44 replies to this topic

[WINO]

Frank Costin has always been described by the [admittedly English] press as one of the great contributors to fifties and early sixties motor racing designs.

After his successful Lotus 11 and the Vanwall body designs, all his subsequent efforts seem to have been rather less brilliant: the Maserati 450S Coupe [with 100% of its failure conveniently blamed on Zagato by a chauvinistic press, although his original design was refused by the CSI], the Vanwall "fighter plane" cockpit which was dropped immediately after first trial, the 1959 Lister which did no endear itself to the drivers, the later Lister Coupe, etc.

Was the 1956 Vanwall really his last successful effort?

WINO

[Mac Lark]

Dr Mike Lawrence has some good Frank Costin stories.

Calling Mike Lawrence!

[Wolf]

Well one might argue his teaming up with Keith Duckworth wasn't that disastrous move after all. What was the name of company, again- Duck(worth & Cos)tin, or was it other way arond?

And I've also liked the looks of the 'Little Vanwall' MARCH...

[rosemeyer]

Think of Frank Costin strapping himself to the Lotus watching yarn tuffs to check airflow the man had guts.

[WINO]

Are you sure that was the same Costin?

WINO

[D-Type]

Wasn't it his brother, Mike Costin who co-founded Cosworth?

[rosemeyer]

Very possibly as he was an aircraft designer.

[WINO]

Rosemeyer,

I was referring to Wolf's comments, which have nothing to do with the subject. Furthermore, Frank may have had guts, but I was bringing up his post Vanwall work.

WINO

[Wolf]

Originally posted by WINO
Rosemeyer,

I was referring to Wolf's comments, which have nothing to do with the subject. Furthermore, Frank may have had guts, but I was bringing up his post Vanwall work.

WINO

Wery well, I admit to my mistake about Cosworth, but my point about March 711 still stands...

[rosemeyer]

I am probibly wrong it may have been Mike but it appears to be a grey area more research required.www.racing70s.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/racing70s/Historic/lotus_1115.htm

[llmaurice]

Yes ,it was definitely Mike Costin who went in with Keith Duckworth . Mike was getting a bit disenchanted with some of the "Guvnors" schemes and dealings but had to serve some final time at Lotus before actually departing . Best move he ever made in my opinion as he is a "solid bloke ".

[Paolo]

I think Frank Costin was responsible for the aero deign of the Teapot March. Its radiator fairing were not working properly, and had to be discarded.
Quite a failure.

[David Beard]

Originally posted by Paolo
I think Frank Costin was responsible for the aero deign of the Teapot March. Its radiator fairing were not working properly, and had to be discarded.
Quite a failure.

Failure? The 711 took Ronnie to second place in the championship!

[Paolo]

Originally posted by David Beard


Failure? The 711 took Ronnie to second place in the championship!

Despite radiators hanging in free stream. Good chassis, great driving. Awful aero.

[Ian McKean]

I think he also designed the Protos which went very well at some fast track (was it Enna?) but failed to cover itself with glory elsewhere.

I always wondered about the 1959 Lister and whether the opposition had just moved on or whether it was just worse than the 1958 car. I am not close enough to know the answer but it would be interesting to get an opinion and even comparative lap times and straight line speeds from drivers now involved in Historic racing.

[Huw Jadvantich]

I think what Costin lacked was the ability to prove out his designs and tweek them in the wind tunnel, Both the Protos (Which was plywood) and the March 711 lacked success for reasons outside Costins area of expertese. Sure the rear panels of the March 711 were thrown away, but probably only because it was expedient, they didn't have the time or money to develop their way out of it.
Costin would have revelled in todays environment where aero is king and time in the wind tunnel is not looked upon as wasted money. I think costins racing designs were superb throughout, and only lacked the ability to finish the job off with proper testing and development.
Did March get the best Cosworth engines in 1971, and did they have a great evelopment driver?

[Rosemayer]

New link to Costin

lotuseleven.org/DarkAges6/headfairings.htm

[D-Type]

Wino,
I think you have a point, but the March 711 should also be considered a success. However, remember that Frank Costin was primarily an aircraft engineer and never (as far as I know) a full time racing car designer.

[Roger Clark]

You'd have to admit that Costin had more failures than successes. In fact, only the Vanwall and the early Lotuses can be said to be successful in achieving their objectives, although others may have been a successful technical exercise which is not quite the same thing. Despite this, you have to admire him for trying something different at a time when racing cars were already becoming rather similar. The Protos was a particular favourite and the Costin-Nathan was a lovely little car. The March 711 could hardly be said to be a Costin design as it had lost most of its bodywork by the time it raced.

One thing has always puzzled me: how much advantage can an open-wheeled racing car really get from aerodynamic bodywork? Costin's work was always aimed at reducing the drag co-efficient. I always thought that the drag co-efficient on an open wheeled car so so dominated by the wheels that there was little that could be gained from streamlined bodywork. By the 1970s, things were even worse with the drag-inducing wings. So were Costin's methods ever going to produce an advantage?

[Lexington_Tyrrell]

Anyone know what happened to the Astra RNR 1A group 6 sports car? This had a plywood monocoque centre section with front and rear sub - frames. Power was Climax FPF and then FVA.

The car finished second to John Miles works Lotus Europa 62 in the Brands International of 1969 (I think it was 1969), third in Nogaro and second in it's class at Nurnburgring.

Mike Short.

[petefenelon]

Don't forget that not only did the radiator sidepods of the 711 not work, but also the original airbox trapped a layer of stagnant hot air over the induction trumpets!

[ian senior]

I'll confess to worshipping at the Costin shrine. So much of what Francis did was right, so much was misunderstood. Some of it, fair to say, didn't work too well.

Common wisdom is that he was an aerodynamics bloke and that's it, bodywork only. He was red hot on structures too, and if the fact that he liked plywood was looked on askance by some, I suspect it's only because, as the title of the one and only album by Hotlegs says, "You didn't like it because you didn't think of it".

The Protos was one of my favourites and perhaps wasn't quite as wonderful as was hoped because, amongst other things, it turned out to carry more weight than it should have done. There were also problems with the front suspension, but surely nothing that could not have been addressed in the proposed mk2 version, which never materialised due to lack of money and/or interest. That fact remains, it was seriously quick in a straight line.

Marcos sports cars, in the early days, were as ugly as a box of frogs but undeniably effective - just ask Sir Jackie Stewart. The small Costin sports racers, such as the Costin-Nathan (which later became the Astra) were also competitive. There was the amazing Costin Amigo road car, with staggering preformance from a bog standard Vauxhall engine.

Amazing man, diverse career, and if some of his projects didn't come to fruition or work properly, it's largely due to influences outside Frank's control.

[T54]

I am happy just to contemplate the Costin-Nathan coupe, a perfect representation of what England is all about.
I mean after Ann Boleyn's little adventure of course. :
I want one. I mean, a Costin-Nathan coupe, not a silver sword.

[David Beard]

Originally posted by Roger Clark

One thing has always puzzled me: how much advantage can an open-wheeled racing car really get from aerodynamic bodywork? Costin's work was always aimed at reducing the drag co-efficient. I always thought that the drag co-efficient on an open wheeled car so so dominated by the wheels that there was little that could be gained from streamlined bodywork. By the 1970s, things were even worse with the drag-inducing wings. So were Costin's methods ever going to produce an advantage?

Not an advantage perhaps...but certainly never a disadvantage. He always produced a theoretical form which could be used as a basis for the ultimate solution, I would have thought, open wheeled or otherwise. March should have tried harder to follow his thoughts with the 711, I reckon...

[macoran]

Originally posted by Roger Clark

One thing has always puzzled me: how much advantage can an open-wheeled racing car really get from aerodynamic bodywork? Costin's work was always aimed at reducing the drag co-efficient. I always thought that the drag co-efficient on an open wheeled car so so dominated by the wheels that there was little that could be gained from streamlined bodywork. By the 1970s, things were even worse with the drag-inducing wings. So were Costin's methods ever going to produce an advantage?

If we think of the wheels/tyres on the latest F1 stuff......why would the guys bother with aero
today if it didn't have any effect ?

[macoran]

Anyway I think we should give Costin the benefit of the doubt ( I think it's called
in English).
He was "thinking" aero,,,,,,,,,,with a notepad and pencil...
See what the chaps have nowadays........24/7 !!!

[dretceterini]

One of my personal heros. Leraned a lot about aerodynamics from his infrequent writings and prehistoric measuring tools...

[Roger Clark]

Originally posted by macoran
Originally posted by Roger Clark

One thing has always puzzled me: how much advantage can an open-wheeled racing car really get from aerodynamic bodywork? Costin's work was always aimed at reducing the drag co-efficient. I always thought that the drag co-efficient on an open wheeled car so so dominated by the wheels that there was little that could be gained from streamlined bodywork. By the 1970s, things were even worse with the drag-inducing wings. So were Costin's methods ever going to produce an advantage?

If we think of the wheels/tyres on the latest F1 stuff......why would the guys bother with aero
today if it didn't have any effect ?

I thought that most of their effort went into producing downforce. Costin was attempting to reduce drag. I wondered how much he could really gain in that direction.

[David Beard]

Originally posted by Roger Clark

I thought that most of their effort went into producing downforce. Costin was attempting to reduce drag. I wondered how much he could really gain in that direction.

Surely they try to produce downforce with minimum drag...they don't go for one while ignoring the other, except in the days of the turbo perhaps...

When did this silly bit of a word "aero" first appear, anyway? It's not an expression a TNFer should use. Worse still, the "aero package".

[Catalina Park]

Originally posted by David Beard
When did this silly bit of a word "aero" first appear, anyway? It's not an expression a TNFer should use. Worse still, the "aero package".

Ferrari 156 Aero?

Aero package

[petefenelon]

Originally posted by Catalina Park

Ferrari 156 Aero?

Aero package

Wasn't that because of the construction method, with a panelled semi-monocoque, though?;)

[David Beard]

Originally posted by Catalina Park


Aero package

[Huw Jadvantich]

No question about Peterson being a great driver, but March resources that year were being spread very thin. It was likely proved one day that the car was faster without the rear bodywork, the layer of hot air over the top of the inlet trumpets was likely because it had no where else to go, in other words, a little development would have solved the problem. The bodywork was undoubtedly heavy so throwing the whole lot away would have been seen as a quick result. However as mentioned one of the big causes of drag with single seaters is the wheels so making the best use of the air before it gets to them or leading it to something useful between them like a cooling surface is good aerodynamics. The March 711 nose had a relatively low frontal area, and made very good use of the air. A much maligned vehicle.
Costin was nobody's fool and the 711 should be considered one of his greatest efforts. Unfortunately for him bodywork could not be made light enough at that time to give any sort of advantage. I believe if they had spent a little more time on the extraction the body work might have overcome its weight disadvantage.

[bradbury west]

IIRC, and I am not an engineer, I understood Frank's "thing" when it came to car design was the question of air penetration, ie the CX factor rather than CD, the CX being the drag coefficient multiplied by the frontal area offered to the wind. There is little point having a good CD if the thing has a shape like the proverbial brick outhouse. IIRC the D type Jag had a CD of .55, but the small frontal area helped it along to high speeds.

Costin was also very concerned about airflow through all areas and orifices, hence the dual purpose in/out venting on the drivers' mirrors on the Vanwalls, the downside of which was the brake dust on the faces of the drivers. (What price health and safety today?) I always understood them to be quick in a line.

The various NACA ducts harnessed laminar flow at key areas, or something like that, like on the Elite's bonnet..

It is worth reading Flying on four wheels just for the story of his laboriously manually calculating the air flow and subsequent bodyshape on the Vanwalls, then interpreted into metal by the body shops her.

His skills went onto be exhibited in the design of boat hulls, where the ability to slip through the water achieving maximum speed and minimum drag through the sea was paramount.

The shapes of all of his cars up to the end followed this concept.

BTW The Costin Maserati at le Mans can hardly have had a chance to show as good or bad, since the Italian bodybuilders altered everything as they saw fit, totally ignoring his drawings, possibly substituting leather/sand bags for an understanding of Costin's designs, so to censure his design here is a little unfair, I feel. His road cars always rolled through the air with little throttle, so the ideas must have worked. Gregor Grant IIRC (have not checked the book) made the same point via fuel ecomomy figures on a Lotus mk9?? or 11?? when they tested it to Cornwall and back.

Perhaps Dr Lawrence would give his views.

Roger Lund.

[bradbury west]

PS

His air flow management also ensured that his cars had small radiator intakes for a given cooling need, again thus ensuring no unnessary drag. Makes sense not to waste power just to disturb the air.

I remember from another life that at upto 55mph most power was used to power the vehicle. Over that speed the majority of the engine's power went to disturb the air, rather than to move the truck along, we are talking about large refrigerated trailers on pan European work That is why we started using cab mounted deflectors, and rounded corners on the trailers, which alone reduced drag by about 5 %

RL

[David Beard]

Originally posted by bradbury west

Costin was also very concerned about airflow through all areas and orifices, hence the dual purpose in/out venting on the drivers' mirrors on the Vanwalls, the downside of which was the brake dust on the faces of the drivers.
Roger Lund.

I thought the brake dust arrived on the driver's face via the three holes behind his head?

[macoran]

When was that other life R.... ??

[bradbury west]

David, It might well have been. But it still centred on airflow management, I suspect.
But the two way air movement via the mirrors as a design point still stands.
I will check Costin's book when I have a moment

RL

[Wolf]

Marc- I think other life is now too. I'd say that up to 60kph it's practicaly irrelevant, when considering the air resistance, whether one has teardrop shape or a cube, as long as their frontal areas are the same.

As for Roger's claim (I think he has mentioned trucks), let us take 25.000kg heavy vehicle with cf of 0.6. Rolling resistance will be 0.01*m*g, which will be roughly 2500N. At speed of 90kph the truck will have to have over 10 m.sq. frontal area to produce the same amount of drag... Dunno if it makes sense.

[Roger Stoddard]

For what it's worth I was involved with a Costin-bodied Crossle 70F Formula Ford car in 1989/90 and although it looked particularly phallic [we thought about painting it pink!] I don't recall it having any demonstrable straight line advantage over the contemporary Van Diemens or Swifts ... though of course that could have been down to the customer spec blue-painted engine in the back ...

[David Beard]

Originally posted by Roger Stoddard
For what it's worth I was involved with a Costin-bodied Crossle 70F Formula Ford car in 1989/90

This car must have happened after the Dennis Ortenburger biography was published? Photo, anyone?

[bradbury west]

I have just checked a 1990 C&SC article on Frank Costin and another one from Classic Cars in 1993 and there is no mention of it. Perhaps Dr Lawrence can shed some light?

Roger Lund

[cosworth bdg]

Originally posted by Roger Stoddard
For what it's worth I was involved with a Costin-bodied Crossle 70F Formula Ford car in 1989/90 and although it looked particularly phallic [we thought about painting it pink!] I don't recall it having any demonstrable straight line advantage over the contemporary Van Diemens or Swifts ... though of course that could have been down to the customer spec blue-painted engine in the back ...

A formula ford engine of the period is not a very high spec engine, customer spec and built engines are nothing to be frowned upon.........

[ace woodington]

Sorry to put a damper on all the theories of why the MARCH 711 radiator ducts were discarded.

It was simple. It was impossible to get the ducts to fit close enough to the radiators and stay within the legal width. The cooling worked without the ducts so no effort was made to correct the initial problem.

[Cirrus]

Crossle 70F pictures here.....

http://www.race-cars...059940712pp.htm