on the one hand, he is seen as one of the least deserving champions.
on the other hand, he made mincemeat of HHF - a driver previously considered to be on the level of M. Schumacher.
poor career choices (could he have fared better had he stayed on at Williams?) seem to be a constant throughout his career.
PTRACER wrote: ↑3 years ago
I didn't explain myself properly...The difference in lap times between the cars was mostly due to their top speeds on the straight, so for teams like Brabham, or the 2.7 litre Climax cars, the corners didn't make much difference to overall lap time.
In Clark's case, him and Hill were in the same car and the Eagle was even faster in a straight line, so Clark must have made up most of his time in the corners alone.
True, PT. The Eagle was clocked at 196mph at Spa and Clark reported hitting the DFV's limiter halfway down to Stavelot at 193mph. Only 3mph but it would have made a difference that Clark has to overcome.
'Don't mean to interrupt and/or get nit picky, but, also one needs to add to the equation is the time it takes to arrive at those terminal velocities.
Jim, of course, was/is my man and let's say (hypothetically) he was cornering at 1 mph quicker, and the torque of both engines were the same (acceleration identical, hypothetically, remember), that extra mile per hour advantage is carried all the way up to the rev limiter.
I also don't know the stats, but if the DFV was torquier than the Weslake, then even though Gurney had a higher max speed, mayhaps Jim got to his quicker (acceleration rate) which, again, potentially makes up time..... (edit for clarification): Thus, if Jim reached his 193 mph (rev limiter mentioned previously) only half way down the straight, and Dan was still accelerating from 185 at that point and only reached his 196 just before slowing, Jim was making up time right there.....
Time on straights is not purely dependent on a cars maximum velocity.
Absolutely agree with you JC. What we don't know though is whereabouts and on which straight the speed trap was that Gurney was clocked at. He may have been already been doing 196mph at the same point as Clark was doing 193... Logic suggests you place a speed trap just before where cars brake from their fastest point on a circuit, but I've never found out where the speed trap was at Spa in '67 (in fact more drivers than just Gurney must have been clocked but I've never seen any other speeds quoted). Clarks speed came from the calculated max of the fixed ratio ZF gearbox at max rpm - trying to remember where I read that, might have been Michael Oliver's Lotus 49 book but I might be wrong. Might have been the Motor Sport report of that race.
"I decided i was going to go into it flat, so i did" Nigel Mansell, 1990 Mexican GP
PTRACER wrote: ↑3 years ago
I didn't explain myself properly...The difference in lap times between the cars was mostly due to their top speeds on the straight, so for teams like Brabham, or the 2.7 litre Climax cars, the corners didn't make much difference to overall lap time.
In Clark's case, him and Hill were in the same car and the Eagle was even faster in a straight line, so Clark must have made up most of his time in the corners alone.
True, PT. The Eagle was clocked at 196mph at Spa and Clark reported hitting the DFV's limiter halfway down to Stavelot at 193mph. Only 3mph but it would have made a difference that Clark has to overcome.
'Don't mean to interrupt and/or get nit picky, but, also one needs to add to the equation is the time it takes to arrive at those terminal velocities.
Jim, of course, was/is my man and let's say (hypothetically) he was cornering at 1 mph quicker, and the torque of both engines were the same (acceleration identical, hypothetically, remember), that extra mile per hour advantage is carried all the way up to the rev limiter.
I also don't know the stats, but if the DFV was torquier than the Weslake, then even though Gurney had a higher max speed, mayhaps Jim got to his quicker (acceleration rate) which, again, potentially makes up time..... (edit for clarification): Thus, if Jim reached his 193 mph (rev limiter mentioned previously) only half way down the straight, and Dan was still accelerating from 185 at that point and only reached his 196 just before slowing, Jim was making up time right there.....
Time on straights is not purely dependent on a cars maximum velocity.
Absolutely agree with you JC. What we don't know though is whereabouts and on which straight the speed trap was that Gurney was clocked at. He may have been already been doing 196mph at the same point as Clark was doing 193... Logic suggests you place a speed trap just before where cars brake from their fastest point on a circuit, but I've never found out where the speed trap was at Spa in '67 (in fact more drivers than just Gurney must have been clocked but I've never seen any other speeds quoted). Clarks speed came from the calculated max of the fixed ratio ZF gearbox at max rpm - trying to remember where I read that, might have been Michael Oliver's Lotus 49 book but I might be wrong. Might have been the Motor Sport report of that race.
I believe Motor Sport said it was just before the Masta kink.
Here are two blokes at Silverstone with their radar trap at the '67 GP. Presumably they used a similar piece of equipment at Belgium.
Cheers PT, never seen those pics before, including the 'Dunlop Bridge' outside of Woodcote. Love the ad-hoc nature of the speed trap - wood and banding straps, sitting on an upturned crate , powered by a car battery!
What you and jimclark both said is definitely right then, as the Eagle may well have been 10mph+ off it's top speed at the point that Clark's 49 was bouncing off the limiter. Dan Gurney may well have geared the Eagle higher to have plenty of spare revs at top speed as well, to help in reliability, knowing the lack of engines he had, thus still accelerating at the point he was clocked but at a slower rate than the '49 would have done up to it's top speed.
Going off on a tangent, I've always been fascinated to know exactly when the first F1 (as opposed to GP) car was officially clocked at 200mph / 322kmh or above. From the rough data I've collected in the past I couldn't find any evidence of any earlier than the '82 French GP - Gurney's 196mph at Spa 15 years earlier being the closest until then. Unless anyone knows different? Rindt's Lotus 72 was 'geared for 205mph' at Monza in 1970 but I haven't found evidence of any speed trap results from the GP that year..
(I say GP cars as the late 30's Auto Unions and Mercedes were allegedly capable of 200+ at Tripoli and Avus butI don't think they were officially clocked at or above that speed during a race session, ignoring the speed record attempts with the streamliners).
"I decided i was going to go into it flat, so i did" Nigel Mansell, 1990 Mexican GP
Anyone who played Grand Prix Legends - like me - knows Eagle-Weslake was the most powerful F1 car of 1967. It was just helluva unreliable in real-life.
{{{ This post probably belongs to Video Game section }}}
07.04.1968 - Flower of Scotland when will we see your like again? 01.05.1994 - We'll never forget...
Vassago wrote: ↑3 years ago
Anyone who played Grand Prix Legends - like me - knows Eagle-Weslake was the most powerful F1 car of 1967. It was just helluva unreliable in real-life.
{{{ This post probably belongs to Video Game section }}}
Only just...413bhp compared to the DFV's 409bhp. The problem with the DFV is that the power band was quite narrow. Peak torque was at 8500bhp and peak power at 9000rpm. Power didn't even come in until about 6500rpm. The Eagle's disadvantage was the added weight of the car and unusually tall driver.
(Remember how the original GPL BRM had nothing at the lower rev range and then suddenly burst into life? That's kind of how the Lotus should have been...)
I played in Polish GPL leagues many moons ago. We had a league system that each car could be used only twice during the season (original tracks). The races at Spa & Monza were all Eagle & Ferrari. While Monaco had a field of Cooper and BRM (yeah, BRM was obviously useless on the speed tracks but some guys liked it more than Cooper overall). Lotus was usually the dominant entry at Silverstone. Brabham was the preferred choice for Rouen IIRC.
07.04.1968 - Flower of Scotland when will we see your like again? 01.05.1994 - We'll never forget...
Antonov wrote: ↑3 years ago
Villeneuve (Jr) is a bit of an enigma isn't he?
on the one hand, he is seen as one of the least deserving champions.
on the other hand, he made mincemeat of HHF - a driver previously considered to be on the level of M. Schumacher.
poor career choices (could he have fared better had he stayed on at Williams?) seem to be a constant throughout his career.
A good driver with a chip on his shoulder. Poor career choices? Okay, Italian and Japanese F3 was non-productive, but he got into Formula Atlantic at the right time, with the right sponsor, and got the best from the Forsythe/Green split, also. Went to F1 in a top team, can it get any worse? Left Williams when the team was in decline, perfect. Chose to listen to the wrong people, Craig Pollock anyone? Didn't get another good drive because he had pissed people off left and right with his arrogance. Shit happens.
"Least deserving champion", what does that even mean? Is that better than most deserving non-champion, or worse?
2023 'Guess The Pole' Points & Accuracy Champion
If you don't vote now against fascism, you may never have that chance again...
Vassago wrote: ↑3 years ago
Anyone who played Grand Prix Legends - like me - knows Eagle-Weslake was the most powerful F1 car of 1967. It was just helluva unreliable in real-life.
{{{ This post probably belongs to Video Game section }}}
I'm starting to think I really need to play GPL. I have never played the game but see myself driving 60's F1 cars in Assetto Corsa more often than not, and I've always loved going back to older sims... Welp, time to check some abandonware websites!
Vassago wrote: ↑3 years ago
Anyone who played Grand Prix Legends - like me - knows Eagle-Weslake was the most powerful F1 car of 1967. It was just helluva unreliable in real-life.
{{{ This post probably belongs to Video Game section }}}
I'm starting to think I really need to play GPL. I have never played the game but see myself driving 60's F1 cars in Assetto Corsa more often than not, and I've always loved going back to older sims... Welp, time to check some abandonware websites!
I find the Lotus 49 in Assetto Corsa practically undriveable. At least on default setup. The Ferrari is totally different.
