LOTUS and the U.S.A SPECIAL

Colin Chapman Archive and Resource October 2016

Newsletter – Number 57

Chapman and Can-Am: Big Bangers and Even Bigger Bucks: An Opportunity missed
Lotus 38: The Special Relationship
Lotus –Historic Sponsor Series: Firestone: On the Rim of Success
Tracks Across America: Riverside

All previous articles relating to these are held on the website.

1. Chapman and Can-Am: Big Bangers and Even Bigger Bucks: An Opportunity Missed?

Introduction

The Canadian –American Challenge Cup was launched in 1966.It was intended for professional Group 7 sports racing cars.

It was a big bucks spiral with its own Championship Title and big dollar prize money. So why did Lotus not participate when all the evidence and experience indicated they could do well and earn? Particularly as Chapman and Lotus has done so well at Indianapolis through the 1960’s and had used a Ford engine.

In this article we will explore that rational and circumstances.

The record of Lotus in Can-Am is limited .Therefore this article is written as a platform from which we hope we can both base further research and tease out some answers. It’s hoped our North American subscribers will be able to help. The editors have attempted to extrapolate some propositions.

The A&R on behalf of the proposed CCM&EC believes it important to investigate objectively not only the major successes of Colin Chapman and Lotus but also some of the disappointments and failures.

Interwoven with this article the editors will discuss the Chaparral marque. There is an interesting interconnectivity of technological innovation running through both marques design engineers overlaid in the Can-Am series .In order to bring out the fuller details the A&R have produced a dedicated article on the Chaparral marque.

Preamble Can-Am: A Fist Full of Dollars

North America has an honorable and significant history of sports car racing.

This particularly expanded and encompassed amateur sports car racing in the post second world war period. Owner / drivers primarily raced for the sport and were awarded trophies consistent with the amateur status. Big powerful sports cars were popular in the US and formed the backbone of the amateur racing

However this would change with professionalism and prize money in the late 1950’s.

From the early 1960’s racers adapted their popular Cooper Monaco’s and Lotus 19’s [see A&R article] to accept local American V8 engines. Typical was the 4L Buick, 4.7L Ford and 4.6L Chevrolet.

Can –Am emerged from various powerful strains and interest and certainly from a developing momentum. On 15^th February 1966 both the American and Canadian racing organizations/ representatives agreed to inaugurate the Canadian-American Challenge Cup. It sought amongst its objectives to bring the drama and excitement of Grand Prix racing to the new North American road circuits. Johnson Wax was an early supporter of the series. It was to succeed big time!

Initially there would be six races between September and November later to be extended to eight and eventually eleven?

“It is really big Series event in the New World, and probably carries the biggest prize money of any group of races in the world. There are a number of Can-Am races, held on big tracks all over the North American continent. Prizes for individual races are big and the prize for the overall winner is bigger still”

At the time Can- Am offered the world’s richest prize money. This to some extend would compare with Indianapolis. The prize money was possible proportionate to attendance. In 1973 for example it has been estimated 402,500 approximately spectated at eight circuits. This and sponsorship possibly made it the attraction and provided the rewards that motivated both local and international competition [manufacturers and drivers]

Lyons observes:-

“The Can-Am was a child of the psychedelic 1960’s launched along with rockets to the moon, and revolutions in society. Americans racing great technological adventure was a noble experiment in unchained performance”

And that:-

“The early Can-Am was a hot house of enthusiastic exploration into novel unrestricted technologies –engines, transmission, tyres, suspension, aerodynamics and materials”

Can-am engendered international respect providing exciting spectacle along with innovative, intriguing, creative yet diverse design solutions and participation .Some races are recorded as attracting thirty eight entrants.

The Big Bang Theory

Writing in 1971, P Lyons describes his drive with P.Revson in Can-Am car

“A great hammer struck my spine slamming my head back ………….it was rushing like some

Demonic torrent frantic to enter the gates of hell. Small markings –stains, patches, pebbles –appeared as flickers and were gone like dust on a cine film. There was no longer any sensation of speed .we were going to fast………..”

Definition: The Magnificent Seven

Can-Am racers have been considered amongst the ultimate racing machines with few and almost no limitations. In effect almost totally unrestricted. The cars are classed as Group 7, Category “C” in many respects they offered a formula Libre for sports cars. It spawned some outrageous technology. The parameters were:-

“Sports Cars”
Two seater [notionally] passenger space just capable accepting passenger to fulfill definition of sports car
Enclosed aerodynamic two seater bodywork ie.enclosed wheels/tyres
Unrestricted engine capacity
Turbocharging or supercharging allowed
Unrestricted aerodynamics [in early days]
No minimum weight
No forbidden materials
No specified componentry
Safety standards enforced

From which evolved cars that adopted wings, were extremely light, possessed unheard of speed, developed ground effect and incorporated aerospace materials.

The series was later codified as Group 7 sports cars by the FIA

Can-Am Spectacle and Success

All those who spectated and participated agreed Can-Am was an impressive sight comprising cars which were extrovert and:-

Fast
Colourful
Sponsor liveried
Loud ,learey and noisy
Extremely fast and powerful
International meld of various manufacturers , drivers
Possessing a strong North American flavor and culture
Easily distinguishable
Competing on high speed road circuits comprising a fluidity incorporating variety of corners and undulating gradients, surfaces.

The editors believe that the success of Can-Am might be due to some of the following:-

The obvious spectacle mentioned above
Local and world recognized drivers competing
Affordability to both competitors and spectators[ some sources suggest an entry spectator ticket price of $5]
Viewing and ability to be close to the action and close racing
The predominant use of home grown engines
American sponsors and related trade support
Geographical proximity of spectators to tracks
Extension of racing tradition upgraded and with concession to European practice [ including the combination of British made chassis and American V8 engines ]
US manufacturer support etc.
It caught the mood of the era and part overlaid with the hippy movement in California in the late 1960’s
Attractive proposition to both drivers and designers with considerable freedoms
Significant winnings and appearance money
Climate and seasonal advantage vis Europe

Lyons possibly summed it up with the observation that:

“The Can-Am car combined rarefied aerospace science with the red meat muscle of the dragster, the sophisticated European method with gaudy Indy showmanship”

Whilst Dymock commented:-

“New cars appeared at almost every event, and even if some of the drivers did not reach the professional standards of those at the fronts of the grids, the crowds were still rolling up, and enjoying the spectacle of the big, wide racing cars battling it out or merely pursuing the orange McLaren’s on some of the finest tracks in the world”

The Race Series

The series is believed to have grown from 6 [2 races in Canada and 4 in America] to 8 then 11 races by 1969.Some of the following circuits hosted the series:-

Bridgehampton

Charlotte

Donnybrooke

Edmonton

Elkhart Lake

Hall County

Laguna Seca

Las Vegas

Lexington

Mid-Ohio

Michigan

Mont Tremblant

Mosport Park

Riverside

Road America

Sears Point

St.Jovite

Texas

Trois Rivieres

Watkins Glen

Note that some of the circuits are recorded in brief detail in Perkin’s “Indycar”Editor apologies if names of American tracks not fully understood / quoted.

Further reading suggests that Road Atlanta, Chesapeake, Fuji might also be included?

Mount- Tremblant from the net;-
“Mont Tremblant circuit is located in the surroundings of Tremblant Village, near Mont Tremblant skiing facilities, not far from Saint-Jovite in the marvelous Laurentides landscape. It was opened on August 3rd, 1964 in the shortest layout, the “Short Track” (later on renamed North Loop), a 1.5 miles long track with 12 turns. During the following year, in August, the full track was opened, extending its length to 2.65 miles with a total of 15 turns. The circuit features so many ups and downs that Jacky Stewart defined it a “mini-Nürburgring”, making this track very selective and dangerous.”

The Rewards: A Few Dollars More

The editors believe that Graham Hill took winnings of $175,000 for the 1966 Indianapolis. Dymock obsevers that:-

“The world of the Canadian –American Challenge cup is a rich one. Ever since the series began in 1966, the prize money has been enormous by any standards – during the years of Johnson Wax sponsorship, the McLaren team won over a million dollars….in 1966 …..The series was an immediate success .The awards totaled $360,000.”

The editors believe that John Surtees won between 48-$70,000 in Can Am, 1966.

He continues with what seems to be reference to 1967:

“Prize money reached a new total of $500,000 of which $210,000 was in guaranteed race purses and $900,000 in the drivers’ championship fund, which paid $31,500 for first place, down to $2,700 for tenth. In addition there was$ 200,000 for accessory awards or trade bonus……… Bruce McLarens own solitary win in 1968 was in the $100,000 Times Grand Prix at Riverside”

Pritchard states in “Specialist British Sports Cars” that Bruce McLaren in 1969 won the Can Am series with winnings of $ 158,750.Of course this has to be weighed in relative terms and translated into today’s prices. Also to be factored in are the cost of the cars and overheads possibly taxes and other considerations for the figures to be truly meaningful. For example; it’s thought at the time the $/Dollar /sterling conversion was between 2-3 $ to £ pound sterling.

D.Hulme is reputed to have won $660,000 between 1967-1972.

It’s been estimated that typical McLaren sports racing car cost approximately £11-13,000 in period but the Porsche 917-10K with its light weight chassis comprising magnesium tube, titanium and alloy components plus the 5L flat 12 turbo charged engine was sold to customers for £65,000. [Engines at £25,000 each and gearbox £5,000]; see paragraph below for prices of the Lotus Types 30 &40.

Some sources suggest that the total prize fund might have reached $1 million.

Year	Winner	Approx. Prize Money $
1966	John Surtees	48,000
1967	Bruce McLaren	62,000
1968	Bruce McLaren	93,000
1969	Bruce McLaren	160,000
1970	Denny Hulme	162,000

Source: “On Four Wheels” No.16/Mike Kettlewell

The Competitors: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly [Orange and White Elephants]

The following list has been extracted from various internet sites.

BRM	P154 & P167
Autocoast	Ti22
Bizzarrini	P358
Brabham
Burnett		Chevrolet
BVC	Mk.1	Chevrolet
Chaparral	2E,2H, 2J	Chevrolet
Chinook	Mk.10	Chevrolet
Cobra	Ford
Cooper	Ford
Ferrari	250 LM
Ferrari	612P
Ford	GT 40
Ford	G7A
Frissbee	GR3	Chevrolet
Genie	Mk.10,10B	Oldsmobile
Hamill	SR3
Honker	II
Lola	Type 70	T162 -163B	T260-310
Lotus 19		Ford
Lotus 23
Lotus 30	Cherokee	Ford
Matich
Matra	MS630
Mckee	Mk.6, Mk.10	Ford	“Wedge”
McLaren	M 1B -M20	Chevrolet
Merlyn	Mk.8-12	Chevrolet
Mirage		Oldsmobile
PAM	Ford
Porsche	906
Porsche	917 PA,917/10K	917/30
Profet
Schkee
AVS Shadows	Mk.1
Spyder
Stanton	Special
VDS	2	Chevrolet
Webster
Wolverine
Shadow	DN4, DN4A	Chevrolet
Cadwell	D7
McLeagle

One –off might also include Hayman,HoareMacs-it Special, Platypus,Nickey Vinegaroom II

The regulations created an environment of innovation and specifications extended from the sublime to the ridiculous. But this was good for the sport and for spectators. See some details and comparisons below.

Some of the most significant cars were McLaren M1B, M6B,M8 B,C,D&E, Lola Type 70 in various specifications, and the T260 , Ferrari 612,Porsche 917/,Chaparral 2E.

Can-Am Round 1

The editors believe the following circuits comprised round 1:-

o Mount Tremblant

o Bridgehampton

o Mosport Park

o Laguna Seca

o Riverside

o Stardust

The Can-Am Champions

Year	Driver	Team	Car
1966	John Surtees	Team Surtees	Lola T70–Chevrolet
1967	Bruce McLaren	Bruce McLaren Motor Racing	McLaren M6A-Chevrolet
1968	Denny Hulme	Bruce McLaren Motor Racing	McLaren M8A-Chevrolet
1969	Bruce McLaren	Bruce McLaren Motor Racing	McLaren M8B-Chevrolet
1970	Denny Hulme	Bruce McLaren Motor Racing	McLaren M8D-Chevrolet
1971	Peter Revson	Bruce McLaren Motor Racing	McLaren M8F-Chevrolet
1972	George Follmer	Penske Racing	Porsche 917/10
1973	Mark Donohue	Penske Racing	Porsche 917/30KL
1974	Jackie Oliver	Shadow Racing Cars	Shadow DN4A-Chevrolet
1975-6	No series
1977	Patrick Tambay	Haas–Hall Racing	Lola T333CS-Chevrolet
1978	Alan Jones	Haas–Hall Racing	Lola T333CS-Chevrolet
1979	Jacky Ickx	Carl Haas Racing	Lola T333CS-Chevrolet
1980	Patrick Tambay	Carl Haas Racing	Lola T530-Chevrolet
1981	Geoff Brabham	Team VDS	Lola T530-Chevrolet / VDS 001-Chevrolet
1982	Al Unser Jr.	Galles Racing	Frissbee GR3-Chevrolet
1983	Jacques Villeneuve Sr.	Canadian Tire	Frissbee GR3-Chevrolet
1984	Michael Roe	Norwood/Walker	VDS 002-Chevrolet / VDS 004-Chevrolet
1985	Rick Miaskiewicz	Mosquito Autosport	Frissbee GR3-Chevrolet
1986	Horst Kroll	Kroll Racing	Frissbee KR3-Chevrolet
1987	Bill Tempero	Texas American Racing Team	March 85C-Chevrolet

The under 2L class might have also include Ralt, Marquey, Scandia, and March.

It’s evident that Lotus did not really contest the Can-Am Championship although some interesting home grown marques did.

Technical Specification Comparisons

Comparative analysis taken from “The Worlds Racing Cars” by Twite.

Specification	Autocoast Ti22	Chaparral 2 H	Ferrari 612	Lola T162 -163-163 B Chevrolet	McLaren 8B
Engine	V 8 water cooled	V 8 water cooled	V12 water cooled	V 8 water cooled	V 8 water cooled
Bore /Stroke	4.25 x 3.75”	42.5 x 3.76 ” *	3.62 x 3.08”	42.5 x 3.76 ” *	4.25 x 3.75”
CC	427 cubic inch	430 cubic inch	380 cubic inch	430 cubic inch	427 cubic inch
Valve gear	OHV	OHV	OHC	OHV	OHV
Compression ratio	11.5:1	12:01	10.5:1	12:01	12:01
Carburettors	Lucas Fuel injection	Hall/Lucas injection	Lucas Fuel injection	Hall/Lucas injection	McL mod ‘Lucas Fuel inj’
Max power/Rpm	600 bhp @ 7000 rpm	650 bhp @ 7500 rpm	660 bhp @ 7700 rpm	650 bhp @ 7000 rpm	650 bhp @ 7500 rpm
Transmission	Hewland LG 600 [5]	Automatic 3 speed	Ferrari 4 speed	Hewland LG 600 [5]	Hewland LG 600 [4]
Brakes	Airheart 12″ vent’ disc	12″ ventilated disc	Ventilated disc	Girling 12″ ventilated disc	Lockheed 12″
Steering	Rack & pinion	Rack & pinion	Rack & pinion	Rack & pinion	Rack & pinion
Front suspension	Unequal A arms & csd	W’bone &CS dampers	Coil spring /adj damper		Unequal Wb & csd
Rear suspension	W’B’, paired rad arm, csd	Hall de Dion/ Watts Csd	Coil spring /adj damper	W’B’ /radius rods, self-aligning	W’b paired rad’rods, cs
Chassis Construction	Titanium & alum’ monoc’	Alum ‘alloy monocoque	Multi tube/part monoc’	Alum’ monoc’ bonded & rivit’	Semi- monoc’ with tubing
Wheel base	7′-10″	7′-7″	8′-0.5″	7′-10″	7′-10″
Front track	5′-00″	4′-3″	5′-3.1″	4′-6″	4′-9″
Rear track	4′-9″	4′-3″	5′-2.5″	4′-6.5″	4′-7″
Overall length	12′-6″	13′-00″	12′-2.5″	13′-2.5″	12’10”
Overall width	6′-2″	5′-00″	7′-00″	5′-11″	6′-3″
Kerb weight	1400 lbs [est’]	1500 lbs.	1540 lbs.	1500 lbs.	1480 lbs.
Front tyres	11.00 x 15″	11.00 x 15″	13.90 x 15″	12.00 x 15″	9.00 x 10”
Rear tyres	16.00 x 15″	15.5 15″	15.90 x 15″	20.00 x 15″	14.00 x 15″

All the salient points are brought out within the specifications: primarily the spectacle, speed, sound, physical preence and advanced technologies and materials. Although the American V8 engine dominated there were some considerable variety.

Chaparral [The Texas Rangers]

Jim Hall was a talented engineering graduate and also an accomplished driver. He had owned and driven a Lotus 18. He may have also come into contact with British sports racing cars such as the Lister, Cooper Monaco and Lotus 19.The comparison with Chapman is worthy of comparison ; both men were considerable innovators and embraced aeronautical engineering practice / materials. And both men enjoyed considerable international success .For example both won at Indianapolis. Both men voiced concerns about the politics of the sport they felt undermined innovation. Chapman relating to the twin chassis and Hall for the aerodynamic technology of his 2J.Both men raced their own cars with considerable success. Hall withdrawing following a serious accident

It’s believed that in the early 1960’s Jim Hall moved to Midland, Texas and set up Rattlesnake Raceway. This was a private test track constructed to be demanding like a road circuit. He joined forces with Hap Sharp [both men had earned their fortunes in the oil industry] and formed Chaparral Cars Inc.; they are considered co- designers. About the same time Dick Troutman and Tom Barnes set up their engineering firm in Culver City, California. They would construct cars to Hall’s design / specification.

The Lotus Type 30 & 40 [Group 7 Sports Racing Cars-1964/1965]

The Types 30/40 would have seemed to be contenders for Can-am but due to problems we record they had limited success or entry. It ought to be noted that they were not designed specifically for Can-Am and actually predate it.

The Type 30 and 40 and thought to be amongst the less successful of the Lotus competition cars.

The author would suggest a re-examination and when seen in a different context perhaps these machines might be re-evaluated.

The Type 30 and 40 specification aligns it with Can-Am but there were obvious deficiencies. This will be developed in a subsequent paragraph.

The A&R approach is to measure and contrast for the purpose of evaluation. The author therefore recommends the forthcoming article on the Ford Fairlane Lola GT that has a direct relevance to understanding both the context and performance of the Types 30 and 40.

Editors sketch of the Lotus 30

Lotus 30 and North American Racing

The editors believe that both Bob Challman and D.Gulstrand competed in North American circuit races which might have included early rounds of Can-Am.

A useful table of peer competitors is extracted from the entrants at the 1964 Canadian GP, Mosport [26/9/1964]

1	Jim Clark	Team Lotus (GB)		Lotus	30		Ford	S+2.0
2	Walt Hansgen	North American Racing Team (USA)		Ferrari	275 P		Ferrari	S+2.0
3	Ludovico Scarfiotti	North American Racing Team (USA)		Ferrari	330 P		Ferrari	S+2.0
4	Pedro Rodriguez	North American Racing Team (USA)		Ferrari	330 P		Ferrari	S+2.0
5	Vic Yachuk	Portland Garages (CDN)		Lotus	19		Climax	S2.0
6	Hugh Dibley	Hugh Dibley (GB)		Brabham	BT8		Climax	S2.0
7	James Scott	Carl Haas Automobile Imports Inc. (USA)		Elva	Mk VII		BMW	S2.0
11	M. R. J. Wyllie	M. R. J. Wyllie (USA)		Lola	Mk.1		Climax	S2.0
12	George Wintersteen	George Wintersteen (USA)		Cooper	Monaco	T61M	Chevrolet	S+2.0
17	Joe Buzzetta	Robt. Bosch Spark Plug Racing Team (USA)		Elva	Mk VII		Porsche	S2.0
19	Peter Goetz	Peter Goetz (USA)		Elva	Mk VII		Ford	S2.0
20	Mike Goth	Michael Goth (USA)		Lotus	23		Alfa Romeo	S2.0
21	Robs Lamplough	Robert Lamplough (GB)		Brabham	BT8		Climax	S2.0
22	Tommy Hitchcock	Celerity Inc.		Brabham	BT8			S2.0
27	Charlie Hayes	Carl Haas Automobile Imports Inc. (USA)		Elva	Mk VII		BMW	S2.0
30	Bob Grossman	Scuderia Bear (USA)	William McKelvy	Ferrari	250 LM		Ferrari	S+2.0
41	Peter Lerch	Peter Lerch (CDN)	Peter Lerch	Lotus	19	B	Ford	S+2.0
43	Phil Smyth	Dr. Phil Smyth (CDN)		Lotus	23	B	Ford	S2.0
47	Bruce McLaren	Bruce McLaren Motor Racing Ltd. (NZ)		McLaren	Elva Mark I		Oldsmobile	S+2.0
55	Ludwig Heimrath	Canadian Comstock Ltd. (CDN)		Cooper	Monaco	T61M	Ford	S+2.0
66	Jim Hall	Chaparral Cars Inc. (USA)		Chaparral	2A		Chevrolet	S+2.0
71	Skip Hudson	Nickey Chevrolet (USA)		Cooper	Monaco	T61M	Chevrolet	S+2.0
77	Bill Wuesthoff	Robt. Bosch Spark Plug Racing Team		Elva	Mk VII		Porsche	S2.0
81	Wayne Kelly	Bata Shoe Co. Ltd. (CDN)		Kelly	Special		Porsche	S2.0
89	John Cox	Team Speedwell (CDN)		Speedwell	Special			S2.0
94	Wayne Burnett	Wayne Burnett (USA)		Ferrari	250 TR		Ferrari	S+2.0
95	George Reed	George Reed (USA)		Ferrari	250 TR	59/60	Ford	S+2.0
99	Herb Swan	Herb Swan (USA)		Porsche	718 RS 61		Porsche	S2.0
133	Rudy Bartling	Heimrath Porsche Racing Team (CDN)		Porsche	718 RS 61		Porsche	S2.0
155	Norm Evenden	Norm Evendon (USA)		Cooper	Monaco	T61	Ford	S+2.0
169	Nat Adams	Tidewater Oil Co. Ltd.		Lotus	23		Climax	S2.0

Entered cars that did not arrive:

No.	Drivers	Entrant	Principal	Make	Type	Model	Engine	Gr.
8	Jerry Grant	Bardahl Lubricants		Lotus	19	B	Chevrolet	S+2.0
14	Jack Moore	Jack Moore (USA)		Shelby	Cobra		Chevrolet	S+2.0

The Continuum and Context.

The Types 30 and 40 ought to be seen in context of Lotus development.

The editor makes these connections and links.

Type 19 Sports Racer 1960

Type 23 Sports Racer 1962

Type 25 F1 1962

Type 26 Elan 1962

Type 28 Lotus Cortina 1962

Type 29 Indianapolis Car 1963

Type 30 Group 7 1964

Type 34 Indianapolis Car 1964

Type 38 “ “1965

Type 40 1965

Type 46 Europa S1 1966

Type 47 Racing Europa 1966

The conventional wisdom or history suggests that Chapman had hoped to win a contract/ commission to develop a sports racing car for Ford. This did not materialise and went to Lola and that the Types 30 and 40 were inferior attempts.

The editor would suggest the reference to the continuum of Lotus development and its breakneck speed. Chapman and Lotus had developed extremely successful links with Ford and the reason for loss of the commission is not really known but Lotus had track record and real urgency to deliver.

Whether Le Mans history impacted cannot be known.

Lotus achievements were staggering with one or more new products per year. This has to be understood in the context of their labour force and income [sadly objective information does not exist although it’s important to make some ball park calculation] but it was not the budget that Ford was able to commit. If the product was less than successful over stretching might have been the cause.

Should have Ford invested rather than Lola the result might have been very different and perhaps it ought be recalled that although the Lola spawned the Ford GT40 it was not spectacularly successful in its own right and the GT40 only came good after a multimillion $ research and development programme.

It’s worth noting the Ford Fairlane Lola GT launched 1963 and the Ford GT40 was completed in 1963 and raced 1964.

The author also suggests other possibilities that might have impacted on the design and performance of the 30&40. It might have been intended that the car was to be a closed coupe and some additional stiffness might have been imparted to the chassis .The other feeling is that perhaps somewhere in the background the 30 &40 were intended to grow into an integrated family of sports cars commencing with a relatively small capacity Ford engine. These models might have performed far better without the enormous and heavy V8. Taylor quotes weight between 1529-1650 lbs.

It cannot be known if the Europa was conceived directly or indirectly from the 30 &40 but it suggests whatever Chapman’s inadequacies he never failed to move on and incorporate lessons at devastating speed. The knowledge gained was also probably carried through from the Europa to the Esprit range.

In defence of the Type 30 & 40 they were sold at very competitive prices [Taylor noted that “The Lotus 30 was offered to the public at a reasonable £3,495” and refereeing to the Type 40 “Lotus Components put its works cars up for sale in April 1966 at £3,750 each”] and this enabled many to reach, afford and participate in a class of racing that might not otherwise been available. Many were developed and significantly improved. They were possibly too powerful for their aerodynamics and with the expense of wind tunnel testing they were in unknown territory. Later in the 1960’s the early generation of super cars were still experiencing front-end lift.

Conventional wisdom says that these models were a relative failure; they might not have sold in the volumes of the Eleven and 23 but a respective number were made.

These models were extremely beautiful and almost the last of an era. Although not the greatest of commercial and competition success they were not an absolute failure for such a small company without subsidy from government or mass production.

They have found favour with historic racers and remain magnificent and worthy competition to the likes of Ferrari, Lola, McLaren and Chaparral

The Design and Aesthetic [see photographs in related articles and diagram above]

The Type 30& 40 were designs conceived to conform to Group Seven and Can –Am racing. They were designed and built c 1964 by Chapman, Len Terry [who may have had reservations for various reasons and other engineers at Lotus] the company was at Chesthunt during this period.

The considerable aesthetic beauty of the Type 30 &40 models possibly emanates from their organic forms. This might also have contributed in part to some of the handling failures. The chassis relative to the V8 was another consideration. The car depending on gearing, at least theoretically was capable of 150 mph plus.

The dimensions and hence proportions:

94.5”wheelbase

49”front track

47.5”rear track

165”length

68”wide

26.5” high top of windscreen

4.5”ground clearance

Note an average approximation has been made across both cars.

It might have raced in the “Big Banger” class but this was no brute.

The original prototype body was believed to have been executed in aluminum and subsequently in glass fibre.

The 30&40 and a symphony of sensuous curvaceous flowing curves in elevation and section. Large handsome and imposing. Voluptuous. It has presence. Large hansom imposing.

The undulating wave like form is far more pronounced than the 19 or 23. The respective wings height front and rear visually indicate/ articulate /communicate / orientate and hence identify form and function. Of course this is reinforced by cockpit position also.

The screen fuses, integrates and nestles between the rounded domed top wheel arches.

The extremely reclined seating position dictates the long cockpit opening and Perspex screen angled back on a sharp rake.

Seen head on all the main design features and proportions are accentuated. The profile is an exaggerated bent wire “M”. The considerable width is apparent across the shallow “bonnet” which forms a flat-bottomed valley between the parabolic curves of the front wheel arches. Under which a spare wheel was mounted.

The low set nose is a bunted arrowhead in to which two radiators are ducted. The Perspex headlamp covers suggest night racing can be considered.

When fitted with a roll bar the car loses some of its undulating grace and the hard-edged geometry of these bars breaks the uninterrupted flow of the original design.

The rear elevation has certain symmetry with the front but in the “valley” there is an engine cover .The 13×7 tyres speak of the era and the power being delivered from the V8.

The author likes and admires the aesthetic of the Type 30 &40.They are perhaps amongst the last of the “organic” shape prior to the perhaps more efficient aerodynamically but less visually appealing sharp edged, squared off and flat surface wedge bodies.

The 30&40 possess harmony and poise despite their bulk and power. This might be helped but the undulating profile and very low build. Seen at rest or in motion all lines and proportion flow and integrate with a homogeneous 3D totality.

The design has expression and vocabulary and clearly distinguishes which is front and rear and which way the car travels. This is not always the case with mid and rear engine cars. They often became schizophrenic and the viewer does no know which way they are facing.

The power and performance of these “Big Bangers” produced some brutish Tyson looks but the Type 30&40 retained much of the lithe muscular and athleticism of Ali.

The cockpit was entered via relatively long drop down doors. The driver was required to surmount a wide cill that housed petrol tanks. The black plastic seats ran flat to the floor and the driver as mentioned was in a very inclined position approximately 40degree lean backwards. Most drivers’ eye line was just above the Perspex screen. A small diameter leather rimmed Motolita steering wheel was often fitted.

The backbone chassis formed a prop shaft tunnel that rose from the floor to approximately outstretched elbow level. The dashboard is believed to have formed part of the body and relatively small instruments were fitted possibly including revcounter, speedo, water and oil temperature, oil pressure and toggle switches.

Of course the gear change lever is on the right hand site for the rear-mounted gearbox.

Finished in Team Lotus colours of BRG and yellow with stripe. It accentuated the low purposeful build. The knocks on hub wheels were complementary and not excessive.

Types 30&40 Retail and Production

Taylor provides the relevant information .He suggests the respective cars were retailed as follows:-

Year Type No. Retail Produced

C1964 Type 30 £3,495 33 [21xS1&12S2]

C1965/66 Type 40 £3,750 3

By comparison the Indianapolis Type 38 was sold to customers at $22,500 c 1965.

Taylor suggests Jim Clark drove a Type 30 in the Canadian GP and at California and possibly at Riverside.

Route 66: The Lotus Type 66 Can Am Project proposal

Writing in September 2016, Motor Sport, Clive Chapman reveals that his father did contemplate a Can-Am car .He suggests that Geoff Ferris made some drawings and he shows the side elevation layout with CAD imagery to give 3D form to the proposal. These drawings suggest and idea was being worked up in September 1969.

Their ought to have been considerable interest from Chapman and Lotus with their ability to exploit:-

Track record and brand image in USA
Chapman experience with aerodynamics and larger capacity engines
The possibility of JPs sponsorship
The open regulations
The possibility of Ford or Chevrolet engines
The possibility of either a full works Team [enjoying climate for drivers at end of European season ] or customer cars
Chapman might have believed there was the potential for duplication /mutation into F5000 or possibly a road car

The reasons not to develop the Type 66 or contest the series have not been recorded. However the editors will attempt to surmise.

Lotus Absence

The Chapman/ Lotus absence and failure to register success in Can-Am seems difficult to fathom. Although we note that several low key Lotus were entered or modified to compete. It would seem to play to Chapman’s strengths and commercial opportunities including:-

The unrestricted rules
His history of using Ford V8 engines at Indianapolis
The prize money
The circuits suiting the cars
British and American drivers familiar with the cars were available and willing to compete

The editors would postulate that Chapman’s failure to exploit the opportunity might be drawn from some of the following circumstances:-

The Lotus Type 30/40 were not properly developed
They were built marginally too soon , and did not create the best reputation
They might have also fallen between eras of technological development particularly relating to tyre technology and aerodynamics
Perhaps in the attempt for simplicity and affordability the chassis an suspension were an inappropriate combination relative to power and speed being extracted
Critically it ought be stated that the cars might have befallen the Chapman malaise of a combination of being overstretched organizationally, lacking resources, lacking testing and a certain impatience across all to seek incremental progress allied with an expectation and budget requiring instant success. However it must always be noted the enormity of output and diversity of machinery – road and track that Chapman/Lotus delivered particularly in the decade of the 1960’s. Not least the three World Championships
There is a possibility that he was unable to muster a suitable racing team
Perhaps too Chapman’s reputation in the US might have been slightly tarnished by the Elite and some aspects of the Indianapolis programme.
Its worth noting that the other main competitors were more focused and restricted their racing campaigns
It’s not known whether logistics played any part it would seem unlikely , there is a possibility that sponsorship might have not been available.Tyres is a particular instance
The editors also question if a Ford engine was available; possibly Ford wished to concentrate their resources elsewhere although the home grown championship would seem an ideal marketing opportunity and with Chapman /Lotus connection at Indianapolis providing track record. Ford might not have wanted a rival to the GT40
Similarly it might be that tyres were not available for various reasons
It’s also worth pondering if Chapman would have entertained a works team or sold to privateers? in this instance there was strong competition and established winners
Can-Cam like other forms of competitive racing can suffer from their own success. The large winnings no doubt forced expensive R&D .By the time that Chapman was considering a dedicated Can Am car the series was approaching its nadir
Perhaps too we ought consider that Chapman questioned if he could catch up late in the 1960’s and that a poor showing far from helping sales could generate negative publicity
Success in FI might have been considered sufficient at the time for the sales volume and intended markets?

Perhaps we ought never to forget that Chapman and Lotus were a commercial concern and survival factors were primary considerations.

The Significance

Can –Am was a considerable success for all parties concerned. Not least was the technical innovation that it engendered. [See technical specification above] Of course this was truly competitive and the prize money both made it possible and worthwhile. Can-Am witnessed some truly outrageous and pioneering technology and this was no bad thing.

It possibly offered a special spectacle for a North American audience with its special meld of American and European technologies and international mix of drivers.

Although Chaparral did not win the greatest number of races / championships they led with a virtual all American assemblage. This must have significant psychological boost with moral affirming and the potential to compete successfully on the world stage.

Of course in the paragraph above we have to note that this was one major opportunity that Chapman let go by. It seems very significant that he missed the opportunity and it would be good research to discover the objective facts.

Dymock summarizes extremely well:-

“During the Johnson Wax years, the Can-Am series was a phenomenon, advancing American road racing by a dozen years within the span of half that time. It established in America a new sort of prestige, well organized motor racing that matched [except, perhaps in the tradition of 70 years] anything in Europe”

Can-Am brought forward some of the greatest drivers, engineering design and race spectacle in one series. Through the process it won international respect.

Decline and Revival

The classic Can –Am ended in 1974.there was several reasons for this:-

Spiraling costs associated with some of the extreme technology and space race materials
General and related costs of competing [see above]
World economic recession brought on by oil/ energy crisis
Possibly related falling support from sponsors vis recession
Possibly over domination by few marques
Possibly falling attendance relating to combination of other factors mentioned

Can-Am was followed by F5000 then later revived in modified form between 1980-1987. It was further briefly reintroduced 1998/99. A form of Can-Am reinvented between 2004-2009 in the form of Le Mans Prototypes.

Learning Opportunities

Our learning /educational opportunities are intended to be challenging thought provoking and requiring additional research and/or analysis.

These opportunities are particularly designed for a museum/education centre location where visitors would be able to enjoy access to all the structured resources available in conjunction with any concurrent exhibition.

In this instance we suggest the following might be appropriate:-

Obtain customers car sales for main rivals to Lotus 30/40 –how do they compare?
Conduct SWAT or Cost Benefit Analysis that Chapman might have undertaken to evaluate returns of Can-Am series
Conduct research detect if Can-Am sales had beneficial impacts on manufacturers and engine suppliers
Which marques competed in FI, Can-Am and Indianapolis?
Use CAD drawing of proposed Lotus 66 a produce traditional elevation views ,can you detect inspirations in its forms
Use same drawings to produce imagery that Chapman might be used to attract sponsor in particular draw the proposed Type 66 in JPS colours.
Suggest a proposal that Chapman might have laid before sponsors
Design a closed GT road car based around the Type 30/40 in the Chapman mould

Exhibitions, Education and Economics

The proposed museum believes that commercial considerations are both necessary and complementary with its educational objectives.

For these reasons our Business Plan includes provision for promoting products and services which share Chapman’s ideals of mechanical efficiency and sustainability. In addition we propose merchandising that explain and interprets the social and cultural context of Chapman’s designs in period. It’s suggested there will be catalogue for on line purchasing.

In particular the Can-Am series and recent historical recreation provides a glorious opportunity for exhibitions and interpretations.

Set in the mid-late 1960’s it falls in a significant cultural era across two continents. It touches the space race, societal change, women’s lib, Vietnam, pop music and the hippies. Into which is feed the extrapolation of the space race materials, technologies but also reasonably inexpensive fuel.

Can-Am was an evident success and the proposed CCM&EC ought be able to present and interpret this to a wide audience whilst retaining a strong educational / analytical questioning relating to Chapman’s strategically conduct.

Some exhibition titles might include:-

Forty Shades of Green: Lotus 30 &40
Type 66 mocked up
Home on the Range: Lotus Brand racing in America
Bangers And Smash: Can-Am racing
Wild, Wild Horses: Engine Capacity growth during Can-Am era
Can-Am: From Pony Express to Pony Excess
Litres and Meters: Can-Am Cars
Can-Am cars Spread their wings
Can-Am race car Rodeo

Conclusion

Can-am was a great series at a great time of the 1960’s spanning pop and the hippy era.

Can-am was successful on many fronts. It possibly became a victim of its success. As in other branches of motorsport even those intended to be affordable have a tendency to see costs escalate.

The purse of Can-Am possibly accentuated this .The high rewards possibly warranting high levels of technology and expense. But there were external factors too not least the oil crisis of the 1970’s.

It’s interesting that authors including Crombac have not explored why Chapman did not contest Can-Am; although Ludvisgen suggests disillusionment with the larger capacity racers.

Chapman’s failure to exploit Can-Am is an anomaly. As we have noted there is all the evidence and inducements he required. Can-Am attracted other marques whom competed with Lotus in other classes but were not always more successful.

The deduction being that Chapman perhaps came to realize that he was spreading his meagre resources too far and that despite the prize and prestige of Can-Am he could not succeed without other sacrifices .Throughout motorsport technology and costs were rising and perhaps Chapman felt that in order to retain preeminence in FI with its impact on sales of his road cars he ought focus and restrict participation where results might not be gained. Of course their might be other political issues we will never know.

As there has been little formal debate on this subject; it’s to be hoped that discussion can be provoked and some hypothesis explored.

Appendix 1

Technical Specification of Canadian GP, 1964 [see details above]

1	Lotus 30			Ford			V8	N/A
2	Ferrari 275 P			Ferrari		3300 cc	V12	N/A
3	Ferrari 330 P			Ferrari		4000 cc	V12	N/A
4	Ferrari 330 P	0820		Ferrari		4000 cc	V12	N/A
5	Lotus 19	959		Climax				N/A
6	Brabham BT8	SC-2-64		Climax			L4	N/A
7	Elva Mk VII			BMW				N/A
11	Lola Mk.1	BR30		Climax		1500 cc		N/A
12	Cooper Monaco			Chevrolet			V8	N/A
17	Elva Mk VII			Porsche				N/A
19	Elva Mk VII			Ford				N/A
20	Lotus 23			Alfa Romeo				N/A
21	Brabham BT8	SC-1-64?		Climax				N/A
22	Brabham BT8	SC-4-64					L4	N/A
27	Elva Mk VII			BMW				N/A
30	Ferrari 250 LM	5909		Ferrari		3300 cc	V12 2v 1xOHC	N/A
41	Lotus 19	963		Ford			V8	N/A
43	Lotus 23			Ford				N/A
47	McLaren Elva Mark I	BMMR 1/64		Oldsmobile	/Traco	3900 cc	V8	N/A
55	Cooper Monaco	CM/6/63		Ford		4700 cc	V8/90° 2v OHV	N/A
66	Chaparral 2A	001		Chevrolet		5500 cc	V8	N/A
71	Cooper Monaco	CM/4/63		Chevrolet			V8	N/A
77	Elva Mk VII			Porsche				N/A
81	Kelly Special	001		Porsche				N/A
89	Speedwell Special							N/A
94	Ferrari 250 TR	0714TR	1958	Ferrari		3000 cc	V12	N/A
95	Ferrari 250 TR	0770TR		Ford		7000 cc	V8	N/A
99	Porsche 718 RS 61			Porsche				N/A
133	Porsche 718 RS 61			Porsche				N/A
155	Cooper Monaco			Ford				N/A
169	Lotus 23			Climax				N/A

Entered cars that did not arrive:

No.	Car	Chassis	Built	Engine	Type	Size	Cyl.	Turbo
8	Lotus 19	957		Chevrolet			V8	N/A
14	Shelby Cobra			Chevrolet				N/A

Reference:

Can Am challenge 1966-87 in FI Register Record Book.Rabagliati, Page, and Sheldon.FI Record.2001

Can-Am Cars in Detail. Pete Lyons [photographs by P.Harholdt].David Bull.2010

ISBN: 9781935007111

Can-Am.P.Lyons.Motorsport International.2002

ISBN: 0760300178

Can-Am Photo History. Pete Lyons. Motor books.1999

ISBN: 0760308063

Can-Am.Pete Lyons.Motorbooks.1995

ISBN: 0760300178

Chaparral Can-Am and Prototypes Race Cars. Dave Friedman.Motorbooks.1998

ISBN: 0760305080

Chaparral. The Texas Roadrunner. Friedman, Kazuo, Hayashi, Miyoshi.News Publishing Co. [Japan] 1997. [Non ISBN reference 978/4938495534]

Chaparral- Complete History of Jim Hall’s Chaparral Race cars 1961-1970.Richard Falconer and Doug Nye.Motorbooks.1992

ISBN: 087938607X

Chaparral. Jim Hall and Dave Friedman.Motorbooks.1998

Chaparral.Carl Ludvigsen

Can-Am Cars, 1966-74.Dave McKinney. Osprey

Can-Am Racers 1966-69.Brooklands

Can-Am Racers 1970-74.Brooklands

Can-Am Racers 1966-74.R. Clark.Brooklands.

ISBN: 1855205440

Can-Am Challenger.Peter Bryant. David Bull. See A&R Book review Can-Am Challenger

Chaparral: Can-am Racing Cars from Texas. Karl Ludvigsen

ISBN:

Chaparral. Classic &Sports cars. August 1989

Lola, Can-Am and Endurance Race Cars.D.Friedman.MBI.1998

ISBN: 076030646X

On Four Wheels.Orbis Publishing. Can-Am by Mike Kettlewell

Lotus Sports Racers. [Colin Pitt] Unique Motor Books. ISBN: 1841554308

The Lotus Book. William Taylor. Coterie Press. ISBN: 1902351002

IndyCar.Kris Perkins.Osprey.1993.

ISBN: 1855323990

The World of Racing Cars.Dymock.Hamlyn.1972.

ISBN: 0600392406

The Worlds Racing Cars.Twite.Macdonald.1971

SBN: 356031551

Can-Am 50^th.anniversary.Flat out with North America’s Greatest Race Series 1966-74.Levy&Biro .Motorbooks.2016.

ISBN: 9780760350218

Cut away drawings by James Allington and Dick Ellis for Autocar.

www.worldsportsracingprototypes-Can-Am1966

Bob Challman: www.ultimateracinghistory

“Motor Sport” .September, 2016.

*References obtained through the British Library

A&R library – see also book review

Figure 1.Advert poster capturing the essence of the 1965 event with Clark in winning Lotus 38

2.0 Lotus 38: The Special Relationship

Introduction

Our title the Special Relationship is both a play on words but also expresses the serious connectivity, partnership /collaboration and teamwork/spirit that enabled Team Lotus to win Indianapolis in 1965.

The commercial importance is almost immeasurable. The significance of Indianapolis to Lotus and Chapman cannot be overestimated.

It is possibly best summarized in bullet. It provided:-

Enhanced reputation
Reputation linked to publicity and sales both racing road cars
Income –quite considerable see details of purse below
Collaboration with Ford [and by achievement reaching out to other manufacturers]
The possibility of consultancy
Advertising and Exposure to the very important American market not least California
It gave great support to Lotus dealers in the USA
It provided potential sponsors with credibility of the marque ,delivery and success with a very fashionable for the time British image
It bridged and reached out on a cultural level and reinforced the image of Britain in the US during the 1960’s [ nb importance of British pop music , fashion and TV

Ford committed to the total performance programme in the early 1960’s.This was major corporate decision of one of the world’s greatest car makers. Chapman had been using Ford engines from early on in his manufacture of cars. This developed commercially with the Elan engine and the Ford Lotus Cortina of 1962.

It’s with this context in mind we can approach the importance of entry and winning at Indianapolis.

Subscribers might like to see related A&R articles:-

Lotus Indianapolis cars
Lotus and Can-Am

Ford’s Total Performance

Editors have paraphrased from the net etc.:-

“Total Performance was far more than just a slogan or an advertising spiel. It was a universal commitment-from president Henry Ford II down-that the company would develop the cars, engines, and/or teams it took to win in the world’s most significant racing series. Lee Iacocca, Carroll Shelby, Bill Gay, Colin Chapman, Keith Duckworth and Mike Costin, Don Frey, and hundreds more executed a masterful assault on Indy, NASCAR, Formula 1, Trans-Am, endurance racing, the quarter mile, and others. They were successful (and in several cases, dominating) in all of them.

This story was written in race results for nearly a decade. Here are the archival photographs-iconic and seldom seen-that connect names, faces, and legendary race cars to those all-conquering statistics.

http://www.motortrend.com/classic/features/c12_0612_ford_racing/index.html

Ford need to do something and it was the guiding hand of Lee Iacocca that would transform the company. He was the first manager to propose an all-encompassing marketing campaigned centered around high-performance. Initially it was a high level proposal; there were no granular details or specific programs. As opportunities arouse they were evaluated and if it fit with the company’s strategy the program was added to the Total Performance mix. In June of 1962 Ford released a six-paragraph statement announcing Ford’s withdrawal from the 1957 AMA Safety Agreement. It was signed by Henry Ford II. It was at this point that Ford went all in on the Total Performance program.

Henry Ford II

Lee Iacocca – 1964 Indianapolis 500

Total Performance was a marketing program and corporate funding would be subject to the marketing groups strategic planning. The company’s motto became “Total Performance” and was implemented as engineering excellence demonstrated in the heat of competition. Total Performance included programs that directly promoted the production cars and other initiatives that built the brand image. Through the life of Total Performance careers would be built, legends created and lives lost.

Neither before nor after has any manufacture commitments its reputation to as aggressive competition program as Ford did. By the end of the Total Performance program Ford powered cars had won the World Manufactures Championship, the Indianapolis 500 and USAC Championship, international Formula I, II and Formula III series, Sports Car Club of America’s Trans-Am series. Ford also had a significant impact on international Rallying, drag racing and the NASCAR racing series.

Without updated products any marketing program is heading for failure. With Iacocca’s guidance and engineering input from people like Don Frey, Ford revised its product line up. The Falcon lead the way to the Mustang and an entire new market segment, the Pony Car, was born. When the 427ci V8 was introduced it was offered in the Galaxie and the Fairlane. Ultimately there would be a program or multiple programs for each of the product lines and advertising campaigns to promote the success.

Len Terry

The late Len Terry was probably not given all the credit he deserved for the Indianapolis programme. His contribution was structured and integrated, rather holistic and included the car design and race logistics.

From wiki:-

“He was working on a freelance basis (including for Lotus) when Colin Chapman asked him to return full-time to design a car to compete in the Indianapolis 500. He produced the rear-engined Lotus 29 which, driven by Jim Clark, finished a close second at the 1963 Indianapolis 500 and the Lotus 34 for 1964 which, although starting from pole-position only completed 47 laps (out of 200) due to tyre and suspension problems. Terry later claimed that differences with Chapman meant the car had not been fully developed.^[3] He was also involved in the design of the Lotus 33 F1 car with which Clark won the 1965 Drivers’ World Championship.^[5]

For the 1965 Indianapolis 500, Terry was given full control over the design of the Lotus 38, and the car finished first that year, and second in 1966, each time with Clark driving. However, Terry left Lotus before the 1965 race, having already been recruited by Dan Gurney‘s AAR team to design a Formula One car.^[3] This led to the Eagle–Weslake V12, which has been considered one of the most aesthetic Formula One designs.^”

Terry has stated with regard to the design methodology for the Indianapolis cars he employed the following including design of the first Lotus Indianapolis car [29 ]:-

Mixture of experience

Design know how
Common sense
Suck it and see

For example the cars right hand suspension links were six inches longer than those on the left.

The Design/Specification

Len Terry commented:-

“the most notable thing about the Lotus 38 was that it was a true monocoque, the cockpit being cigar tube ……the 38’s metalwork wrapped right over the drivers knees and was thus 50% stiffer but there were lots of small details that made the difference…….I arranged the fuel tanks –there were three of them –so that they drained from the right side first, thus keeping as much weight as possible on the inboard side for as long as possible

Taylor adds;-

The chassis was considerably stiffer than any previous Lotus single seater but it still only weighed 130lb.the chassis contained a rear-mounted fuel reservouir fed by three separate tank bays ,two length ones each side and one behind the seat this allowed fuel capacity to increase by 40% with no expansion in terms of overall width or height

The shape of the 38 was much smoother than the 1963 64 cars ……….the length increased by 6inches in a longer nose to enhance air penetration. The track was slightly wider at 60 inches. Underneath the running gear remained much as before with the exception of two inch larger ventilated disc brakes and modified suspension geometry “

Ford Engine

The Ford engine was an extremely important ingredient of the Indianapolis car both from the sponsorship aspect but also performance to achieve parity with other established brand leaders.

Figure 2.”The engine that won Indy” the modified Ford Fairlane V8

Terry states:-

“The Ford engine was strong, perhaps a little over –valved or its capacity but more than powerful enough to do the job”

Taylor:-

“the latest incarnation of the fuel injected Ford V8 engine developed 500 bhp but the difference was that it fueled by alcohol rather than pump fuel ………alcohol engines run cooler than those on petrol ,a smaller radiator could be fitted ……….Lotus used Firestone tyres”

Figure 3.Advertisment and cutaway of the basic Ford Fairlane engine

Ford Fairlane Engine

The editors have seen a variety of specifications for the Ford Fairlane engine. In an article accompanying the above illustration the specification was outlined as:-

V8 water cooled
Cast iron block and heads
Single 4 barrel carburetor
4,262 cc
260 bhp at 5,800 rpm
269lbs/ft. torque at 4,500 rpm

Posthumus [Classic Racing Cars] quotes in relation to Lotus application:-

“The engine which they supplied was a 4.2 litre version of their Fairlane pushrod overhead valve 90 degree V8 series production unit, giving 375 bhp at 7200 rpm on four Weber twin choke carburetors

Ford US 90 degree V8
Bore and stroke 96.5×72.8 mm
Capacity 4261 cc
Four overhead camshafts operating 4 valves per cylinder ;Hilborn –Travers fuel injection electronic ignition
Maximum power 500bhp at 8000 rpm

Figure 4.Editors sketch of type 38 with representational cross section of Ford V8 engine. Note sponsor decals left of drawing but details provided below.

Technical Specification from Taylor

Model	Type 38	Indianapolis car
Year	1965
Volume	10
Engine	Ford	Quad cam,V8
C.C.	4,198 cc
Carburation	Hilborn Ford	mechanical injection
Power Output	500 bhp	at 8,800 rpm
Transmission	ZF 2DS20	2 speed manual
Chassis	Aluminium alloy	monocoque,steel sub frames
Body	Body chassis unit	separate GRP nose,tail,engine cover
Front Suspension	Offset to left	top rocker arm, double wishb’inboard csd’
Rear Suspension	Offset Reverse lower wb’	top link ,twin radius rods, csd’,anti-roll bar
Brakes F/R	outboard ventilated	12 in.Girling disc
Wheels F/R	15 x 8.5 or 16 x 9.5 in	Lotus cast magnesium
Tyres F/R	9.20 x 15/12.00×15 or 16
Length	156 in	3962.5mm
Width	73 in	1854mm
Height	31 in	787.5mm
Wheelbase	96 in	2438mm
Track	60/60 in	1524mm
Weight	1350 lb	1350 [Nye] 567 kg]

Note Posthumus suggests a dry weight of 1250 lb. [Classic Racing Cars]

Drawing

Figure 5.Editors sketch working drawing type 38.

Aesthetic

The editors consider the aesthetic of the Type 38 more significant than credited.

It bore the national race colour scheme but this was done in subtle way and yet accentuated. The manner sponsor details were incorporated tasteful.

Despite all the glamour and razzmatazz of Indianapolis the Lotus Type 38 was rather understated yet succeeded in being distinctive.

The editors are not sure who was responsible for the detailing but the bold yellow exhaust prominent above the engine and extending back over the body nicely colour coded with the total scheme. Equally the bright chrome work was just sufficient to lend some sparkle.

The editor did not possess the drafting skill to incorporate the sponsors logo’s on the drawing but we consider these sufficiently important to record them below.

Figure 6.Peter Hutton-Illustration of the Lotus 38- see details /availability from Historic Team Lotus memorabilia

Sponsors and Decals

These are the main sponsors the editors have been able to detect:

Enco
Sun
Perfect Circle
Autolite [see advertisement above]
Wynn’s
Bear
VHT
Premier
Sunnen
Monroe

Posthumus suggest that in addition:-

Hilborn-Travers fuel injection
Halibrand cast magnesium wheels
Firestone tyres of course

Subscribers who are also keen model makers might like to see the following website as the supplier has a set of Lotus Type 38 decals.

http://www.indycals.net/

Figure 7.Enco one of the sponsors of the Lotus 38

Jim Clark

Jim Clark is particularly identified with Lotus. He enjoyed a special relationship with Colin Chapman. He is thought to be amongst the greatest FI racing drivers of all time.

He was modest, quiet, unassuming but possessing natural talent and reserves of determination and in his own way a creativity as expressed through his driving ability and reading of a race. Here we need not expand .Subscribers are directed to our other relevant pieces about his life and driving for Lotus.

Subscribers are directed to an excellent website:-

https://www.indianapolismotorspeedway.com/history/people-of-ims/indianapolis-500-drivers/jim-clark

Clark almost did not race at Indianapolis because his mother had reservations about safety. Indianapolis was not the usual track conditions experienced in Europe neither the style of racing. The combined achievement of all the parties and team work are all the more remarkable as a result.

We include a breakdown of Clark’s record at Indianapolis and it forms a considerable achievement and legacy.

Figure 8.Poster found on the net which provides a totality of expression capturing the links around Jim Clark

From wiki

“James Clark, Jr OBE (4 March 1936 – 7 April 1968), known as Jim Clark, was a British Formula One racing driver from Scotland, who won two World Championships, in 1963 and 1965.

Clark was a versatile driver who competed in sports cars, touring cars and in the Indianapolis 500, which he won in 1965. He was particularly associated with the Lotus marque.”

Indy 500 results

Year^[21]	Car number	Start	Qual. speed	Speed rank	Finish	Laps completed	Laps led	Race status	Chassis
1963	92	5	149.750	7	2	200	28	Running	Lotus–Ford 29/3
1964	6	1	158.828	1	24	47	14	Suspension	Lotus–Ford 34/3
1965	82	2	160.729	2	1	200	190	Running	Lotus–Ford 38/1
1966	19	2	164.114	2	2	200	66	Running	Lotus–Ford 38/4
1967	31	16	163.213	23	31	35	0	Piston	Lotus–Ford 38/7
Totals						682	298

Starts	5
Poles	1
Front Row	3
Wins	1
Top 5	3
Top 10	3
Retired	2

Clark’s starting positions from 1964, 1965, and 1966 represent the best 3-race starting streak of the 1960s.
Clark’s 1965 win was the first win for a rear-engined car at the Indianapolis 500. No front-engined car has won the race since.

Strategy and Pit work

Len Terry:-

“I even designed the fueling system, adopting the swirl technique so that we could get more fuel in more quickly, Ford’s top NASCAR crew the Wood brothers did our pitstop.They were fantastic at wheel changing, made a big difference, but I like to think that our refueling rig made just as big a contribution, our pistops were certainly a lot faster than those of the opposition”

Purse

This is extremely important and subscribers will be able to better understand motives budgets and commitments when seen against the rewards. To which we might add those of advertising and reputational value added to the brand.

Despite the distance, costs and logistics Chapman and Lotus campaigned Indianapolis throughout the mid 1960’s. The editors believe this is the greatest indication of the totality of the rewards and a means to penetrate the American sports car market by gaining success at its greatest race.

1965 Indianapolis 500
FP	SP	Car	Driver	Car Name Chassis/Engine Running or Reason Out	Laps Comp	Prize Money	Qual. Speed
1	2	82	Clark, Jim	Lotus powered by Ford Lotus/Ford Running	200	$166,621	160.729
2	5	98	Jones, Parnelli	Agajanian/Hurst Kuzma-Lotus/Ford Running	200	$64,661	158.625
3	4	12	Andretti, Mario(R)	Dean Van Lines/Auto Technics Brawner/Ford Running	200	$42,551	158.849
4	7	74	Miller, Al (Krulac)	Jerry Alderman Ford-Lotus Lotus/Ford Running	200	$26,641	157.805
5	14	76	Johncock, Gordon(R)	Weinberger Homes/Wilseck Watson/Offy Running	200	$21,981	155.012
6	15	81	Rupp, Mick(R)	G.C. Murphy/Pete Salemi Gerhardt/Offy Flagged	198	$18,971	154.839
7	22	83	Johns, Bobby(R)	Lotus powered by Ford Lotus/Ford Flagged	197	$16,886	155.481
8	18	4	Branson, Don	Wynn’s/Leader Cards Watson/Ford Flagged	197	$16,376	155.501
9	32	45	Unser, Al(R)	Sheraton-Thompson/Ansted Lola/Ford Flagged	196	$14,416	154.440
10	28	23	Johnson, Eddie	H. Allen Chapman Watson/Offy Flagged	195	$14,656	153.998
11	9	7	Ruby, Lloyd	Dupont Golden 7/McManus Halibrand/Ford Blown Engine	184	$11,846	157.246
12	12	16	Sutton, Len	Bryant/Robbins & Vollstedt Vollstedt/Ford Flagged	177	$11,586	156.121
13	29	14	Boyd, Johnny	George Bryant Racing BRP/Ford Gearbox	140	$11,976	155.172
14	21	53	Hansgen, Walt	MG-Liquid Suspension/Qvale Huffaker/Offy Overheating	117	$10,566	155.662
15	1	1	Foyt Jr., A.J.	Sheraton-Thompson/Ansted Lotus/Ford Gearbox	115	$20,517	161.233
16	24	5	Tingelstad, Bud	American Red Ball/Hopkins Lola/Ford Crash 3	115	$9,569	154.672
17	6	66	Foster, Billy(R)	Jim Robbins & Vollstedt Vollstedt/Offy Water manifold	85	$9,936	158.416
18	19	18	Knepper, Arnie(R)	Konstant Hot/Vatis Kurtis/Offy Cylinder	80	$10,326	154.513
19	8	9	Unser, Bobby	STP Gas Treatment Ferguson/Novi Oil Fitting	69	$9,216	157.467
20	13	52	McElreath, Jim	Zink-Urschel Trackburner Brabham/Offy Rear End Gears	66	$8,656	155.878
21	16	94	Snider, George(R)	Gerhardt Offy Gerhardt/Offy Rear End Gears	64	$8,696	154.825
22	25	65	Duman, Ronnie	Travelon Trailer/Ruiz Gerhardt/Offy Rear End Gears	62	$8,786	154.533
23	31	41	Gregory, Masten(R)	George Bryant Racing BRP/Ford Oil Pressure	59	$9,076	154.540
24	10	54	Veith, Bob	MG-Liquid Suspension/Qvale Huffaker/Offy Piston	58	$8,266	156.427
25	26	88	Stevenson, Chuck	Vita Fresh OJ/Van Liew Kuzma/Offy Piston	50	$8,306	154.275
26	3	17	Gurney, Dan	Yamaha/All American Racers Lotus/Ford Timing Gears	42	$9,596	158.898
27	17	48	Grant, Jerry(R)	Bardahl MG/Kjell Qvale Huffaker/Offy Magneto	30	$7,786	154.606
28	30	19	Rodee, Chuck	Wally Weir’s Mobilgas Halibrand/Offy Rear End Gears	28	$8,726	154.546
29	27	29	Leonard, Joe(R)	All American Racers Halibrand/Ford Oil Leak	27	$7,816	154.268
30	23	25	McCluskey, Roger	All American Racers Halibrand/Ford Clutch	18	$8,106	155.186
31	11	24	Rutherford, Johnny	Racing Associates Halibrand/Ford Rear End Gears	15	$7,596	156.291
32	33	47	Cheesbourg, Bill	WIFE GoodGuy/Lane-Fulbright Gerhardt/Offy Magneto	14	$7,836	153.774
33	23	59	Hurtubise, Jim	STP-Tombstone Life/Chemical Kurtis/Novi Transmission	1	$8,626	156.863

Total Purse:	$628,399	Field Average:	156.058
Cars Entered:	79	Cars Started:	33
Number Rookies:	11	Former Winners:	2

Customer Cars/retail price

Taylor suggests 10 cars were built and that 2 were sold to private customers for $22,500 each.

These numbers and figures are interesting:-

They can be used to “guestimate” development cost v winnings
The success of the cars would generate demand [spiral we have discussed previously]
Additional cars on the track would provide further publicity
Profit on each car would contribute to positive overall budget

Learning Opportunities

Our learning /educational opportunities are intended to be challenging thought provoking and requiring additional research and/or analysis.

In this instance we suggest the following might be appropriate:-

Compare and Contrast American and European motor racing in 1960’s
Why was the V8 engine so significant to American motor industry
Quantify the financial value of winning Indianapolis to manufacturer
Estimate development costs in relation to purse for Chapman at Indianapolis
Consider the logistics and costs for Lotus attending Indianapolis in the 1960’s
How distinctive were Lotus cars and livery at Indianapolis
Establish exchange rates between $ and sterling in 1960’s
Examine European GP purse in contrast with Indianapolis
Compare Can-Am purse with Indianapolis

Education, Economics and Exhibitions

The proposed museum believes that commercial considerations are both necessary and complementary with its educational objectives.

In particular:-

Indianapolis :Chapman enters the Oval Office
Indianapolis: Chapman’s Bonanza
Indianapolis: Chapman’s American Dream
Indianapolis: Chapman’s Western Union
Indianapolis :Chapman’s Pony Express
Indianapolis :Chapman’s Transatlantic Treaty
Indianapolis : Chapman’s Declaration of Independence
Indianapolis :Chapman from brickbats to the brickyard
Jim Clark at Indianapolis :Scotland the Brave
Chapman at Indianapolis: An Englishman Abroad
British Pop in America: Chapman breaks all the records
Clark leads “Scotland the Brave”
Jim Clark at Indianapolis: Braveheart
The American Revolution:Rev’olution at Indianapolis
The American Civil War: Chapman challenges the Establishment at Indianapolis

Conclusion

The editors believe the conclusions here are fairly self-evident. Rather than repeat we invite subscribers to look at the objectives set out in the introduction and evaluate exactly what was achieved.In the editors estimation they were exceeded.

Chapman /Lotus and his team came to Indianapolis as a young progressive British team with little previous experience. On a modest budget they won in 1965, came very close on other occasions and set up a legacy that saw almost immediately wholesale that their concept was adopted.

Chapman and Lotus in the early days were not engine manufacturers, their achievement for Ford was immense and advanced their reputation in their home country and abroad. Also possibly allowing Chapman to access production engines economically. Although Ford did not go with Chapman for Le Mans their later collaboration for the Ford Cosworth DVF a couple of years later [see A&R dedicated article] would again set up revolutionary changes that echoed down through to the Lotus 72 etc.

Other marques are sometimes forced to buy or create publicity for marketing purposes. The editors invite our subscribers to consider the value of positive publicity that winning Indianapolis provided. Although it cannot be forensically proved possibly in the mind of Ford and Lotus owners was the glow of association, identification with a big winner.

Finally the editors call attention to the special relationship that pervaded the Chapman /Lotus achievement. A small young British specialist was collaborating with one of it not the largest car maker in the world, crossing the Atlantic out of near obscurity to win at Indianapolis. This was achieved with considerable team work, motivation and cooperation.

Furthermore this was in the era of the mid 1960’s when America and Britain were enjoying an explosion of youth culture and appreciation of each other’s contributions in design, manufacture, fashion and music. Around the time of the Indianapolis success Lotus Elan would appear on American TV in the cult programme The Avengers. It’s very likely in the public’s mind these events possessed a connectivity and association with a particular progressive modernism and Britishness. This in turn might have influenced a wider pervasiveness and acceptance of British products in America as well as feeding the large number of American tourists coming to Britain in the 1960’s. [See dedicated A&R article on Lotus and Carnaby Street etc.]

When we consider the achievements of Chapman and Lotus there is a risk the focus is too narrow and restrictive rarely stretching beyond the racing cars in fact the reality is more complex more fascinating and infinitely deeper in the cultural design impact he unleashed. The impacts still rippling through time in to today and the editors consider will extend well into the future.

Appendix

To better comprehend the commercial/competition interface of the Ford Total Performance corporate strategy subscribers are directed to:-

Ford Total Performance: Ford’s Legendary High-Performance Street and Race Cars Author: Martyn L. Schorr publisher: Motorbooks International

Number of Pages: 208 publication Date: 05 Nov 2015 Language: English ISBN-10: 0760348588 ISBN-13: 9780760348581 – See more at: http://www.getbookz.xyz/book/9780760348581/ford-total-performance#sthash.k6QfNdEN.dpuf

Ford Total Performance: Ford’s Legendary High-Performance Street and Race Cars – Follow Ford’s leap into the 1960s and the performance era–on the streets and on the track! In the early 1960s, Ford Motor Company underwent a dramatic change in corporate philosophy. Previously, under Ford’s young chairman, Henry Ford II (“the Deuce”) safety, not performance, was the goal. But by 1962, even the chairman realized his philosophy needed to change. Ford was nearly invisible to car-crazy baby boomers. Lee Iacocca convinced Ford that he needed to act decisively or risk losing the emerging youth market to the competition. Thus began Ford’s “Total Performance” program. “Ford Total Performance” is all about Ford’s prime racing era from 1961 through 1971. In addition to purpose-built race cars, it also covers production performance cars, specialty models, and unique concepts such as lightweight drag race cars. The book explores the 427 Fairlane Thunderbolt; Mercury Comet; unique V-8 Falcons that competed in the 1963 and 1964 Monte Carlo Rallies; Dick Brannan’s 427 A/FX drag car; Ford Indy 500 winning race cars; 427 Overhead Cam SOHC 427 engines as used in A/FX and fuel race cars; Boss 302 and 429 Mustangs for street, drag racing, and Trans-Am; and many more. The Ford-Ferrari war that led to the creation of the legendary GT40 Le Mans race cars isn’t forgotten. Featuring unpublished period photographs, plus photos and artwork from Ford designers, “Ford Total Performance” covers all of Ford’s classic race and street cars, including Cobras and Shelby Mustangs. It’s a must-have book for any fan of classic American performance cars! – See more at: http://www.getbookz.xyz/book/9780760348581/ford-total-performance#sthash.k6QfNdEN.dpuf

3.0 Lotus –Historic Sponsor Series: Firestone: On the Rim of Success

General Introduction

The exact interpretation of sponsorship in conjunction with Lotus is difficult to establish objectively. The appearance of a sponsor’s logo on a car is not necessarily evidence of financial support. Access to historical archive and contracts is sought wherever possible but with the passage of time and for various reasons these are not always available or accessible to the public.

In constructing the historic sponsor series the A&R looks only at the logos worn in period and assumes the company involved had no objection to Lotus promoting their products. The A&R sees much to be gained by the wider promotion of sponsors but in the event that a specific organization disapproves for any reason that article will be removed.

Sponsorship is an instrument of mutual benefit and promotion. Subscribers might like to see A&R articles on Sponsorship and Product Placement to understand the numerical / financial reach provided by sponsorship; with its ability to identify and project status through identification.

The principle continues particularly with regard to education based exhibitions [see below for details]

Each of these articles is devoted to a company/ organization that is believed to have sponsored Lotus or have been a major component supplier.

The intention of each article is to: –

Explain the sponsors own history and outline their products and services – past-present and future
Explain the historical connection with Lotus and the contribution made both in competition and the production cars
To suggest how these two interlocking facets may be translated into exciting, interpretive, educational and commercial exhibitions

Figure 1.an interesting period advertising poster. These are worthy of study and reflect changes in technology, society and fashion.

Firestone History and Products

From the net:-

“The Firestone Tire and Rubber Company is an American tire company founded by Harvey Samuel Firestone in 1900 to supply pneumatic tires for wagons, buggies, and other forms of wheeled transportation common in the era. Firestone soon saw the huge potential for marketing tires for automobiles. The company was a pioneer in the mass production of tires. Harvey Firestone had a friendship with Henry Ford. Firestone used this relationship to become the original equipment supplier of Ford Motor Company automobiles, and was also active in the replacement market.^[1]

In 1988, the company was sold to the Japanese Bridgestone Corporation.

In 1928 the company built a factory in Brentford, England, a longtime Art Deco landmark on a major route into the city. This closed in 1979.

The 1911 Indianapolis 500 auto race was won by a car running Firestone tires. Firestone-shod cars won all editions of the race from 1920 to 1966. The company also provided tires to Formula One from 1950 to 1974. As a consequence of the 1973 Indianapolis 500, 1973 United States Grand Prix and 1974 Austrian Grand Prix tragedies, Firestone retired from American open-wheel racing and Formula One after 1974. The manufacturer returned in 1995 to the CART series with technical assistance from Bridgestone. Goodyear retired after 1999, thereby leaving Firestone as the single supplier of the IndyCar Series as of 2013.

Sponsor Overview

The following is taken from Firestone tyre brochure Summer 2015.

Under the heading Freedom to Drive Firestone list their landmarks.

1900

Firestone Tyre and Rubber Company founded by Harvey firestone in Akron, Ohio

1906

Firestone delivers 2,000 sets of tyres to Ford Motor Company in the largest single order for tyres in the automobile industry at the time.

1910

Profits of the Firestone Tyre &Rubber company exceed 1MN USD for the first time.

1911

Ray Harroun wins the first Indianapolis 500 o firestone tyres

1928

Firestone opens its first overseas plant in Brentford, UK.Other EU plants in Sweden, Spain, France, Portugal, and Switzerland will follow the next decade

1932

Firestone develops the first practical low-pressure pneumatic tractor tyre and begins the “Put the Farm on Rubber” campaign

1968

Firestone provides Graham Hill is first FIA Formula 1 championship winner on Firestone tyres.

1988

Firestone merges with Bridgestone Corporation, a company that share similar values and tradition of innovative excellence .this merge created what is now the largest tyre manufacturer in the world.

1993

Firestone announces the return to the Indianapolis 500 and Indy/Champ Car 20 years after leaving motorsports

1996

Firestone wins the Indy 500 of the modern era for the first time

2014

Firestone Revival campaign is kicked off in Europe, with the launch of the new Destination HP SUV tyre

Wheels on Fire: The Lotus Connection

The sponsor’s logo has been seen on the following Lotus models: –

Type No.	Purpose	Year
19	Sports Racing	1960
29	Indianapolis	1963
38	Indianapolis	1965
42	Indianapolis	1966
43	F1	1966
49	F1	1967
56	Indianapolis	1968
57/58	F2&1	1968
63	F1	1969
64	Indianapolis	1969
72	F1	1972

Figure 3.Firestone being of American origin would have natural connections and historical association with Indianapolis. Note again the mutuality aspect.

Figure 4.Editors sketch drawing of Lotus 63 [4×4] fitted with Firestone tyres

Figure 5.Note black and white magazine advertisment.Which driver is being represented?

Learning Opportunities

Our learning /educational opportunities are intended to be challenging thought provoking and requiring additional research and/or analysis.

In this instance we suggest the following might be appropriate:-

Who are the world’s major tyre manufacturers? What is their connection with motor sport?
Analyise the statistics of tyre manufacturers in motorsport
Explore tyre manufacturers marketing techniques –how to they respond to societal values, fashions and concerns?
How important is tyre technology in FI today?
How many categories of markets for tyres exist? What are the respective numbers/percentages
Examine the physics and chemistry of tyre design
Examine sustainability in tyre manufacture
Why was the London firestone factory so important? How was its architecture defined?

Education, Exhibitions, Economics

The proposed museum believes that commercial considerations are both necessary and complementary with its educational objectives.

In particular an exhibition as outlined above has enormous potential for merchandising. The learning opportunities [individual and collective] and competitions provided might be linked to prizes for individuals, schools and related learning centers etc.

In this instance the following might be appropriate:-

What goes round comes round: Lotus and Tyre Technology
Firestone’s High Profile Prominence: Firestone and Lotus FI Championships
Firestone’s Low Profile :Tyre Strategy and Marketing
Firestone Rubber: Tree of Knowledge
Finding the Right Compound :Lotus and Firestone’s Grip
Form and Fusion: Firestone and Lotus chemistry
Firestone Composites: Tyres and Lotus chassis structures
Firestone on the Rim

Conclusion

Firestone state their legacy as:-

“An exciting heritage…………

The Firestone story begins in the year 1900 with the efforts of one man, Harvey Firestone.it was his vision, pioneering spirit and passion for innovation that sparked a virtual revolution in the field of transportation, one that has touched the lives of countless generations.

From helping to push the bounds of performance as some of motorsports premier racetracks to helping ordinary motorists broaden their own horizons …. Firestone’s legacy continues to inspire people from all walks of life, letting them rediscover the freedom to drive…..”

There can be little doubt about the significant contribution of firestone to Lotus which includes multiple Formula 1 world championships and Indianapolis. Both very high prestige on the world stage .Both lucrative. Firestone would therefore help Lotus sales and possibly increase American receptiveness. Equally Lotus success in Europe would have helped Firestone’s market share.

During the Chapman era Firestone would have a London base and occupy a landmark building. [See appendix below]

Firestone continue to innovate and inspire. Their contribution, products, research and development are worthy of wider publicity and dissemination. The proposed CCM&EC believes that it can achieve this in the most effective manner and capture added value with its educational progammes and allied training opportunities. In such a manner there is greater emphasis on the future. It avoids fossilization or atrophy by ensuring that sponsors are not frozen in time but presented as dynamic. The examination and historical perspective serve the purpose of context, momentum, continuity and an interpretation device for future trajectory.

Appendix

From the net:-

“The Firestone Factory

Brentford & Chiswick Journal 2 (1981)

In February 1980 the Firestone Tyre Factory on the Great West Road closed and 1,500 people lost their jobs. The building was sold to the Trafalgar House Company – run by Lord Victor Matthews and Nigel Broakes – and contracts were finally exchanged on Friday, 22nd August.

During that August week an Inspector from the Department of the Environment had visited the factory and had decided to ‘spot-list’ the building – an emergency procedure which would protect it from demolition. No senior civil servant could be found to sign the papers before the Bank Holiday weekend. On Saturday 23rd August Lord Matthews ordered demolition men to destroy the main features of the facade – the ceramic tiles around the entrance, the white pillars, the pediment above and the bronze lamp standards.

The Great West Road was once known as The Golden Mile. The factories along it were built in the late 1920s and the early 1930s, often by American companies which relied on advertising to promote their products. The factories themselves were used as advertising, which is why they were so eye-catching and exciting. They had to boast their modernity. Apart from Firestones, there was Trico (American windscreen wipers), Sperry Gyroscope, Pyrene fire extinguishers, Macleans, Gillette and Jantzen American swimwear. A similar company, Hoover, built their factory on the Western Avenue. Of British and European companies there were Henley’s – ‘The world’s biggest petrol station’ – the Garden Bakery of Macfarlane Lang, Coty Cosmetics, and Simmonds Aerocessories (now the Beecham building).

The Firestone factory was designed in 3 weeks by Wallis, Gilbert and Partners; it was built in 18 weeks. This firm was famous in its day for its industrial buildings, for example, the Wrigley’s factory in Wembley, Huntley and Palmer’s in Reading, the Victoria Coach Station, Glaxo in Greenford and Champion Spark Plugs in Feltham. Douglas Wallis himself felt that his buildings were only temporary, a part of the manufacturing process, and that he was not building long-lasting monuments. Many of the workers in the factory will appreciate the contrast between the clean, white exterior and the actual manufacturing process inside; it was dirty, hot and pungent with the smell of rubber.

Our area of west London has derived a lot of its wealth from the Great West Road and the Airport. The demolition of the Firestone factory is symptomatic of a change that is occurring along this road as manufacturing is being replaced by warehouses, distribution centres and offices. The large sites and favourable transport conditions may even tempt retailers here with hypermarkets.

The value of the Firestone factory was that it contained in its shape and appearance the means to interpret what has happened in this area since the end of the First World War It was the best example. Local people felt very bitter about the hasty way it was destroyed and they felt they had been robbed of one of the area’s landmarks. However there is one consolation for the historian who is interested in recording and observing the process of change. The confidence of its construction contrasts noticeably with the lack of confidence surrounding the saga of its destruction.”

Food for thought and the potential loss of the old Lotus factory site Hornsey?

Reference:

Marks of Excellence.P.Mollerup.Phaidon Press.1997.

ISBN: 0714838381

4.0 Tracks Across America: Riverside

Introduction

This is the first instalment in a new series.

These articles will be relatively brief. They will be cross referenced with existing and proposed A&R articles.

Due to the nature of the subject and some lack of experience by the editors we will use internet information as needed.

The editors consider the American dimension of Chapman’s/Lotus development extremely important.

This dimension has many facets which include:-

Moto racing in North America with related rules and governing bodies etc.
The home grown and imported brands used in racing / competition
The race tracks and their comparison with Europe
The connectivity between racing , publicity, reputation , image and sales, particularly with regard to Lotus road cars
The Lotus sales dealerships in US
Geography and climate that favoured open sports cars like the Lotus
The race track attendance /support and following of various series along with the associated financial viabilities
Broad cultural exchange between Europe and US particularly with regard to car culture and competition
American engines and particularly Ford and V8 engines adopted by Chapman for Lotus ; this to include race tuning
US racing drivers ,particularly the owner racers who chose to compete in Lotus

A recurring under current of our study of Colin Chapman and Lotus is the search for objectivity. The editors have deliberate6ly used comparison and benchmarking to evaluate Chapman and Lotus.

In this series we hope we can combine both in an examination of race track, the nature of the competition and the performance of Lotus at a specific venue.

Where possible we will include details of the entry list in order that the range, extent and the contemporaries can be better understood.

The editors will offer some comment and interpretation that they hope will explain a moment in time.

Articles to follow will look at Indianapolis, Can Am and FI GP racing.

Riverside

Subscribers are directed to the many excellent websites that feature this circuit in Southern California.

The following details are quoted from the net:-

“RIR played host to almost every major racing series in modern history. NASCAR to Can-Am to Cal Car Club to Indy Cars to International Motor Sport Association (IMSA) to United States Road Racing Championship (USRRC) to The National Hot Rod Association (NHRA) and the AMA Superbikes all called the track home for high-pro?le annual events. In 1960, RIR hosted the Formula One United States Grand Prix. Take also into account that no other sports car race in the US was richer than the annual LA Times Grand Prix as notable drivers from all over the world descended on the black tarmac ribbons winding through dessert sands of Riverside.”

It’s worth looking at events to trace the Lotus entries. A programme cover [illustrated above seems to feature a Lotus 19 possibly driven by Stirling Moss.

Riverside 200, October, 1964

The editors invite our subscribers to study the entry list below and make deductions .We reserve ours for comments below.

It’s significant that the race took place in the early mid 1960’s a time of Anglo-American cultural exchange.

1	Brabham BT8	Thomas Hitchcock	green				open	mid
2	McLaren Elva Mark I Oldsmobile	Bruce McLaren Motor Racing Ltd.	green (+white)	STP/BP		BP	open	mid
3	Brabham BT8 Climax	Team Elite (’62) Ltd.	white/green				open	mid
4	Brabham BT8	Ecurie Vitesse S.A., Geneva, Switz.	green				open	mid
5	Cooper Monaco T61 Chevrolet	Nickey Chevrolet	purple				open	mid
6	Chaparral 2A Chevrolet	Chaparral Cars	white	CHAMPION			open	mid
7	Brabham BT8 Climax	Stirling Moss Automobile Racing Team	green				open	mid
8	Lotus 19 Chevrolet	Alan Green Chevrolet, Inc.	green				open	mid
10	Lotus 19 Ferrari	Rosebud Racing – Tom O’Connor, Jr.	blue				–	mid
11	Brabham BT8 Climax	Robert Lamplough	red				open	mid
12	Cooper Monaco T61 Chevrolet	Bernice Mc I. Wintersteen	green/white				open	mid
14	Webster 2 Liter Type A	Webster Racing Enterprises	black/red				–	–
15	Lotus 30 Ford	Colin Chapman Team Lotus	green				open	mid
16	Lotus 23B Porsche	Trans Ocean Motors	white				–	mid
19	Lotus 19G Ford	Pacesetter Homes	white (+black)	PACESETTER Ford			open	mid
21	Lotus 30 Ford	Bob Challman – Ecurie Shirlee					–	mid
22	Lotus 23B Ford	Bob Challman – Ecurie Shitlee					–	mid
23	Hussein I Dodge	John Mecom, Jr.	dark blue (+white)	ZEREX SPECIAL	Firestone		open	mid
24	Lola Mk.6 GT Chevrolet	John Mecom, Jr.	blue/white				closed	mid
25	Genie Mk.10 Chevrolet	John Mecom, Jr.	blue/white				–	–
26	Scarab Mk IV Chevrolet	John Mecom, Jr.	blue/white				open	mid
33	Cheetah – Chevrolet	Clarence Dixon Cadillac, Inc.	silver				–	front
39	Cooper King Cobra Ford	Charles C. Cox	metallic blue				open	mid
51			blue/white		Goodyear		open	mid
60	Genie Mk.10B Ford	Don Webster Enterprises	yellow				–	–
61	Genie Mk.8 Chevrolet	Paul Reinhart	purple				open	mid
66	Chaparral 2A Chevrolet	Chaparral Cars	white				open	mid
69	Lotus 23B	Arciero Bros. Racing	red				–	mid
75	Platypus – Porsche	Hans-Adam – P.A.M.	yellow				open	front
77	Elva – Porsche	Oliver C. Schmidt	yellow				–	mid
81	Cheetah G.T. Coupe Chevrolet	Alan Green Chevrolet	green				–	front
90	Genie Mk.10 Chevrolet	George H. Koehne, Jr.	white				–	–
91	Fordette (McKee Mk.III Ford)	Shelby American, Inc.	blue				–	–
92	Cooper King Cobra Ford	Shelby American, Inc.	blue	STP	Goodyear	STP	open	mid
93	Cooper King Cobra Ford	Shelby American, Inc.	blue				open	mid
94	Cooper King Cobra Ford	Shelby American, Inc.	dark grey		Goodyear	STP	open	mid
95	Cooper King Cobra Ford	Shelby American, Inc.	blue				open	mid
96	Lotus 19 Monte Carlo Chevrolet	Arciero Bros. Racing	red				open	mid
97	Lang Cooper Monaco T61 Ford	Shelby American, Inc.	orange				open	mid
98	Shelby Cobra roadster	Shelby American, Inc.	metallic blue				–	front
99	Lotus 23B	Shelby American, Inc.	blue				–	mid
111	Lotus 23B Ford	Rick Muther	white				open	mid
146	Genie Mk.8 Comet	Jim Wessman	green yellow				open	mid
177	Elva Mk VII Porsche	Robert Bosch Spark Plug Special	silver/blue				–	–
	Cooper – Ford						open	mid
	Lotus 30 Ford	Colin Chapman Team Lotus					open	mid
	Lotus 23B Ford						–	mid
	Cooper – Chevrolet						–	–

Entered cars that did not arrive:

No.	Car	Entrant	Colour	Sponsors	Tyres	Lubricant	Body	Engine
9	Brabham BT8 BRM	Rosebud Racing – Tom O’Connor, Jr.	blue				open	mid
13	Ferrari Special	Robert R. Stevens	gold				–	–
17	Lotus 23 Alfa Romeo	G.R.T. Enterprises	white				–	mid
18	Ferrari Prototype	John Surtees	red				–	–
20	Lotus 30 Ford	Bob Challman – Ecurie Shirlee					–	mid
34	Elva – BMW	Benz Racing Team	white				–	mid
36	Cheetah G.T. Coupe	Four Jays Racing Team	red				–	front
38	Front Runner ‘I’ Chevrolet	Beach City Chevrolet	orange red				–	–
41	Elva Mk VIIS BMW	Rev – M. Racing	blue				–	mid
43	Lotus 23B	Frank Monise Motors	red				–	mid
44	Lotus 23B	Frank Monise Motors	green				–	mid
48	Porsche 718 RS 60	Ralph Wood	blue/white				–	mid
55	WRE II Chevrolet	Prince Sat	green				–	–
57	Lotus Seven	Haddad Enterprises	green				–	front
58	Cheetah G.T. Coupe	Bill Thomas Company	white				–	front
64	Lotus 23	Reg Parnell (Racing) Ltd.	blue/red				–	mid
67	Cooper	Team Corvette	white				open	mid
70	Genie Mark I Roadster Climax	Harry L. Banta	yellow				–	–
71	Ol’Yaller Mk II	Jerry Entin	yellow				–	–
76	Elva Mk VII Porsche	Oliver C. Schmidt	yellow				open	mid
78	Elva – Porsche	Oliver C. Schmidt	white				–	–
79	Elva – Porsche	Oliver C. Schmidt	yellow				–	–
82	Shivley Special Ford	Troy Clem	red				–	–
83	Pegasus I	Ralph Wood	green/white				–	–
87	Elva Mk VII Porsche	Ralph Wood	yellow/black				open	mid
88	Merlyn Mark 4A Porsche	Ken O’Neill	green				–	–
121	MG Special	Frank G. Blachly	bronze				–	–
123	Lotus 23F	Paul Scott	silver				–	mid
141	Lotus 23B Osca Special	W. F. Goodrum/Enduro Speed, Inc.	white/blue				–	mid
169	Genie Huffaker	Thomas M. Tobin, DDS	coral				–	–
170	Lotus 23B	Ernie Gravelle	blue				–	mid
178	Cooper Monaco	Grizzly Engineering	blue				open	mid
187	Cooper – Chevrolet	Jim Gravelle	red				–	–
221	Lotus 23	James W. Paul	blue				–	mid
222	Porsche Spyder	Masterson Racing Enterprises	blue				–	mid
444	Lotus 23B	Dio Brothers	white				–	mid

The editor’s note the range and capacity variation of potential Lotus entry which includes the 19, 23, and Seven.

European marques are well represented with Lola, Brabham, McLaren, and even Ferrari.

American marques of note are Chaparral, Webster, King Cobra and Shelby Cobra.

Also significant is the adoption of American engines into British marques.

Many of these marques competing in 1964 would go on to join the Can am series of 1966 [see dedicated A&R articles on both Can-Am and Chaparral].

Lotus 30

On this occasion we discuss the Lotus 30.The Type 30 driven by Jim Clark obtained one of its best results. There was a competitive field and engines of similar performance were included.

Equally there were some international level drivers competing against American talent that might have had more experience of the track.

The holistic combination of track, driver might have assisted Lotus to be well placed.

Figure 1.This is Spark scale model of the Jim Clark /Lotus 30 see entry details above. Car identified by race number. See: racingmodels.com. A fine Spark 1:43 scale model.
SK2187 M8

The Lotus Type 30 Ford as raced to 3rd place in the 1964 Riverside 200 Los Angeles Times Grand Prix for Sports Cars by the great Jim Clark.

Rather than duplicate we suggest subscribers look at several of our dedicated articles on the Lotus 30&40.

Learning Opportunities

Our learning /educational opportunities are intended to be challenging thought provoking and requiring additional research and/or analysis.

In this instance we suggest the following might be appropriate:-

Consider the content of an appropriate exhibition designed around American Country &Western anthems like “The Race is On”, Don’t Fence Me In”, “Fast as You”, “Looking at the World through a Windshield”
Explore the economics /viability of circuits discuss circumstances of how and why Riverside was closed and redeveloped
Study the origins of race circuits and assess their importance in the development of the automobile? Does the same apply today?
Explore the economic geography of road circuits – how can the best sites be identified?
Plot the location/distribution of the main North American road race circuits. Estimate the distances between and what population base did they serve
Explore the social dimension of attendance , estimate popularity and motivation for attendance –drivers and spectators
Compare / contrast oval and road racing circuits in North America
Enumerate the marque/ brands that became Anglo-American hybrids adopting American engines in the 1960’s
Debate the interrelationship between large capacity engines , modest outputs , cheap fuel and sustainability
Contemplate the Who,Where,When and Why ,Which Lotus models helped establish the British brand in the US
How might a virtual track experience of Riverside be created to generate user participation?

Exhibitions, Education and Economics

In the museum context the editors believe that commercial considerations are both necessary and complementary with its educational objectives.

For these reasons our suggested outline Business Plan includes provision for promoting products and services which share Chapman’s ideals of mechanical efficiency and sustainability. In addition we propose merchandising that explain and interprets the social and cultural context of Chapman’s designs in period. It’s suggested there will be catalogue for on line purchasing.

The editors consider it important to introduce a British and European audience to North American racing and its experience. This is more important as circuits get redeveloped like Riverside. For this reason it would be important to mount education and rewarding exhibition experiences connecting audiences with historical perspectives.

The following might be appropriate:-

The American Dream: of motor racing
Route 66
California Dreaming: Racing in the sun
Car Culture in the US
Ford’s: The Engine of Change
Mavericks of Racing Car Design
Wild ,wild Horses:BHP of American engines in 1960’s

Conclusion

For brevity, impact and to avoid duplication in future pieces in the series; the editors use bullet points to summarize our evaluation of Riverside and the Lotus connection.

Riverside was an important circuit and well regarded by drivers and spectators
Race circuits across the world face threats of redevelopment but this can be a the loss of social capital
Tracks like Riverside provided a neckless and chain assisting the development of American and later international motor racing
Circuit variation and complexity was good for drivers and spectators
Racing assisted automobile development and provided branding /publicity /advertising opportunity for manufacturers
Related was engine development and particularly how the specialist European marques adopted American engines [think of examples like Jensen,TVR, AC and earlier Allard]
Racing circuits provided driver experience, performance tuning to specific layouts and nurtured driver talent , often offering a stepping stone /springboard to international level
Race tracks like Riverside were steeped in drama, excitement and visual spectacle. The live on in the memory and register as a competitive arena
The race tracks provided a social and cultural exchange of ideas , machinery technology , experience and in the more amateur days a meeting place for direct and indirect participation
The race circuits can also be studied as prism to examine social and cultural habits along with technological advances

The editors will enjoy developing this series. We invite subscribers to share experiences, photographs or to suggest tracks or events in North America which connect with Lotus.

The editors will then research these and write them up.

European audiences will be richer, more informed and culturally aware from the experience.

Reference:

On this occasion the editors have used net material. Other sources are contained in the bibliographies with specific mentioned articles.

Editor John Scott Davies

Editor Neil Duncan

Webmaster Jamie Duncan