119 replies to this topic

[AdrianM]

I have been reading a lot about Jim Clark recently and I have not found one word of criticism about him. The only time I think was the misunderstanding between Clark and Ireland when the latter was sacked by Lotus.
So has their been any recorded criticism of Clark.
IMO he was the greatest without doubt!

[dmj]

On his behaviour, no.
On his testing and developing skills, yes. A few times I have read that Jim never complained about his car - he just drove any car as fast as possible, without any comments or suggestions. If it is true (and it was doubted before in TNF) then other Lotus drivers probably had to do more development work.

[Joe Fan]

The only negative things I can say about Jim was that he wasn't naturally a fast driver, he started off in smaller cars and blossomed into one later. Another thing is that Jim was the right driver at the right time at Lotus. We all know how revolutionary Chapman's cars were and Jimmy was there to reap the benefits. So consequently, he racked up a pretty amazing Grand Prix record that statistically rivals Fangios. I admire Jimmy and his versatility of being able to race all kinds of cars successfully. However, I will say this to my deathbed, Clark was not the driving talent of Fangio or Moss! He deserves to mentioned with the greats but I am 100% confident from all the research that I have done, that he wasn't as good as Fangio or Moss in a Grand Prix or sports car.

[Mike Argetsinger]

This is one of those speculative and potentially emotional threads that I have generally learned to stay away from. But this time I can't resist responding to Joe Fan's comments. Joe (and I often agree with you so I offer this with all respect) - your first sentence flies in the face of all evidence. What Jim Clark was - more than anything else - was a pure natural. He showed speed from virtually day one - and was fast in anything he drove. He was not a highly technical driver - but incredibly intuitive. I saw him drive many races - and not only in Grand Prix cars - and will tell you that he was impressive. He had the respect and admiration of his peers and that is not always an automatic. As for the suggestion that he was fortunate to be in the Lotus at that time - well, I would maintain that it is a lot more complicated than that. Despite not being a technical driver the symbiosis between Clark and Chapman was a two way street. Clark helped make Lotus as much as the other way around in my opinion. Touching briefly on the relationship with Innes Ireland - I knew Innes even better than I knew Jim so I heard first hand what he thought at the time - let's not forget that Innes wrote what I consider to be the most touching tribute of all at the time of Jimmy's death (Innes was then Sports editor of Autocar). So one of the reasons that you will seldom hear bad things about Jimmy is that he was a genuinely fine and decent human being. He wasn't a saint - and he had a natural reserve which some people misinterperted - but he could be as much or more fun than anyone when he felt comfortable with his environment. Was he the best of all time? Maybe not - but he certainly makes my top half dozen. More importantly he was that rarest of figures - a superstar who bore his stardom with grace and ease. He was a real guy - and one of the greatest drivers of all time.

[Wolf]

May I second Mike, with Moss 's quote ('All But My Life') :

The greatest natural talent driving today is probably Clark, and I say 'probably' just for the forms' sake, because I'm convinced Jimmy is the best in the world. He's a born driver, boy, and you know the difference between a born driver and a made driver is the difference between night and day, and more. I was having trouble with Jimmy Clark back in 1961. Very well, in matched cars, I'd beat him, but by 1961 it was plain that Jimmy Clark was just not the boy to take on if one were driving last year's motor car.

(highlights are as in the original text)

[David McKinney]

I'm definitely with Mike and Wolf on this - it would be interesting to hear the basis for 'Joe's' belief.

[Buford]

There was a rumor at one time he was homosexual, which he definately was not. He had lots of women.

[ehagar]

Peter Bramwell, creator of the Jim Clark tribute site, wrote to Stirling Moss, Jackie Stewart and Sir Jack Brabham 30 years after his death (web page link below).

http://tinny.eis.net...ell/welcome.htm


Sir Jack's reply was kind of interesting...

Jimmy was an extremely good driver. But everything had to be right or he wouldn't feel competitive. He was very emotional which a lot of people don't know. He would get very pumped up before a race. At a Monaco Grand Prix early on the doctors weren't sure he should race, his heartrate was so high before the start.

I don't think that Jimmy knew enough about his cars and I'm sure that's what killed him in the end. I used to see quite a bit of him as we both used to fly aeroplanes. Jimmy was a friendly fellow and easy to like. They were good days and we enjoyed ourselves.

Sir Jack Brabham
Sydney

[karlth]

I seem to remember reading something about Surtees never respecting Clark too much as a driver.

[RJL]

Originally posted by Buford
There was a rumor at one time he was homosexual, which he definately was not. He had lots of women.

Buford, this makes two threads in a row that I have opened that contain homosexuality posts from you. What is up with that?

[Buford]

Geez I thought of that too!!!! I don't know. Now I'm scared!

[Barry Boor]

The only negative things I can say about Jim was that he wasn't naturally a fast driver,

The Boor soapbox is out again. Joe, there is NO WAY that statement can be accurate. From the first moment Jimmy stepped into any sort of competition car, he was quick. Perhaps the fact that he did not blow Ireland and Clark away the instant he got an F1 drive in 1960 gives credence to Joe's view, but there had to be a certain amount of feeling his way. Remember, he was driving Formula Junior just a few months earlier.
Chapman was a shrewd operator - once he saw what he had in Clark, Ireland was STR. (surplus to requirements).

As for a bad word about him.......

We are talking here about one of the world's BEST EVER drivers.

[Vitesse2]

Move over a bit, Barry ...

Jimmy was certainly fast from the beginning - no question. But it's fairly certain that his first season in Formula 1 must have been coloured by the traumatic events at his first race: the tragic Belgian GP which saw the deaths of Alan Stacey and Chris Bristow, not to mention two serious accidents involving the Lotuses of Stirling Moss and Mike Taylor. Quite a good reason for curbing natural enthusiasm, I would have thought ....

[David J Jones]

I think perhaps only the Italian Authorities spoke bad words about Jimmy after the 61 GP at Monza but that ceased around 64 or 65 - I think

[Bernd]

I can't believe that I just read a post from an intelligent and productive poster like Joe Fan that says that Jim Clark was not a naturally quick driver!
This is beyond ridiculous!!! The man won the first race he ever competed in can you think of ANYONE else who can claim the same?....... I can't.
Not to mention that he was instantly on the pace with your hero Mr Gregory despite the fact that Masten was really considered hot **** at the time. Masten was pushing much, much harder to get the speed, for Jim it was just driving no work involved. After the Goodwood incident Masten was considered "fast but fragile' and his career began to decline.
Jimmys limits were so high that he only probed them once according to Colin Chapman at the Nurburgring in 62.
Juan Fangio after Monza 67 stated categorically for the rest of his life that Jimmy Clark was the greatest driver he ever saw.

Now his faults, there were many contrary to the people who think he was some kind of saint. In testing his 'fault!' was if a problem occurred or a handling problem presented itself he would slow down figure out what it was and then speed up again completely adjusting his driving style to the new parameters. The Lotus boys quickly learned to pull him in if they noticed a dip in his laptimes and often they found something had gone awry like the anti-roll bar of something like that. As Mike can surely tell us in more detail his feat at the Glen in 1967 was beyond belief.
Jim could be very short with people and could literally explode if rubbed the wrong way especially if bothered by Journalists whom he considered vultures, not proper racing writers like Jenks whom Jimmy greatly respected but local papermen etc.
Sir Jacks point about Jim getting round up before a race is very true and relevant to his character. Jim Clarks natural enviorment was at his farm in Duns or in the cockpit of a racing car. Once he got his bum in the seat everything calmed down and he went into another world. He detested all the razzamatazz that went on along with racing. Though he was expanding and becoming more cosmopolitan before the end.

[Wolf]

Well, didn't Phil Hill also get jumpy before the race? I remember Moss mentioning it. But it should not be relevant whether one was nervous or calm like Moss before the start- it's what happened after the flag fell.;)

[Roger Clark]

I'm interested in the Jack Brabham quote:

But everything had to be right or he wouldn't feel competitive.

I don't understand this at all. In how many races, from 1962 onwards was he not competitive? I suggest that you could count the Grands Prix on the thumbs of one hand, or possibly the toes. Even in uncompetitve cars, such as the Lotus 30/40 or the 33 in 1966 he achieved far more than anyone else.

At a Monaco Grand Prix early on the doctors weren't sure he should race, his heartrate was so high before the start.

I hadn't heard this before. My guess is that it refers to 1961, which was the first race he and the car were fully competitve and both he and Ireland had had big crashes during practice.

I don't think that Jimmy knew enough about his cars and I'm sure that's what killed him in the end.

Again I find this extraordinary. I think it is now generally agreed that the fatal accident was caused by a puncture and sudden failure of the tyre. Is Sir Jack suggesting that Clark should have detected the problem earlier? I think he showed over the years that he could detect the most minute changes in the handling of the car and drive round the most major ones. The crash investigation said that there was no way he could have felt anything at Hockenheim until the complete failure of the tyre.

As regards his testing ability, we have discussed this before. I think I posted then a quote from Chapman in 1965 when he said that Clark had been a poor tester early in his career but had developed into a good one. He could describe precisely what the car was doing and what he wanted it to do, even if he couldn't say how to make it do it.

[Bernd]

I've always found Jacks attitude to Jimmy Clark a tad queer. I brought it up with him at Adelaide years ago and his response was a simple "Nah Rindt was better" when I pressed on why (or how) this was so he couldn't answer. I've said before that I believe that this was because of his mentality that if someone was really whipping him then that person must have a far better car. This is a healthy attitude for a racing driver, when Jack saw Rindt in the same car as himself he couldn't apply this so hence he was the 2nd best and Rindt was the best! Jack and Jim were good friends as well so his attitude did not apply of the track. Ron Tauranac said after a really good geez at the Lotus 25 that "The fastest thing about the Monocoque Lotus is Jimmy Clark"

My favourite Jim Clark quote was directed at Chris Amon after his spotted Chris desparing over the new 'fag packet' Gold Leaf Lotus 49T in New Zealand he sauntered over and said "Don't worry Chris it still looks the same from behind" This was delivered without a trace of arrogance and some laughter and really sums up Jim Clark for me.

As for anxiety before a race I am a huge sufferer I used to sit in the car almost jumping around because I was shaking so much and my feet used to jump on the pedals going into the first corner but after that I was too busy to worry. It has got far better these days with just a bit of shaking hands before getting in, I am far from a natural driver.

[Buford]

When I frist started reading that Brabham quote I was thinking "what a load of crap thjis is". Then I saw who said it and I shut up. He would know better than me. But if he said Rindt was better than Clark, I can say this. Clark took to the Indianapolis Speedway, in an experimental car, instantly. Thus screwing up Dan Gurney's plans. Dan had put the program together and thought he would be a lock to win. His teammate foiled his plans. Rindt had a good car when he tried Indy. He was out to lunch there. Hated it and didn't qualify. Just one track but there anyway, Rindt was nowhere close to Clark in being as good.

[Joe Fan]

Woah folks! Sorry that I have hit a nerve here. However, I stand by my statement that I didn't think Jim was a naturally fast driver. Why? My standards must be different than everyone else's because I use my hometown hero as the gold standard, someone who was destined to find himself behind the wheel of race car to cure his need for speed or else he would be without a driver's license. I won't give all the glory details of Masten's formative years here because that would defeat the purpose of people buying the book but Masten was wild, someone who would sneak the family car out of the garage at the age of 15 and someone that the police knew well. A race career was a logical progression for him.

On the otherhand, after reading Graham Gauld and Eric Dymock's books on Jimmy, I never got the impression that Jim was a naturally fast driver. A natural driving talent who was developed into one later yes, but he was too shy, timid, insecure, to fit the mold of being a naturally fast driver. Early on, he needed to be psyched by Ian Scott Watson that he had what it took which highlights Jim's fragile psyche.

Jimmy came from a real disciplined background. He was 17 before he got a driver's license. 19 the first time he broke 100mph in a car. As Bernd said above, yes he did win his first race but as Gauld's book states, his only real competition was a Vauxhall that ended up being a non-starter. He was driving a 2.2-liter Sunbeam and yes did supposedly beat an experienced amateur driver who was driving a 1.6-liter Porsche.

However, Jimmy's first real track event (an exact quote from Dymock' book page 81), was a race at Crimond in 1956. From Dymock's book (last paragraph on p.84), "In the race at Crimond he had been surprised to overtake one car until he discovered it had broken a half shaft and was dropping out. He (Jimmy) finished last, but he had been introduced not only to motor racing but also officialdom."

From here on Jimmy cut his teeth in small cars (under 1.2 liter DKW, under 1.6-liter Porsche, under 2-liter MGs) in races at British airfield circuits. His first real test was at Spa in 1958. He finished 5th in the under 2000cc GT race against nonames and 8th in the Spa Grand Prix in a Border Reivers D-Type Jag. This is the race that Jim was left in awe of Masten's driving ability (note that this race was only Masten's 2nd trip to Spa, his first trip there, he finished 2nd to Peter Collins). The truth of it was that Jimmy was intimidated by the course and never liked it, even though he would have success at it later on. One of Jim's favorite tracks was the slow but challenging Monaco circuit.

Overall, Jimmy developed and honed his skills in small cars for several years before tackling the real machines, and this was something that many drivers did not do back at that time. He transitioned his career into his Formula One career slowly from Formula Junior and F2.

Jimmy was a Scot. If he was really that naturally fast of a driver, why did it take Scottish race team Ecurie Ecosse three years to put a car underneath him? Overall, I never got the impression from reading these books that Jim was really a naturally fast driver. I don't think his background, upbringing, and personality was conducive to this. However, I do conceed the fact that he developed into one later.

[AdrianM]

I've always found Jacks attitude to Jimmy Clark a tad queer. I brought it up with him at Adelaide years ago and his response was a simple "Nah Rindt was better" when I pressed on why (or how) this was so he couldn't answer.

He has to say that to explain what happened at Monaco 1970

[FrankB]

Originally posted by Joe Fan
He was 17 before he got a driver's license. 19 the first time he broke 100mph in a car.

I'm not quite sure what you are trying to prove with these statements.

Firstly - by law he would have to be 17 before he could have a driver's license.

Secondly - I think this supports rather than refutes the idea of Jim Clark being a fast driver. How many cars that were capable of 100mph+ were on the road in 1955 and available to a 19 yr old farmer's son?

It certainly would not have been like the situation today where only a minority of road cars have a top speed of less than 100 mph.

[Joe Fan]

Originally posted by FrankB


I'm not quite sure what you are trying to prove with these statements.

Firstly - by law he would have to be 17 before he could have a driver's license.

Secondly - I think this supports rather than refutes the idea of Jim Clark being a fast driver. How many cars that were capable of 100mph+ were on the road in 1955 and available to a 19 yr old farmer's son?

It certainly would not have been like the situation today where only a minority of road cars have a top speed of less than 100 mph.

The 100mph Jimmy acheived was in a low level rally race. As far as how drivers were capable of these speeds at that age, I do know that Masten Gregory was capable of it in his hopped up street cars during his teens. In the US, you can get a driver's permit at age 15 and a license at age 16.

As far as Jim Clark's career, really it can be summed up in two words, Lotus and Ford. There is plenty of documentation that Fangio or Moss could be fast or make cars fast, in many different makes of cars, some being privateer equipment.

[karlth]

It can hardly be said that Clark impressed in his first F1 season.

[FrankB]

Originally posted by Joe Fan


The 100mph Jimmy acheived was in a low level rally race. As far as how drivers were capable of these speeds at that age, I do know that Masten Gregory was capable of it in his hopped up street cars during his teens.

Once again I don't see that your statements support your arguements. On its own, to say that Masten Gregory drove cars that were capable of 100mph+ at those speeds proves nothing. Any of us can drive our road cars at their maximumum speed, but in isolation that doesn't prove that we are fast drivers.

This is not in any way an attempt to belittle Masten Gregory's (or indeed any driver's) abilities and achievments. I am simply trying to say stating that an individual drove at 100mph (or whatever) at a particular age proves nothing about the driving ability, but a lot about the available machinery.

[Joe Fan]

Originally posted by FrankB


Once again I don't see that your statements support your arguements. On its own, to say that Masten Gregory drove cars that were capable of 100mph+ at those speeds proves nothing. Any of us can drive our road cars at their maximumum speed, but in isolation that doesn't prove that we are fast drivers.

This is not in any way an attempt to belittle Masten Gregory's (or indeed any driver's) abilities and achievments. I am simply trying to say stating that an individual drove at 100mph (or whatever) at a particular age proves nothing about the driving ability, but a lot about the available machinery.

I think I have made it quite clear that I believe that his upbringing, personality and coddling of his psyche by Ian Scott Watson early on that he wasn't a naturally fast driver. Really where is the proof that he was a naturally fast driver early on? Is there anything that you can find that hits you over the head that Jim was naturally fast and destined to be a racer car driver? I think he had natural driving abilities but I haven't found anything yet that shows me that he was destined to be a race car driver.

[Vitesse2]

Originally posted by karlth
It can hardly be said that Clark impressed in his first F1 season.

Karlth: see my post above ....

Joe: I'm not sure Clark actually wanted to drive for Ecurie Ecosse. He was one of the leading drivers for Border Reivers - there was fierce rivalry between the two, which is reflected in any Scottish sporting endeavour. Scotland is essentially three regions - Lowlands & Borders, Central (Glasgow/Edinburgh) and Highland/Grampian. A Rugby match between an Edinburgh side and Hawick or Jedburgh is a bit like the battles between the clans - old scores are settled!

Borders men are fierce and independent, sometimes bullheaded ... surnames like Nixon, Dixon, Graham and Armstrong are typical. Another Borders name is Robson - "Little George" was born only 50 miles from Clark's home.

But when he did eventually join EE, Jimmy proved (as he had with BR) that he could handle big hairy sports cars, outdated though they might have been by then.

And where he lived there were really no circuits to speak of - circuit racing has always been concentrated in Southern England - a trip to (say) Brands Hatch for a weekend race would have been nearly a week out of his life with the roads as they were in the late 50s. Britain didn't have what you would call freeways then and even major cities had not yet acquired bypasses ...

[Joe Fan]

Originally posted by Vitesse2


Joe: I'm not sure Clark actually wanted to drive for Ecurie Ecosse. He was one of the leading drivers for Border Reivers - there was fierce rivalry between the two, which is reflected in any Scottish sporting endeavour. Scotland is essentially three regions - Lowlands & Borders, Central (Glasgow/Edinburgh) and Highland/Grampian. A Rugby match between an Edinburgh side and Hawick or Jedburgh is a bit like the battles between the clans - old scores are settled!

Vitesse, I know that he did. I have a quote from Graham Gauld for my biography that affirms this.

[f li]

Yes, by Joe Fan!

[FrankB]

Originally posted by Joe Fan


Really where is the proof that he was a naturally fast driver early on? Is there anything that you can find that hits you over the head that Jim was naturally fast and destined to be a racer car driver? I think he had natural driving abilities but I haven't found anything yet that shows me that he was destined to be a race car driver.

I am not trying to make a case for whether Jim Clark was a naturally fast driver or not. What I have been trying to do is point out that your arguments are not supported by any substance. Where is your evidence - not belief or opinion - to support your assertions?

[David McKinney]

I think I now understand where JF is coming from. Masten Gregory won the 1958 Spa sportscar race, in which Jim Clark was 8th. What more proof do you need?
None, if you disregard the fact that the Scotsman's 1956 production-model D-type was beaten only by two works 4.2-litre DBR2 Aston Martins, two latest-model Lister-Jaguars, two full-race Ecurie Ecosse D-types and a state-of-the-art 250TR Ferrari. I can't see many people being able to do better than that, especially in their first big race.

Joe's statement that "he transitioned his career into his Formula One career slowly from Formula Junior and F2" is simply untrue. His first F1 Grand Prix came after less than half a season of FJ and F2 - if that's slow, what's fast?

As for karlth's failure to be impressed by Clark's 1960 F1 season, by the end of the year Jimmy was consistently outqualifying team-mates Ireland and Surtees - four times in their last five races. Anyone who could do that in their first season in F1 had to have a fair amount of natural talent, I would have thought.

[Joe Fan]

Originally posted by FrankB


I am not trying to make a case for whether Jim Clark was a naturally fast driver or not. What I have been trying to do is point out that your arguments are not supported by any substance. Where is your evidence - not belief or opinion - to support your assertions?

Well, give me evidence that he was a naturally fast driver.

[David J Jones]

Joe Fan

He was quick in Anything ---- I saw him throughout his career.

[David McKinney]

Originally posted by Joe Fan
Well, give me evidence that he was a naturally fast driver.

The evidence was in his driving, and his results. Just look at the contemporary reports.
In his first full season, in the Border Reivers D-type, he was consistently faster than anyone deserved to be in what was hardly a cutting-edge competition machine. His times the following year in the BR Lister - basically a homebuilt special - compared more than favourably with those being achieved at that time by far more experienced drivers in superior machinery. And his performances in the Lotus Elite that year, again against far more experienced men, has been discussed elsewhere on this Forum. By the end of 1959 I for one had him picked as a future star, and my views were confirmed in 1960 when he dominated FJ and was a front-runner in F2. By the end of that year, his first in F1, he was knocking on the door of the established F1 stars.
His natural disposition was such that, in his first few club events, he may indeed have had little appreciation of his undoubted inate ability. That doesn't make him any less a natural talent than another driver who might believe before he takes to the track that he's God's gift to motor racing - and invariably discovers he is not.

[Barry Boor]

Some years ago, my good lady Heather and myself had a short holiday in the Scottish borders. (Bear with me on this one, people.) For Heather it was a chance to see the area of Scotland from which her father came. For me it was the chance, at last, to visit the Jim Clark museum.

We stayed in a farmhouse bed and breakfast establishment in a tiny village called Cranshaws, not many miles from Duns. The lady of the house, upon hearing of my interest in Jim Clark, proceeeded to tell us that she was a young girl when Jim was in his late teens (along with a famous Scottish rally driver who hailed from the same area). Apparently, these two young men spent much of their time tearing around the local side roads, with a couple of screaming girls in the back of the car, at speeds that would have frightened the socks off most mere mortals.

And as I recall, the local police were as well aware of this speed merchant, as Joe tells us the Kansas police were of Masten.

If I was pushed to single out one instance to underline Jim Clark's natural ability, it would be the Nurburgring 1000 Ks with the Lotus 23.

[Joe Fan]

Here is a summary of the qualifying and results of the Grand Prix races that Jim took part in his first year of F1 (1960). His teammates results are shown as a comparison:

Netherlands
3rd-Innes Ireland finshed: 2nd
8th-Alan Stacey finished: DNF
11th-Jim Clark finished: DNF

Belgium
7th-Innes Ireland finished: DNF
9th-Jim Clark finished: 5th
16th-Alan Stacy finished: DNF

France
4th-Innes Ireland finished: 7th
8th-Ron Flockhart finshed: 6th
12th-Jim Clark finished: 5th

Great Britain
5th-Innes Ireland finished 3rd
8th-Jim Clark finished 15th
11th-John Surtees finished 2nd

Portugal
1st-John Surtees finished: DNF
7th-Innes Ireland finished: 6th
8th-Jim Clark finished 3rd

US
5th-Jim Clark finished: DNF
6th-John Surtees finished: DNF
7th-Innes Ireland: 2nd


Note that John Surtees was a rookie this year too and produced a 2nd place finish in his second career F1 start and a pole position in his third on the very same team as Jimmy. Surtees was literally pulled off bikes by Colin Chapman after he won his first time out at Goodwood in a Formula Junior race. Innes Ireland only had one year of F1 experience heading into the 1960 season.


As far as his preparation for F1, Jimmy raced in seven Formula Junior races and two Formula 2 races before his first F1 Grand Prix start at Netherlands. He then competed in two Formula Junior and one F2 race before the Portuguese Grand Prix. Then four more Formula Junior races and one F2 race before the US Grand Prix. On the other hand, Masten Gregory was offered a F1 ride by Enzo Ferrari and Mimo Dei after winning the 1957 Buenos Aires 1000KM race. He went straight to F1, completely bypassing F2 and Formula Junior.

In conclusion, I will repeat. I am a big fan of Jimmy and I do think he was a fast driver. I just don't think he was naturally a fast driver. He had to be pyschologically coddled and developed into one. This is my opinion and you are entitled to your own believe what you want.

[David McKinney]

I'm sorry you felt you had to be so selective with your list of F1 races, and ignore the other three events in which 3 Team Lotus cars started, and in all of which Clark qualified faster than his team-mates
I would also be interested in seeing your list of any F2 or FJ races Gregory could have competed in before his first F1 race.

[Joe Fan]

Originally posted by David McKinney
I'm sorry you felt you had to be so selective with your list of F1 races, and ignore the other three events in which 3 Team Lotus cars started, and in all of which Clark qualified faster than his team-mates
I would also be interested in seeing your list of any F2 or FJ races Gregory could have competed in before his first F1 race.

Sorry I wasn't being selective. The other F1 races weren't World Championship Grands Prix. Would qualifying in non-championship races be taken as seriously as qualifying World Championship Grands Prix? I am certain that once the race started, that the drivers would take them seriously.

As I stated above in my last post, Masten Gregory went straight to F1. He never competed in any F2 or FJ races before making his debut in Formula One in 1957. He competed in some F2 races in 1959 like all the Cooper Team drivers did and one at the tail end of the 1958 season. And maybe a few more after that, that I may not be aware of yet.

[Bernd]

To stop the civilised Joe bashing going on here. He does have a point but is looking at it from a slightly skewed perspective. Everyone around Jim was aware and amazed at his talent and potential except him! Jimmy simply could not believe that he was as quick as he was. Here is a quote from a perplexed Jimmy after an early race at Charterhall which he won at record speed.

"Why was everyone going so slow?"

To which an exasperated Scott Watson replied

"They're not, it is just that you are so fast"

Being such a shy and retiring man and being afraid of his parents finding out about his Motor-Sport flirtations is the reason why Jim had to be coddled along as Joe puts it. NOT because he wasn't any good, he showed phenomenal speed right from the start. In Formula 1 however he wasn't sufficiently confident in his own abilities till around-about 1961 and Lotus didn't really have a fully competitive car till 1962 and we all know what happened from then on...

[David McKinney]

Originally posted by Joe Fan
As I stated above in my last post, Masten Gregory went straight to F1. He never competed in any F2 or FJ races before making his debut in Formula One in 1957

Joe, I don't want this to drag on for ever - you have your view, I have mine.
But let me just clarify my response about Gregory not competing in F2 or FJ. You seem to be holding this up as some sort of proof of your man's talent, whereas my point was that the reason he didn't do F2 or FJ before going into F1 was that he couldn't have. There wasn't any in 1956 (or 1955, or 1954).

[Ray Bell]

Originally posted by Bernd
.....In Formula 1 however he wasn't sufficiently confident in his own abilities till around-about 1961 and Lotus didn't really have a fully competitive car till 1962 and we all know what happened from then on...

Bernd has an excellent point here, one I was going to raise before I got sidetracked with thoughts of what FJ did at the same time...

I was also trying to remember when and where he drove an Aston... I feel sure he did at some time and impressed? Or am I wrong about that? Just another example of a big car...

But perhaps a post made many months ago sums it up best...

Originally posted by Buford
....I was a young teenager. We ate lunch in the Speedway restaurant with Clark and Gurney and Chapman and the chief mechanic Dave Lazenby several times and dinner at the motel a couple times. I talked to Jim one-on-one several times over the next 3 or 4 years. My experience was he was indeed quiet, shy, totally unaffected by his skill, fame, and status, maybe a little effeminate (horrors) at least by the standards of the rough and tumble American racers I knew with their limps and burn scars. He had small soft looking hands and was very nervous. Had bitten his finger nails to the quick. But he was pure racer.

After the race in 1963 when they were cheated in the oil dropping scandal we went immediately to the garage area. I could get in after the race though was too young during the month. My dad knew all the guards so they let me and my younger brother in. All hell was breaking loose in the garage with talk of the black flag and protests to be filed etc.

The only one not excited and furious was Clark. He was standing there near the bench and I always knew my place (as opposed to current race fans) and never bothered a racer when they were busy. But Jim seemed to be the only one not busy so I walked up to him with the qualifying photos we had gotten back since the last time we saw them. I had several 8 X 10’s for the team and some to get autographed for ourselves. Jim loved the photos, signed all the ones I wanted signed, and then turned to Dave Lazenby and told him to pull the spark plugs from the 2nd place Lotus which was sitting there still crackling, and give them to me. I still have the one I kept...

This in the midst of a furore when he had just brought the establishment to his knees... sure, there was a lot of Chapman and Ford in the deal, but Clark had driven the car in circumstances quite unlike those with which he was more familiar.

Maybe he did explore the depths of his immense talent at the 'ring in 1962 after forgetting to turn the fuel pump back on... maybe he didn't recognise his own skills... maybe he even should have noticed some change at Hockenheim to warn him... nobody knows about that one....

But everyone else knew about his skill.

Who summed it up? "Races just quietly surrendered to Clark!"

[Joe Fan]

Originally posted by David McKinney

But let me just clarify my response about Gregory not competing in F2 or FJ. You seem to be holding this up as some sort of proof of your man's talent, whereas my point was that the reason he didn't do F2 or FJ before going into F1 was that he couldn't have. There wasn't any in 1956 (or 1955, or 1954).

David, both British Formula Three and Formula 2 did exist during this time period 1954-1957. Although there were only minor races held in F2 during 1954-1956, it did return full power in 1957 (see http://user.tninet.s.../F257_Index.htm) which was the year that Masten went straight to F1. Why did Masten go straight to F1? Because he proved to Enzo Ferrari and Mimo Dei that he was fast enough and could handle big cars so he was offered a F1 contract by both. Masten chose to go to Mimo Dei's Scuderia Centro Sud team because he would get to race more often, practically full-time. Enzo's offer to Masten was as a fourth driver on the Grand Prix side of Ferrari. British Formula Three was created in 1951. Les Leston was British F3 champion in 1954 and Jim Russell was champion three straight years from 1955-1957. Formula 2 was created in 1947 and later became Formula Junior in 1961.

[David McKinney]

Originally posted by Joe Fan

both British Formula Three and Formula 2 did exist during this time period 1954-1957. Although there were only minor races held in F2 during 1954-1956, it did return full power in 1957

There was no official Formula 2 between 31 December 1953 and 1 January 1957. True, some British organisers ran races for the obsolete cars in 1954 and 1955, and others ran events in 1956 to give British drivers and manufacturers a try-out for 1957. But none was an official F2 event.

Originally posted by Joe Fan

British Formula Three was created in 1951

1947, though it was not called F3 until 1949

Originally posted by Joe Fan

Formula 2 was created in 1947 and later became Formula Junior in 1961.

As stated above, F2 finished in 1953, and resumed 1957-60. Formula Junior ran from 1958 to 1963. F2 resumed in 1964

[Rob29]

It was usual for drivers to go from sports cars to F1 in the period 1954-57.In England in #56 at least,the 1500cc class served the function of an F2. Regarding born drivers,the record must stand to John Surtees,who drove his first car race in March 1960 in FJ,moved to F2 in April,F1 in May,and came second in the British GP in July! Modern licence rules would prevent anyone from attemping to equal this feat.

[Ray Bell]

Unless, of course, Bernie wanted someone to do it...

[Joe Fan]

David, the source for my information come from the The Guiness Guide to International Motor Racing. It shows the first champion of British F3 starting in 1951. At any rate, there was a viable single seater training ground series available for Masten to compete in if he or his team owner felt needed it.

Another thing to consider about the comparison of Lotus drivers, Clark did consistenly outqualify Ireland the following year in 1961 but usually Ireland qualified near him. And if you look at the 13 World Championship Grand Prix that they competed against eachother on the same Lotus team in 1960 and 1961, Ireland nearly doubled Jimmy production by outscoring by a margin of 29-15. I also think John Surtees displayed natural raw speed coming to grips with single seaters (or cars for that matter) as quickly as he did. But neither of these drivers were at Lotus to reap the benefits later on of one of the some of the most revolutionary equipment in the sport during the 60's. It is a shame because neither of these drivers are rated anywhere near Jimmy by most historians. This is why I rate Jimmy in the elite class of drivers in motorsports history but would rank Fangio, Moss in the elite of the elite category. I am confident that during Masten Gregory's era of F1 racing that there were two drivers who stood out above him and the rest: Fangio and Moss. Fangio and Moss were a treat to have in the same era. For NHL fans this era of motorsports would be the equivalent of the Wayne Gretzky-Mario Lemieux era that we enjoyed during the 1980's and 1990's.

[Ray Bell]

Shame you have said you won't give the gories about Masten's early times.... and I believe you have put a good case here, Joe.

There's no doubt in my mind either about Moss and Fangio being on another level. That Clark benefitted by staying with Lotus is undeniable.

But for Gregory, though I don't know much about his early times, by the time he got to Europe he was already racing big, fast cars, was he not?

What point then, going into smaller formulae? If he'd showed enough class to get a works drive, he was clearly there for the top echelon drives.

[Barry Boor]

I know that if my Auntie had a willy, she would be my Uncle and that 'could have' and 'should have' are meaningless phrases.........BUT...

Jim Clark won the title in 1963 and 1965 - he ALMOST won it in 1962 and 1964 - with a tad more reliability, he could easily have won it in 1967 - and almost certainly WOULD have won it in 1968 and probably 1969 as well. None of these failures to win the title are down to any sort of lack of ability on the part of the driver.

So what is my point? Well, the man must have been a bit special, surely........

BTW, Ray, I don't think I want to read about Masten's gories....

[Ray Bell]

You have my total agreement on all points, Barry... glad you gave Jack 1966 by the way...

I think this discussion has got out of hand and is not what Joe was seeking to point out in the first place... his view of Clark's rise to fame being slower than meteoric... whether that's proved or disproved. The comparison with Gregory led to tangential discussion that essentially took everyone off the track.

[Roger Clark]

I'm firmly among those who believe that Jim Clark was probably the most naturally gifted driver of all time in the sense that it all came so easy to him. He really had no idea just how good he was and could not understand why others couldn't keep pace with him.

He was unusual, though not unique, in that early in his career (before 1960) he did not have a burning ambition to become a racing driver. It was just something that he enjoyed doing and appeared to be rather good at. He did have a competitiveness that all great racing drivers need, but it only became apparant when he was behind the wheel. I can't imagine him seeking sponsorship in the way that is required of young drivers today.

Te record of Clark's 1960 season gives only a glimpse of the speed of his development during the year. The Portuguese Grand Prix when he finished third in a Lotus which had been rebuilt overnight and was literally held together with sticky tape was remarkable. Chapman gave him strict instructions not to appear in the first ten for the first six laps until he was sure that the car was handling alright. It was , apart from a certain stiffness in the steering and a tendancy to understeer on some corners and oversteer on others. His performances in the Silver City Trophy (pole position and battling with Brabham for the lead until retirement), the Lombank Trophy (second in practice and the race), and the Gold Cup (second in practice, second in the race until forced off the road by a slower car) give further evidence.

Nevertheless, it cannpt be denied that in 1960, Clark was the number three driver at Team Lotus. Some may say that this makes his achievement even more remarkable given what has been written extensively about the fate of number two Lotus drivers in the 1960s. More to the point, John Surtees was certainly ranked higher than Clark by most observers at this stage of hteir career. At the end of each season, autosport used to give the drivers a five star rating. In 1960, Surtees was given four stars, along with Ireland and the two Hills, Clark was given three. The editor wrote:

"Jim Clark should certainly be in the four star category, and his driving certainly warants his inclusion. Nevertheless he needs a little more experience before he can qualify. Surtees has had that in motorcyle racing, so must have a slight preference over Clark."

A driver, no matter how naturally gifted, needs racing experience, and this was no less true of Jim Clark than anybody else.