Pull the other one...

[TimD]

A couple of days ago, Peter mentioned the MG 18/80 which was entered with some fanfare at Brooklands, and then abjectly ran its bearings, never to compete again.

Of course, that's not what they originally reported. In a desparate face-saving exercise, the official press release reported that a bought-in carburettor had shed a grub screw, releasing the carburettor butterfly, which had dropped down the throat of the engine, past the valve, entered the bore, scored a piston, before finally jamming against the crank and thus ultimately running a bearing....

Not the engine's fault at all, you see.

Another Brooklands notable was the Bentley which showed up, did a few laps, and then retired with a reported "loose fuel tank". Well, up to a point, this was true. But the only reason the tank was loose was because the entire chassis had snapped underneath the back end, and as a result, the fuel tank was indeed a bit on the wobbly side. Along with the differential, propshaft, rear axle....


Any more classic reasons for retirement? The more outrageous the claim the better. Are there any of our current racers who would be prepared to admit to pulling a fast one, for the sake of themselves or their sponsor?

[Neil C]

In the closing years of AJ Foyt's career, he would show up at the track, make a perfunctory appearance for the sake of sponsors and appearance money, then quickly retire. When I saw him at the Milwaukee Mile (one mile oval), he qualified, barely, did 10 very uninspiring race laps and retired due to all-too-familiar "transmission trouble". Of course it's impossible to verify tranny problems, besides, the transmission was probably the only component that did not have sponsorship attached.

He did not serve his legend well in those final days, or since, for that matter.

[Crash Test]

The exact same thing happened at the Gold Coast in 1992, he did no practice, then hoped in a car at the last minute and did half a dozen laps with the car "stuck in third gear"...

[Sparky]

I remember reading that John Cooper told Bruce McLaren that ANY problem that deemed an early retirement in a Cooper was ALWAYS electrical. Even if the thing was smokin' and runnin' on 2 cylinders, it must be faulty wiring to the coil!

Can't imagine that now, can you?

(And no Pete, I know they don't have coils now... )

[Marshal]

I do remember that the Lancia LC2 Group C car retired from Le Mans one year with a puncture. Apparently Michelin who provided the tyres were a bit upset about this, as while the tyre was punctured, it probabaly had something to do with the con-rod that went through it!

[Peter Mallett]

Originally posted by TimD
A couple of days ago, Peter mentioned the MG 18/80 which was entered with some fanfare at Brooklands, and then abjectly ran its bearings, never to compete again.

Er. It was the 18/100 "Tigress". I've got a limited edition print by Crosby. A rather impressive machine IMO.

[TimD]

Oosp. Slip of the kyeboard.

I meant 18/100. Honest I did.

Thank goodness I've got the right one listed in my references.

Marshal, love the story of the Lancia. A sure and certain way not to get development tyres for next season!

[Ray Bell]

Many a smouldering engine has been said to have electrical trouble... easily explained, too:

"The con-rod knocked the alternator off the block..."

Dare I mention the Jenks article?

[djb]

I do not have the background of most of you fellows, but reading these amusing anecdotes brings to mind a Cart race last year, when as a limping car came into the pits, the pit/car radio channel was turned on so we could all here the crew telling the driver to "just say it was an electrical problem"....plus ça change, plus c'est pareille.

Particularly enjoyed the migrating connecting rod examples.

[Ray Bell]

Well, DSJ was around longer than I have been, and he knew this issue well... he wrote this article for Motor Sport back in 1973... I have to thank Eric McLoughlin for copying it...

'The poor fellows who have to write out reports for the weekly motoring comics that we used to call the technical press have a hard enough time falling over themselves, and each other, in order to gather up information and get their story written by Sunday or Monday without having deliberate confusion thrown in their path by the PR world or well meaning team managers. Immediately after a race, especially if a favourite has had trouble, they dash around saying "What happened, what happened?". They note down the official statements from the team spokesman and dash off to the next one. Few of them seem to pause and say to themselves, "Wait a minute, that doesn't ring true". There is such an artificial urgency to beat the rival paper that they don't seem to have time to be inquisitive, they take people's words as gospel and never do any cross checking, either by thinking or looking.

At the GKN - Daily Express meeting at Silverstone everbody's favourite goofed and was left on the starting line in pole position. The Team Lotus 72 of Fittipaldi was pulling a particularly high first gear, which he wasn't used to, so on his warming up lap he did some practice starts, which were spectacular to watch, but gave the clutch a bit of a caning. When the flag dropped, Fittipladi crept away with a burned out clutch, going slowly through the first corner with the revs rising and falling ineffectually as he blipped the throttles. He came to rest on the far side of the circuit. After the race the Lotus team manager said, "Oh dear, don't blame the poor old clutch, Borg and Beck will get all the blame. Say the flywheel came loose or something". This story spread and the results that appeared in print the next week were a riot of fun and imagination, ranging from the flywheel coming off to the flywheel breaking through bolts breaking and coming loose. The important thing was that to anyone who saw the start, none of these stories would hold water.
When you do a racing start with a Cosworth V8, you have 8,000 or 9,000 rpm on the engine, with the flywheel and clutch assembly whizzing around at this speed at the end of the crankshaft. If, as one writer said, the flywheel "fell off", it would have sailed right over the top of the grandstand, taking the clutch housing, most of the gearbox and some of the suspension with it! If the flywheel had "broken", as another writer suggested, there would have been a terrific mess of broken clutch housing, clutch and its mechanism, all over the track. If the flywheel bolts had sheared, and there are eight of them, the crankshaft would have revolved in the spigot, then there would have been no drive to the gearbox and the engine would have run in a very peculiar fashion. If one flywheel bolt had broken there would have been drive through the clutch, the probable sympton being a terrible roughness that would have got worse as the overloaded remaining bolts broke, but there would always have been sufficient drive through the clutch to get away with the rest of the competitors. The classic statement among the comics was that the Lotus failed at the start and then "coasted" as far as Club Corner. Including the uphill bit from Copse to Maggots, one is tempted to ask?
It is all too easy to rush around the paddock after a race, like a blue-bottle, saying "What happened, what happened?"
and wriying down everything you are told. To pause for thought would appear to be difficult, even for 30 seconds, and what has happened to the inquisitive mind? With the influx of commercialism with motor racing and the army of PR men, whose job is to protect their customers, the inquisitive mind is not very popular, you are supposed to believe what you are told.
At a sports car meeting, a Matra stopped out on the circuit and a man from Matra-Simca said it was an old engine and now had a big hole in the side suggesting a connecting rod had broken. This would have resulted in a lot of mess around the engine and probably a lot of oil as well. When the car was towed back to the pits, the engine was completely dry! It had been an electrical fault. Few people in motor racing have ever told the truth, and as Sturt Turner of Ford once said, "It's not that they are dishonest, but they jusy don't know how to be straight". For the race reporter, the only antidote to this is to "Pause for Thought", and be inquisitive. - DSJ

[Peter Mallett]

Interestingly enough, we witnessed the result of a broken flywheel at Mallory Park last year. It came out through the bonnet of a Mustang and embedded itself in the underside (steel universal beam) of the pedestrian bridge that crosses the track. In its dash to freedom, it also took out the front chassis leg and the oil catch-tank, bonnet and surounding metalwork.

[djb]

Mr.Bell, just read the '73 Jenks article, have been working on a shoot with 15 hr days and ye old brain hasn't been up to looking at small characters on a computer screen. Thanks for copying it, made for a good read. Interesting the comment of the influx of commercialism and the role of PR people; this was nearly 30 years ago, lord, look at it now. In all sports in fact.
A thought that came to mind re: being inquisitive, was how the photographer a few years back who caught on to the Maclaren second brake peddle thingee or whatever it was, by noticing the odd rotor glow, and then being lucky enough to be able to stick his camera into the tub and royally tee off Mr. Dennis and co. I'm sure Mr. Jenkinson would have enjoyed that!

Peter, the "in it's dash to freedom" line got a good smile. Didn't Eddie Irvine have some sort of incident early in his F1 career where he was given a penalty of race bans because he swerved in front of someone, but claimed that someone's flywheel had come off infront of him and was zinging across the track in his path? Wasn't following F1 in those years so have only read about this incident, but don't recall the details.

[Peter Mallett]

That was in Brazil when he took out Johnny Herbert and Brundle. (I think). But I don't think it was a "flywheel" because I doubt he would have seen it. He was probably referring to a wheel.

[DAVID PATERSON]

My Dad is an interstate truck driver and these guys are a unique breed with their own very dry sense of humour. Of course, plenty of them have used the old one about electrical trouble; eg. the piston knocked the alternator off it's mount etc.

One of the best however was when a driver called the depot to say he had broken the left side mirror. The boss couldn't understand why he had rang the depot from 500 miles away to tell him about a broken mirror. So he told the driver to just get another mirror from a garage and fit it himself.

The driver replied, "I can't replace the mirror. The truck's lying on it!"

[Ray Bell]

Originally posted by djb
...Didn't Eddie Irvine have some sort of incident early in his F1 career where he was given a penalty of race bans because he swerved in front of someone, but claimed that someone's flywheel had come off infront of him and was zinging across the track in his path?

This was the deal which involved Verstappen...

The point he made was that when the flywheel of the car in front of him went (or whatever it was), the loss of power meant that the car ahead of him was effectively braking at 1g... so he had to duck out from behind it quickly...