1961 Monaco GP

[wedge]

found this recently

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjLwc...eature=related

there's 7 parts altogether, and I can't be bothered with the rest of the links as I'm going off to bed in a moment!

Even though contemporary F1 has stricter regs, '60s often regarded as the golden age, 3:40 somewhat puts things in perspective and goes to show rule changes have often been unpopular:

[youtube]d4P_ifDWDPk[/youtube]

[52Paddy]

Cheers. Great to see Masten Gregory in interview.

[ClarkFan]

The 1961 shift in the formula was particularly unpopular, especially with the British teams. None of them had a decent engine ready to test until late in the season and as a result they were stomped by Ferrari.

By contrast, the switch back to 3 liters for 1966 (your Golden Age, perhaps?), was highly popular........and none of the British engine makers had a new engine ready to test until late in the season, with the Cosworth Ford not coming on line until 1967.

Does any of this sound familiar in the context of responses to recent changes?

ClarkFan

[ShiftingGears]

The switch to 1.5L engines was a terrible idea.

[blito]

the switch to 1.5l was a great idea - the old 2.5`s were just too powerful for the chassis/tyres/tracks of the day and lives were being lost. racing in the 50s was just too dangerous. the 1.5 era gave us some great races, several great seasons, plenty of drama and very few fatalities (2 iirc- von tripps an r rodrigues)

[Don Capps]

The British Racing Establishment was hit was an incredible case of stupidity, myopia, and arrogance in the aftermath of the October 1958 announcement of the new Formule Internationale that was to take effect with the 1961 season. This was a near-lethal combination for the BRE, which was simply a problem of Pride, of finally having reached the top of the heap in the game, only to have those beastly unspeakables on The Continent unhatch a scheme to snatch it away from them.

That the next such formula was going to be based upon a reduction in engine displacement was evident to even The Untrained Eye -- the Championnat du Monde des Marques had a maximum displacement of 3-litres go into effect during the 1958 season, something which had been known well in advance, as just one of many signals. The reduction in duration and distance for the Championnat du Monde des Conducteurs events also beginning with the 1958 season was another.

Given that the British had a virtual lock on the existing Formula 2 which was the basis of the new formula for 1961, all the hysterics, moaning and groaning, and generally unpleasant behavior seems a bit odd, given that not all in the BRE opposed to the formula change.

The performance of Scuderia Ferrari for the 1961 season flatters to deceive, given that there could have been several of rounds in the championship that could have been lost to other teams, Reims being the most notable one, of course, their bacon being saved by the good fortune of the Baghetti privateer effort outlasting the efforts of Gurney. There was also the rumblings and turmoil that percolated under the surface the entire season, which resulted in the walkout of a number of the staff that Winter.

[TheFamousEccles]

nice find with the 1961 Monaco GP vids. Cheers

[ShiftingGears]

the switch to 1.5l was a great idea - the old 2.5`s were just too powerful for the chassis/tyres/tracks of the day and lives were being lost. racing in the 50s was just too dangerous. the 1.5 era gave us some great races, several great seasons, plenty of drama and very few fatalities (2 iirc- von tripps an r rodrigues)

Too dangerous? If drivers didn't want to risk their lives, they didn't participate. To me, F1 consisting of horribly underpowered and slow cars is not what formula one is about.

[Don Capps]

Too dangerous? If drivers didn't want to risk their lives, they didn't participate. To me, F1 consisting of horribly underpowered and slow cars is not what formula one is about.

"Dangerous" is a relative term, of course. Up to and through the Fifties and into the Sixties, automobile racing was quite dangerous, the deaths of drivers and spectators being all too frequent during any given season. The circuits on the Continent were generally public roads with little in the way of driver or spectator protection, with the airfield circuits in Britain not much better, the American speedways also leaving much to be desired.

Your comment about the non-participation of those being aware of the dangers is somewhat juvenile. Although vastly over-emphasized by those in later decades, there was a much greater willingness to accept risk during this era, personal and otherwise, in no small part due to the war that had ended not many years prior to this. Some were convinced that their skill and competence would serve them well, while others were simply either simply foolish or just lack any conziance of the dangers involved. That said, there were those who certainly did step away from automobile racing at this time, Phil Walters being one of them, having witnessed the Le Mans disaster firsthand from the pit area.

Given the aftermath of the 1955 Le Mans incident, the reinforcement of the problem as a result of the Fon de Portago/ Ed Nelson incident during the 1957 Mille Miglia, plus the numerous other on-track deaths and injuries during this period, the reduction in engine displacement was a relatively quick way as to how to do something about the safety issue, the thinking being that the first fix had to be to slow the cars down. Given that there had been governmental intervention in the aftermath of the Le Mans disaster by several countries, with further threats by others, something had to be done, even if at least a token gesture.

As to "...F1 consisting of horribly underpowered and slow cars is not what formula one is about," that is, naturally, your opinion, which is probably shared by many others, then as well as now. However, the entire idea as to "what formula one is about" has morphed and shifted over the years, not always in consistent ways. At the end of the 1961 season, Tony Brooks walked away from the sport due to his lack of interest in the underpowered machines then competing in the Formule Internationale. Many at the time viewed the 1.5-litre era of the Formule Internationale as being something of the Slough of Despair. Although it was not exactly the disaster that many forecast, neither was it exactly the sort of product that necessarily stood up against the other forms of racing all that well, especially when the interest shifted westward towards the United States, the home of full-blooded, powerful racing machines on both the speedways and the road circuits.

By the way, the 1.5-litre machines were not really as "horribly underpowered and slow" as you seem to imagine. They were such only in comparison to the 2.5-litre machines initially, but quickly began to lap many circuits faster than those machines, improvements in the chassis, suspension, transmissions, and tires soon making the difference. As much as I utterly detested the formula then, I have managed to shelve my personal opinions of the era and study it critically, finding it quite interesting in many, many ways, even producing some very good seasons of competition, such as 1962, and especially 1961 and 1964.

One must keep in mind that comparing eras is rarely possible in any meaningful way or that thinking of them only in an anachronistic way is futile.

[BDunnell]

Don, on reading your contributions to this thread, I for one am extremely glad that not only have you continued to contribute to these forums, but also, apparently, to do so to a greater extent. Your wisdom and perspective are genuinely appreciated.

One question, though...

Many at the time viewed the 1.5-litre era of the Formule Internationale as being something of the Slough of Despair. Although it was not exactly the disaster that many forecast, neither was it exactly the sort of product that necessarily stood up against the other forms of racing all that well, especially when the interest shifted westward towards the United States, the home of full-blooded, powerful racing machines on both the speedways and the road circuits.

To what extent, do you think, did it matter that the 1.5-litre Formula One did not stand up against other forms of racing that well? After all, I find it hard to imagine the likes of Lotus and BRM deciding at any time to concentrate their efforts entirely on US racing, and the various US formulae have only ever been of fleeting public interest on the other side of the Atlantic.