Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2017 19:48:12 GMT
My favourite Lotus.  This view shows some of the things that hampered its performance - the cluttered rear end. Outboard spring/damper units, inboard brakes, the big uprights, the levers to the anti-roll bar - all in the way of the flow exiting the sidepods. Note also the cross-ply Good Year tyres and, of course, the skirts. Great picture, looks like Zeltweg, the esses at the top of the hill after the main straight. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2017 19:52:16 GMT
 (From the internet) |
|
|
|
Post by Carl on Nov 12, 2017 23:55:22 GMT
Lucio, Great photograph! My favorite Lotus, because I never saw the Lotus 25 driven in anger, is the 79. Were any of the weak elements of Lotus 78 design also noted and improved by Lotus engineers when they designed the Lotus 79? I know that other teams studied the concept and then surpassed its downforce advantage the following season. Sic transit gloria mundi when Colin Chapman is on to something else. Had I ever met Emma Peel, I would have been tempted to drive away in her Elan, my favorite sports car, after first arranging to have Julie Christie in the passenger seat. Mrs. Peel and Steed would never have caught us in his massive Bentley. To sleep, perchance to dream... Cheers, Carl |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2017 10:25:38 GMT
Carl,
the 79 was more beautiful, no doubt, they call it the "Black Beauty" for a reason.
Yes, the 79 had a much cleaner rear end, without all that clutter above.
As a result it was also quicker in the straights, one of the major limits of the 78 which couldn't overtake cars on straights.
It was also more refined as far as underbody aerodynamics is concerned, with consequent higher downforce.
The higher downforce exposed the main problem which was the lack of torsional stiffness, the chassis in the open cockpit area was minimal and it twisted when they worked on it in the pits. Andretti on one occasion put two strings between two opposed corners in the cockpit to show how one of them went slack when one front wheel was raised.
The car was also plagued by an overall lack of reliability (brakes etc), Chapman sometimes didn't care about details, he seemed to thrive on looking at the whole picture, often going on a tangent.
In fact, he should have addressed the issues on the 79 and make it a better car, instead to end up in the dead end of increased downforce at all costs. Patrick Head with the FW07 did the improved 79 that Chapman should have done.
I like the 78 also because of its flaws - it's just looked purposeful, mean. The 79 was already in highbrow, upper middle class delusion territory...
As far as Emma Peel, haven't got a clue who she is, but Julie Christie was something!  Cheers, Lucio
|
|
|
|
Post by René on Nov 13, 2017 14:32:34 GMT
Lucio, I agree the 78 was an awesome design. The 79 was more refined and elegant for sure but as you said, the 78 looked mean. A very photogenic car (but so were most cars of the seventies!).
Chapman often gave the impression his mind was already working on the next idea while the current project wasn't even finished/optimized.
|
|
|
|
Post by Carl on Nov 13, 2017 21:37:12 GMT
As far as Emma Peel, haven't got a clue who she is, but Julie Christie was something! Cheers, Lucio
Lucio, Is the objection to cross ply tyres because they are less compliant? I would agree, but shouldn't the suspension of the Lotus 78 pictured provide the compliance that would allow the left rear to remain flat and planted while the right rear rides over the curb? "The Avengers" was a very clever English cloak and dagger spy/adventure program in the 1960s whose main characters were the always splendidly dressed John Steed, who drove a vintage Bentley, and the more modern and svelte Emma Peel. Had I driven away in her Elan, the writers may have gained renewed inspiration with Mrs. Peel sharing the Bentley, but my adventures with Julie Christie would have been more interesting. Cheers, Carl Attachment Deleted |
|
|
|
Post by Carl on Nov 13, 2017 21:53:01 GMT
I like the 78 also because of its flaws - it's just looked purposeful, mean. The 79 was already in highbrow, upper middle class delusion territory...
My natural inclination is also to favor those who, because of circumstance, must try harder to succeed. If Andretti is included in "highbrow, upper middle class delusion territory", a certain Round Table member will be pleased! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2017 7:52:28 GMT
If Andretti is included in "highbrow, upper middle class delusion territory", a certain Round Table member will be pleased! I don't have issues with Mario himself, he was hugely talented and earned it the hard way.
The problem is they tend to create dynasties and to become royalty without necessarily much merit. Michael was perhaps very good, but Marco... not so sure.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2017 8:05:58 GMT
As far as Emma Peel, haven't got a clue who she is, but Julie Christie was something! Cheers, Lucio
Lucio, Is the objection to cross ply tyres because they are less compliant? I would agree, but shouldn't the suspension of the Lotus 78 pictured provide the compliance that would allow the left rear to remain flat and planted while the right rear rides over the curb? "The Avengers" was a very clever English cloak and dagger spy/adventure program in the 1960s whose main characters were the always splendidly dressed John Steed, who drove a vintage Bentley, and the more modern and svelte Emma Peel. Had I driven away in her Elan, the writers may have gained renewed inspiration with Mrs. Peel sharing the Bentley, but my adventures with Julie Christie would have been more interesting. Cheers, Carl My recollection is that the cross ply Good Year quality-wise were a bit of a hit-and-miss, while the radials were more stable in their response. The radials also held their shape better.
The suspensions were (still are, of course) designed to exploit the tyres characteristics for most of the wheel movement. The 78 in this sense was fine, the issue was the suspension in the way of the airflow exiting from the sidepods, creating additional drag and causing premature separation of the lateral flow under the sidepods.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2017 9:21:33 GMT
but my adventures with Julie Christie would have been more interesting. Cheers, Carl LOL.
I bet they would! 
|
|
|
|
Post by René on Nov 14, 2017 12:28:26 GMT
In fact, he should have addressed the issues on the 79 and make it a better car, instead to end up in the dead end of increased downforce at all costs. Patrick Head with the FW07 did the improved 79 that Chapman should have done. The Williams FW07 was a fantastic car and I think you can say the best ground effect car. Lotus did the pioneering work but Chapman was already two steps further which were not always steps in the right direction. Didn't Chapman once say the Lotus 79 was a bus in comparison to the new 80? Ducarouge also had a good understanding of the ground effect principles. The 1979 and 1980 Ligiers were very fine cars and I always had the feeling there was more potential in that car then the results showed in the end. But Patrick Head and Williams perfected the ground effect car in the most effective way. I remember seeing the Williams in the Zolder paddock in 1980 up close and how impressed I was with the build quality and finish of that car in comparison to some other cars. It was all so neat with a perfect finish. That car was another step in professionalism for sure. A merely hypothetical idea but how fast would a FW07B be if you could build an exact replica but using modern materials? So carbon instead of aluminium, etc. I believe it could be a very fast racing car, even to modern standards. |
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Nov 14, 2017 12:52:30 GMT
I believe that the 79 was originally penned to have been constructed by an aluminium composite construction but Colin Chapman vetoed this on the grounds of cost and went with his tried and tested aluminium monocoque construction. The car would have been truly outstanding had it been constructed as wished for by the deigned. It is my understanding that the 78 was in actual fact more structurally rigid than the 79 and that Mario actually preferred the 78. just a quickly gents as I am time constrained while away from home  . JC |
|
|
|
Post by Jamie on Nov 14, 2017 20:55:36 GMT
The 78 and 79 were great cars, the 79 particularly beautiful and I completely agree with you Lucio RE: the 78 looking mean, its a very purposeful looking car and looks like it would be a handful! If we're talking Lotus, fairly near the top of my favourites would be the unloved 88, especially in the full Essex Petroleum livery.....not sure why I like it so much, I expect most find it quite ugly, probably because De Angelis drove it and I'm a fan. However, absolute top of the list would be the banner car - the JPS 72. My Dad painstakingly built a 1/12 scale model of the Emmo car when I was a kid and I lusted after that car because of it, still do 😀 Attachment Deleted |
|
|
|
Post by Carl on Nov 14, 2017 21:20:26 GMT
I don't have issues with Mario himself, he was hugely talented and earned it the hard way. The problem is they tend to create dynasties and to become royalty without necessarily much merit. Michael was perhaps very good, but Marco... not so sure.
Exactly right about the sense of dynasty. Michael was far better than most realize. He holds the record for most laps led at Indy without a victory. He had the race won several times but shared the dismal Andretti luck there. Some observers feel Michael had little chance to succeed with McLaren in 1993, thanks to his father's advice. Mario had him flying back and forth between races just as he had done 15 years before, but times had changed. As a consequence, Michael never had adequate time in England to test and learn. Marco has the basics but I doubt he has real interest. In my opinion, he's just doing what's expected. |
|
|
|
Post by Jamie on Nov 14, 2017 21:25:29 GMT
I don't have issues with Mario himself, he was hugely talented and earned it the hard way. The problem is they tend to create dynasties and to become royalty without necessarily much merit. Michael was perhaps very good, but Marco... not so sure.
Exactly right about the sense of dynasty. Michael was far better than most realize. He still holds the record for most laps led at Indy, all to no avail because he shared the dismal Andretti luck there. Many believe that Michael had little chance to succeed with McLaren in 1993. Mario had Michael flying back and forth between races just as he had done 15 years before, but times had changed. As a direct consequence, Michael never had adequate time in England to test and learn. Marco has the basics but I doubt he has real interest. In my opinion, he's just doing what's expected. Agree RE: Marco there Carl. He can drive a race car no doubt, but IMO he's very far from a top liner, nowhere near as talented as pop and grandpop. |
|
.
