Jump to content


Photo

Beardog Lotus 33, critque welcome


  • Please log in to reply
72 replies to this topic

#31 john's slotracing

john's slotracing

    Trackhead

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 993 posts

Posted 26 August 2009 - 09:39 AM

Teams constantly look for ways to make their racing cars better, ways to make them suit a particular circuit better and have to repair them when something gets broken or bent. So even if racing cars were identical when they left the factory, the chances of finding one that was "unfiddled with" during its racing life are not good.
You can make a model of a particular car on a particular day that is absolutely right (assuming you can find every bit of information you need on that car).



#32 BeardogRacing

BeardogRacing

    Trackhead

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 642 posts

Posted 26 August 2009 - 12:21 PM

OK just to clear up muddy waters, or muddy up clear waters, here are 3 pics of modern re-creations of Lotus 33/25's.
Robs Lamplough's car is the middle picture, look how ridiculously out of proportion he looks driving this car, either he must be a very large dude, or Jimmy was incredibly small, or the car just aint right. What do you guys think? Which is more accurate to the originals?








Chris

Chris Wright

#33 DH71Tiger

DH71Tiger

    Top Tuner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 344 posts

Posted 26 August 2009 - 12:55 PM

QUOTE (ClubSpecial @ 26 Aug 2009, 09:19) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Those drawings are certainly better than the Model Cars stuff on VSRN, but they still only show a profile and who knows how accurate that really is. What none of them show is the lumpy-bumpy behind the driver. The engine covers don't have to do much but they do it very subtly.
The Tamiya model is now known to be eroneous by some degree. They claimed to measure the one in Tom Wheatcroft's collection which is known to be a wrong 'un. Bits of this, bits of that. The unpalateable fact is there are no 25s in un-fiddled with condition and only one 33 that I know of. That's owned by Robs Lamplough whom I have started to contact via a little magazine of which I'm a subscriber, as is he. I'll keep you posted on progress with that correspondence.
I'll also get in touch with some old muckers on a statics forum I know. They are real rivet counters. My kind of modelmakers<g>
More anon.

Martin


Martin,

None of the pictures I have show a late model 33 with lumpy bumpy bits on the engine cover.

Chris,

The middle picture is closest to the car that I want to model with the exception of the 15" rear 'wobble' wheels. Yellow for the wheels is also not correct for the 65 period ..................as far as I am concerned, the top picture is definitely a late 25. The bottom one could be anything, but it does look more 25 rather than 33, it does at least, have the correct 13" dia rear wheels, but it's not a 33 of the period for my model.

Thanks for posting the pictures............

Jim was a little bloke and I have a pic of HIM squeezed into the cockpit of a 33, no room for his cardigan.

This is all very intriguing smile.gif smile.gif smile.gif

Keep it coming

Andrew
It's hard to SOAR like an Eagle ...................... when you're surrounded by turkeys

#34 BeardogRacing

BeardogRacing

    Trackhead

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 642 posts

Posted 26 August 2009 - 01:41 PM

Hi Andrew, I believe the last picture is the most accurate, this one has been identified as car #R-9, and as a 33, here's another picture of it in a museum.



Chris
Chris Wright

#35 Russell Sheldon

Russell Sheldon

    Russell Sheldon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,855 posts

Posted 26 August 2009 - 01:48 PM

Many thanks for posting the chassis photo's, Chris. Superb workmanship, as ever!

Thanks also for posting the Motor article with Colin Chapman on the development of the Lotus 25/33. For anyone interested, the full article can be downloaded here.

With kind regards,

Russell

Russell Sheldon
Cape Town, South Africa
---------------------------

#36 DH71Tiger

DH71Tiger

    Top Tuner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 344 posts

Posted 26 August 2009 - 02:14 PM

QUOTE (BeardogRacing @ 26 Aug 2009, 13:41) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Hi Andrew, I believe the last picture is the most accurate, this one has been identified as car #R-9, and as a 33, here's another picture of it in a museum.



Chris


I am sorry Chris.....................but this is very hard to believe.

If the car is authentic.............

Why is the white circle on the nose in the wrong place ?

Why are the rear view mirrors painted yellow.

The information notice says it was used from 63 to 65.................odd because the 33 was not introduced until '64.

Maybe we will never find the answer to this.

Tally H

Andrew


It's hard to SOAR like an Eagle ...................... when you're surrounded by turkeys

#37 DH71Tiger

DH71Tiger

    Top Tuner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 344 posts

Posted 26 August 2009 - 03:03 PM

A little more info on chassis R9.................

From the book 'Theme Lotus' author Doug Nye

"R9 Climax FWMV V8 - Team Lotus 1963-65 - to Jo Bonnier 1965-66 - MGM film 'Grand Prix' 1966
subsequently to Schlumpf Collection, Mullhouse France and retained 1978."

R9 made its debut at the 1964 German GP.

Because this car was used for the MGM film, that might explain some of the oddities.

Jim's regular chassis throughout the 1965 season was R11, a true 33. The car he used for the French GP as mentioned earlier was R6 by then in 25/33 form.

More to come................

Tally H

Andrew
It's hard to SOAR like an Eagle ...................... when you're surrounded by turkeys

#38 DH71Tiger

DH71Tiger

    Top Tuner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 344 posts

Posted 26 August 2009 - 03:12 PM

From the 1965 Belgian GP onwards Team Lotus used centre lock wheel fixings with3 POINTED KNOCK OFF nuts.

My model will be............

Chassis R11 used by J.C. to win the 65 Belgian GP car #17

Low level megaphone exhausts, Climax V8 flat crank and 32 valves.

Decision made ! ! !

Phew

Now all I have to do, is make the shell look something like.

Tally H

Andrew
It's hard to SOAR like an Eagle ...................... when you're surrounded by turkeys

#39 superhornets

superhornets

    Tony Condon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,716 posts

Posted 26 August 2009 - 04:07 PM

Hi Guys
I dont think that you can use the fact that a car is in a museum as proof it is authentic
/in fact the opposite may well be true
I work at haynes museum and know that some of the race cars we have in there are a collection of bits that have been assembled to look like the cars concerned ,and often some of these bits are spares that have never raced ,other bits are just quickly lashed up just to complete the cars
We have Graham hills lola F1 car from 1975 ,looks like it is fitted with a DFV but it is actually made from wood and painted ,fine for a museum but not necessarily authentic !


Cheers tony
"The Older I Get The Faster I Was"

"The History of Electric Model Car Racing in Britain" due for publishing in October 2008 ,price 19.99

Slot racing is cheaper than therapy

#40 BeardogRacing

BeardogRacing

    Trackhead

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 642 posts

Posted 26 August 2009 - 04:18 PM

Hi Tony,

I agree, I've came to the conclusion quite some time ago, it's really rather sad that no authentic Lotus 25 or 33 exsists, as Martin has said this is such a famous mark of car, the lines are so subtle and period photos are just not up to todays standards, this is a bit like searching for the Holy Grail....probably Monty Pythons version biggrin.gif after all they're only toy cars!

Chris
Chris Wright

#41 ClubSpecial

ClubSpecial

    Team Owner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,522 posts

Posted 26 August 2009 - 06:13 PM

Ah, toy cars they may be, Chris, but you know as well as I do that once into a project, you can't think like that. Something stirs you to want to do the best within all reasonable limitations and for me the limitations (so far<g>) have been too many to start it. I am personally confident that I could do a good job that would please most people if I invested in a lot of expensive Lotus books and old Motor Sport magazines and could trust a few leading dimensions. Then I'd trust my eyes, which have not as far as I know significantly let me down before. But could I please the majority?? It's amazing how the "toy car" thing gets forgotten when filthy lucre changes hands!!
I would imagine these are the same parameters that you are working within. Once you start, there ain't no stoppin'!!

Clark was a littl'un and it looks like Robs Lamplough is a bit, er...solid! But his car looks a bit wrong, I must say. But, as usual, can't quite say why.

These cars have got to be done. I DO intend doing them at some point and I think I'm going to start collecting info seriously now. But I am ONLY going for old photos. Nothing recent can be trusted.
Chris, we mustn't duplicate and upset each other on this. Do you want to do the 33 and I'll research the 25? Mail me??


DH 71 Tiger, can a flat plane crank have simple low exhausts without a crossover manifold? I'll check my Climax in Coventry Bible! Actually, come to think of it, the Cooper-Maserati I was involved in had "ordinary" low exhausts with Maser's one and only flat plane crank......Hmmmmm, interesting.
Lots o' revs, terminal vibration, cracks everywhere!!
Also, I hadn't noticed that the 33 has no lumpy-bumpy! THAT'S how subtle it is, but there does seem to be something going on back there even if it's only lousy moulding of the fibreglass (VERY likely!)
Is the late model 33 significantly different from the first ones?

Cheers,
Martin

#42 superhornets

superhornets

    Tony Condon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,716 posts

Posted 26 August 2009 - 06:19 PM

Hi Chris
Yuoare probably right ,but as most of these old cars were hand built they were probably all subtly differnt anyway
We have had this discussion on annother thread
and that great modeller Mick kerr ,who was also a race mechanc from that era told me that there are probablt no two race cars the same ,as they all get modded by the teams that run them
I am sure that a quality model such as yourself can get enough detail from photos /drawings etc to put to gether an eclectic version of a 25 or 33 that would be very acceptable to yourself and others that would admire it ,and dont get too bogged down in the rivets ,if you do you,ll drive yourself bonkers

Cheers tony
"The Older I Get The Faster I Was"

"The History of Electric Model Car Racing in Britain" due for publishing in October 2008 ,price 19.99

Slot racing is cheaper than therapy

#43 DH71Tiger

DH71Tiger

    Top Tuner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 344 posts

Posted 26 August 2009 - 07:30 PM

QUOTE
DH 71 Tiger, can a flat plane crank have simple low exhausts without a crossover manifold? I'll check my Climax in Coventry Bible! Actually, come to think of it, the Cooper-Maserati I was involved in had "ordinary" low exhausts with Maser's one and only flat plane crank......Hmmmmm, interesting.
Lots o' revs, terminal vibration, cracks everywhere!!
Also, I hadn't noticed that the 33 has no lumpy-bumpy! THAT'S how subtle it is, but there does seem to be something going on back there even if it's only lousy moulding of the fibreglass (VERY likely!)
Is the late model 33 significantly different from the first ones?


That's a very difficult question to answer....................read on smile.gif smile.gif

All sources from 'Theme Lotus' author Doug Nye

Details from Page 176

The first 33 built was R8 this was severely damaged by JC at Aintree it was unsatisfactory after rebuild, this was the car that Paul Hawkins put in the drink at Monaco.
Chassis R9 we have already discussed see above.
Chassis R10 Written off by JC at Brands Hatch, Race of Champions.
Chassis R11 we have already discussed see above.
Chassis R12 ( Lotus 39 ) was the chassis intended for the stillborn CC 1.5ltr Flat 16. It was converted with a space frame engine bay for a 2.5 ltr 4cyl CC and drive by JC in the 1966 Tasman championship
Chassis R13 sold to Reg Parnell rebuilt from the remains of R4
Chassis R14 CC FWMV Mk X 2.0 ltr used during 1966................This is supposed to be the car in the Donington Collection.

Its not difficult to see why they had to keep rolling out the 25s during '65 is it ! ! ! !
It would appear that they only had R9 and R11 to play with.

QUOTE
Chassis R11 used by J.C. to win the 65 Belgian GP car #17

Low level megaphone exhausts, Climax V8 flat crank and 32 valves.


This is the caption from the photograph of JC at Spa 1965. Page 76

1965 season World Championship events Jim Clark

South African GP - R10
Monaco Gp - Winning the Indy 500
Belgian GP - R11....................#17......32v...Low level exh
French GP - R6 (25)................#6........??.....High exh
British GP - R11......................#5.......32v...Low level exh
Dutch GP - R9.........................#6.......??.....Low level exh
German GP - R11....................#1.......??.... Low level exh
Italian GP - R11....................#24?.....32v...Low level exh
U S GP - R11
Mexican GP - R11

I have photographs that confirm the info above

In no way do I class myself as a rivet counter, but as far as Jim Clark and Lotus are concerned I do try to do the best I can.

Tally H

Andrew
It's hard to SOAR like an Eagle ...................... when you're surrounded by turkeys

#44 zagato

zagato

    Sir Slotalot

  • PLUS+
  • 2,220 posts

Posted 26 August 2009 - 07:54 PM

Bloody hell! I'm glad it's not painted Aston Martin green!!!

#45 DH71Tiger

DH71Tiger

    Top Tuner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 344 posts

Posted 26 August 2009 - 08:01 PM

QUOTE (zagato @ 26 Aug 2009, 19:54) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Bloody hell! I'm glad it's not painted Aston Martin green!!!


biggrin.gif biggrin.gif biggrin.gif biggrin.gif biggrin.gif biggrin.gif biggrin.gif biggrin.gif biggrin.gif
It's hard to SOAR like an Eagle ...................... when you're surrounded by turkeys




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users