever seen. If I remember correctly, Ongais had been running near the front with Bobby Unser (enventual winner) and Mario Andretti (2nd place after protracted court case!), he went in to pit and stalled the engine trying to get going again, something that happens a lot and as he came out of the pits he really floored it (no pit speed limit back then). He was really moving down the back straight and entering turn three the car snapped turned and hit the wall almost at a 90 degree angle. It looked like a half-shaft snapped on the right rear and caused the immediate turn into the wall at full speed. Danny Ongais was my favorite driver and I loved the black Interscope cars, when I heard they were going to get a Porsche engine I was very happy feeling that they would win Indy, but as written by other people here it didn't happen. Too bad, having a Porsche as a winning engine would have been good for Indy internationally and there was no braver driver than Ongais.

#37 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 13,660 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 17 June 2002 - 14:45

To McRonalds,

Yep, that's a 90P. This must have been the nr 58 Backup car as I see what left on the pic of the number and that little piece of metal between turbo and engine. The other cars were 4 and 41 and I pictured them on two or three occasions and they didn't not have that piece of metal yet. Or must have got it after the second weekend of qualifications.

Neat shot of a unique car. has much better looks then the atmo IRL's ever will have.

Henri

#38 Rainer Nyberg

Rainer Nyberg
  • Member

  • 1,768 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 19 August 2002 - 03:40

Restoration by Gunnar Racing :

http://www.gunnarrac...02indy-0726.htm

Posted Image

#39 Gerr

Gerr
  • Member

  • 698 posts
  • Joined: April 00

Posted 03 December 2002 - 06:42

There was an article on this subject in the Sept 2002 "Porsche Panorama" ,written by Bill Oursler. Anyone interested can read it at this link.
http://962.com/histo...1022/pindex.htm
Seems that the cancellation of the Indy program came down to in-house politics at Porsche.

Advertisement

#40 Rainer Nyberg

Rainer Nyberg
  • Member

  • 1,768 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 03 December 2002 - 13:47

Gerr, thanks for the link.

More on Ted Field thks to http://www.hollywood...o/celeb/1674890
Seems he has been busy producing movies since he departed from the racing scene...

"An heir to one of America's most famous fortunes--that of the descendants of Marshall Field, department store magnate of Chicago--Ted Field has moved in other directions, forming Interscope Communications and Interscope Records , and also professionally racing cars and being vocally involved with liberal causes. Interscope, which Field founded in 1979 , is best recalled for its 1984 charmer and box office hit, "Revenge of the Nerds," which spawned three sequels, as well other box office hits such as "Three Men and A Baby" (1987), "Outrageous Fortune" (1987), and "Cocktail" (1988), all of which Field produced , and "Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure" (1989), which he executive produced. Much of Field's production work has been in tandem with Robert Cort, Interscope president since 1985. Field broke into production in 1977 with the children's series "Marlo and the Magic Movie Machine," which ran on CBS until 1981. It was not until the early 80s that he migrated west from his native Chicago, and began the career that would bring, besides the aforementioned "Revenge of the Nerds," lesser works such as "Turk 182!" (1985), with Timothy Hutton revenging his brothers, dissed by the fire department, "Collision Course" (1990), "Class Action" (1991), and, more recently, such critically-applauded works as "Mr. Holland's Opus" (1995), which starred Richard Dreyfuss as a music teacher who realizes he has made an impact, and "Roommates" (1995), with Peter Falk as a man who raises his grandson until he sure the grandson can manage on his own. In 1997, he produced "Tempting Fate," starring Kenneth Branagh. Field has also executive produced a host of other movies, among them "Bird on a Wire" (1990), starring Mel Gibson and Goldie Hawn, "Arachnophobia" (1990), with Jeff Daniel fighting human-munching spiders, "Paradise" (1991), with Elijah Wood saving the marriage of Melanie Griffith and Don Johnson, the scary "The Hand That Rocks the Cradle" (1992), and, more recently, a host of others from the big-budget Robin Williams vehicle "Jumanji" (1995) to the kid-oriented "Kazam" (1996) to flop prep school "Boys" (1996) to the edgy "Gridlock'd" (1997). Interscope has always been distributed by majors, usually Fox of Buena Vista (Disney), although Field has maintained his independence on all creative matters. The company has also produced for TV, beginning with "American Geisha" (CBS, 1986), a TV movie starring Mariette Hartley. Field was co-executive producer of "The Father Clement Story" (NBC, 1987), with Louis Gossett, Jr. as a priest who adopts a son. In 1987, he executive produced "Murder Ordained" (CBS), a miniseries about a local minister who takes up with a female parishioner leading to the murder of their spouses. Some of Field's TV work has been frothy, such as the 1989 NBC TV movie "My Boyfriend's Back," which told the story of the reunion of a one-hit 50s girl singing group, while other Interscope projects, such as the Emmy-winning "A Mother's Courage: The Mary Thomas Story" (NBC, 1989), have been more substantive. "Revenge of the Nerd" sequels have also been produced for TV. In 1990, Field started Interscope Records , which within four was worth more than $300 million and has such artists as Dr. Dre, Snoop Doggy Dogg, and Nine Inch Nails under contract. Snoop Doggy's arrest and increasing congressional and special interest group pressure put Field on the hot seat more than once, but Interscope Records persevered. Although Field has kept a low profile about his famous Chicago family, he forced the family linen be aired in public when, in 1983, his sale of the Chicago Sun Times to Rupert Murdoch caused the dissolution of the Family company and a public feud with his half-brother, Marshall Field V. "

#41 cabianca

cabianca
  • Member

  • 712 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 04 December 2002 - 03:13

It should be noted that, although Ted Field is often referred to as a Department Store heir, by the time Ted Field was born, the family no longer had an interest in the famous Marshal Field's Department Store. They had moved on to investments and the communications business including TV Stations.

#42 Gerr

Gerr
  • Member

  • 698 posts
  • Joined: April 00

Posted 26 February 2003 - 06:49

Ran across an interesting photo re: Indy Porsches in "CP & Autoweek" May 1/71. It has the caption
"Chassis designer Bob Dickson and Bruce Crower inspect the 4.5-liter Porsche engine destined for USAC Championship car racing in 1972."
"Crower, president of Crower Cams & Equipment Co., has purchased a new-factory dyno tested only-4.5-liter Porsche 917 engine and has started the preliminary stages of a year-long testing program. Bob Dickson, once with AJ Foyt's team, and Bob Bubenik, considered by Crower as the top design and fabricator in the business, will prepare an all-new chassis and aerodynamic shell for the 1972 Indy project. The Chula Vista executive said it will cost him $60,000."

So, what happened ?

#43 Rainer Nyberg

Rainer Nyberg
  • Member

  • 1,768 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 26 February 2003 - 18:48

The Porsche inspired Crower flat-8 appeared at Indianapolis in 1977. Bruce Crower and Bob Bubenik also received the SAE Award in 1977 for this effort. Bubenik did the design which incorporated cylinder heads from the Chevy Vega Cosworth. Those, not beeing designed for lay-down flat layout, created both cooling and lubrication problems. Oil scavenging from the heads were the problem.

The project seems to have died shortly afterwards.

Posted Image

#44 Gerr

Gerr
  • Member

  • 698 posts
  • Joined: April 00

Posted 16 November 2003 - 01:34

Curious to know what Karl Ludvigsen's updated Porsche history has to say about the Interscope project. Is there any mention of the Crower 917 engine Indy project?

I won't get my new and improved "Excellence Was Expected" until Christmas.

#45 T54

T54
  • Member

  • 2,506 posts
  • Joined: November 03

Posted 16 November 2003 - 02:36

It remains that

The Schwartz arcticle is crap.

and I second that. it shows either a serious bias or a complete ignorance of the actual facts, or both.

The Parnelli/Interscope/Porsche flat-6 is on display at this time at the Marconi Automotive Museum for Kids in Tustin, California.

T54

#46 Bondurand

Bondurand
  • Member

  • 166 posts
  • Joined: November 05

Posted 27 November 2007 - 15:31

Reviving that old thread instead of creating a new one, I'd be interested on the F1 chapter of the story.

How and why was Danny Ongais "dragged" (pun intended) on the Grand Prix scene?

All I know is his entry record :

1 1977 Etats-Unis Est Interscope Racing 14 Penske PC4 Ford Cosworth V 8 Goodyear 26 ab Accident
2 1977 Canada Interscope Racing 14 Penske PC4 Ford Cosworth V 8 Goodyear 22 7 z
3 1978 Argentine Team Ensign 22 Ensign N177 Ford Cosworth V 8 Goodyear 21 ab Transmission
4 1978 Brésil Team Ensign 22 Ensign N177 Ford Cosworth V 8 Goodyear 23 ab Freins
5 1978 Etats-Unis Ouest Interscope Racing 39 Shadow DN9 Ford Cosworth V 8 Goodyear 0 npq z
6 1978 Pays-Bas Interscope Racing 39 Shadow DN9 Ford Cosworth V 8 Goodyear 0 npq z



#47 Bondurand

Bondurand
  • Member

  • 166 posts
  • Joined: November 05

Posted 28 November 2007 - 17:20

There is a story by Rainer Nyberg at 8W, a friend posted a link at another forum :

http://www.forix.com/8w/ongais.html

Entrepreneur Ted Field, boss of the Interscope company, noted his skills and wanted Danny to race for him in F5000. So the following two years were spent in F5000 and in 1976 Ongais earned a 5th place in the final standings. At the late age of 35 Danny's single-seater was suddenly blooming, even continuing into America's top category. In 1977 Danny Ongais was put in a Interscope-backed Parnelli ChampCar by his teamboss Ted Field. For a debuting thirty-something Ongais ran extremely well in his rookie year: at the 1977 Indy 500 he retired after 90 laps but later won the Michigan 200.

Still in the same season ambitions rose even higher, Ted Field also wanting to do Formula 1. So Field went shopping and bought a Penske PC4 for Danny to drive. Ongais made his GP debut late in the 1977 season in his home race at Watkins Glen, alas retiring early on, but in the following race at Mosport he finished a fine 7th. Through this result Field and Ongais got the taste for more. In 1978 the team started the first two races in an old Ensign before Field acquired more up-to-date machinery. Unfortunately the Shadow DN9 wasn't a very developed car and here we see Danny struggling to prequalify the car. Despite his usual hard charging he was unable to get the car up to speed. His brief GP career was over almost as quick as it had started and it ended after a final attempt mid-season at Zandvoort.



Now what I really miss is the reason behind the black livery with red/pink lines, was it related to something, or just a matter of personal taste for M. Field?

#48 David M. Kane

David M. Kane
  • Member

  • 5,402 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 28 November 2007 - 20:34

Danny O came from a pretty humble background, he was very much self-made. He was, however, very, very talented.

The first time I saw him he was working on his own dragster in the dark at a Motel in Bristol, Tennessee. Mty mom and aunt had come down for my graduation. That was June, 1967. If he had started road racing earlier, there is no telling how good he could have been. He was tough, gritty and had a lot of fire in his belly.

#49 TooTall

TooTall
  • Member

  • 336 posts
  • Joined: February 05

Posted 28 November 2007 - 22:30

I posted this originally in the "Personal Photos From the Track" thread.

Posted Image

Ongais in the Shadow at Long Beach, 1978.

Cheers,
Kurt O.

#50 RA Historian

RA Historian
  • Member

  • 3,833 posts
  • Joined: October 06

Posted 29 November 2007 - 01:58

Originally posted by Bondurand
Now what I really miss is the reason behind the black livery with red/pink lines, was it related to something, or just a matter of personal taste for M. Field?

Don't know the answer to that, but I do recall seeing every Interscope car from 1975 through 1983 painted in this very scheme. Really, it was refreshing to see a car not festooned with sponsor's colors etc.