8 replies to this topic

[CSGPR]

Hi there

Am I the only one who was surprised by the speed of the old BRM P 180 driven by Flavien Marcais in the 3rd. Monaco Historic GP 14 days ago? Flavien was fastest in both qualifying sessions. In the first session he was 5.711 sec. ahead of second man Maruo Bompani, and an impressive 8,424 faster than Martin Stretton in the Six wheeler. And in the second session he was fastest again, but not as clear as in the first session, but still an impressive 3.734 sec. ahead of Hubertus Bahlsen in his Brabham-Alfa Romeo BT45B (1977).

Flavien must be one hell of a driver, as the BRM P180 left much to desirer back in 1972. The Car won the John Player Challenge at Brands Hatch in the hands of wet weather specialist Jean-Pierre Beltoise. But is was more due to Beltoise decision to run on Intermediates instead of wets, and of cause Beltoise capability to drive in the wet.

But otherwise the car, didn’t bring any success to the BRM team and by the end of 1972 BRM decided to relay on the faithful P160 for 1973.

I have seen a video clip once where Renie Wissel test the P180 at Silverstone and it looked quit a handful to drive as the rear-end was sliding all over the place “Heavy over steer” to say at least.

My question is then. Why was the P180 that good in Monaco 14 days ago. Is it only due to Flavien Marcais talent. Alex Young a Grand Prix driver in a Lotus 72, which must certainly is a far better car to drive, was 4.645 sec slower than Flavien Marcais.

My next question is who owns the car today Peter Hannen was the last owner I know of. Has he sold the car or ?, as we talk of the P180/02. The P180/01 is still at the Donington Collection. At least to my knowledge.

Photo of the P180 can be found here: http://www.acm.mc/gp...cm-gp-histo.php

Best regards

Christian

[ry6]

It is interesting that some cars that were not very good in their "hey-dey" have proved to be successful many years later in historic racing when competing against their former "adversaries"/"counterparts".

Maybe they are now better prepared than in the days of their "works" lives ;
Maybe a change to modern tires which suit them better than the tires they used way back then ;
Maybe the current drivers of the "adversaries" are not so good;
Maybe the preparation of the "adversaries" nowadays is not so good;
Maybe their current owners are pretty clever and have sorted the "bugs" that at one time
limited these cars.

Maybe "every dog has its day!"

As an aside I read that the F1 Scarab, which had a poor race record, was actually a pretty good car, but there was some small technical item that held it back.

[David M. Kane]

Ry6 you are correct on all accounts. Don Nichols says that in their day they were so busy just trying to keep the things on the track with all of
the crashes they were having with the Shadows as well as the ocassional
modification. They didn't test much in those days for a variety of reasons.

Many of these cars are far better today than they were originally. The only
tires available today are AVONs, so everyone is on the same rubber.

[David McKinney]

A combination of a well-sorted car and a bloody good driver, while everyone else was struggling to sort their cars (Stretton), learn the circuit (Yoong) etc
The BRM didn't maintain its advantage in the drier conditions in the race

[biercemountain]

I think most of it goes down to set-up.

I read an article by Mario Andretti recently where he talked about driving the Lotus 79 again. Although he was intimately familiar with the car, he stressed the necessity of spending a good deal of time to get the car set up properly. Only then did he feel comfortable pushing the envelope and going for some competitive times.

Of course Mario has the benefit of knowing more about the 79 than anyone else. He could tell the mechanics right away what might be limiting the handling and how to adjust it. Imagine someone else getting in the car and trying to go quick. It would be completely new territory, and unless you had some really outstanding mechanics and technicians it would take quite a bit of practice to learn how to set up the car.

Mario also knew all the limitations of the car which he understood too well. One of them was the lack of rigidity of the chassis which he used to bitch at Colin Chapman about constantly. He once tied a string diagonally across the cockpit opening which was tight with all four wheels on the ground, but when a mechanic jacked up one side of the car the string loosened. That really irked Chapman aparently. Low-tech proof of a high-tech problem.

[Ray Bell]

I once watched Frank Matich do the same thing to the SR3 chassis... bolted down the back of the chassis and put a piece of tube through the front, put weight on the tube and measured the change in distance between points in the cockpit bay... result? Two more diagonal tubes on the outrigger section alongside the cockpit.

[RaymondMays]

BRM P180/02 is now up for sale, in the latest edition of Motorsport magazine. It would make an excellent TGP car.

If you look at it now, compared to when it originally raced, it looks in even better condition (thanks to Hall & Hall). I think that BRM wanted a car that worked immediately, and weren't prepared to develop it, especially when Tony Southgate left. Looks like that was a big mistake, as it could have turned into a real race winner.

[petefenelon]

Originally posted by RaymondMays
BRM P180/02 is now up for sale, in the latest edition of Motorsport magazine. It would make an excellent TGP car.

If you look at it now, compared to when it originally raced, it looks in even better condition (thanks to Hall & Hall). I think that BRM wanted a car that worked immediately, and weren't prepared to develop it, especially when Tony Southgate left. Looks like that was a big mistake, as it could have turned into a real race winner.

It was a nice article, good to see Howden still looking the part.
(Maybe we can have an article on Howden driving the Tiga F1 if he ever gets the time to finish it!)

I think people are underestimating just how good Flavien Marcais is - I've seen him in a range of historical machinery and he's impressed me in all of it. (I'd rank him up there with the likes of Dayton, Stretton, and Willie Green as a true master of historic cars).

pete

[petefenelon]

Originally posted by Ray Bell
I once watched Frank Matich do the same thing to the SR3 chassis... bolted down the back of the chassis and put a piece of tube through the front, put weight on the tube and measured the change in distance between points in the cockpit bay... result? Two more diagonal tubes on the outrigger section alongside the cockpit.

There's a story of Surtees watching while one wheel of the first Lola F1 car was jacked up, and being somewhat less than happy with the fact that the frame just flexed and the other wheels stayed on the ground...


pete