How This Car BROKE F1
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 พ.ย. 2023
- From a humble garage in London, the seeds of revolution were sown. Colin Chapman, armed with an audacious vision, set forth a journey that would redefine motorsport. Each car Lotus introduced was not just a racer; it was a statement, a testament to innovation, audacity, and engineering genius. From the simplicity of the Seven to the groundbreaking design of the 88, Lotus's journey in F1 was more than just about speed-it was about pushing boundaries, challenging norms, and crafting masterpieces on wheels. Dive in and relive the exhilarating saga of Lotus, a tale where every turn holds a story, every car a legend. Discover the spirit that drove Lotus to redefine the history of motorsport.
- ยานยนต์และพาหนะ
![ใจดำกับฉันก่อน - วงทัพห้า [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/I48wa4qurAU/mqdefault.jpg)
![24 ชั่วโมง ซื้อของสีเดียว!! [Ver.2024]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TNPgzIMr_w8/mqdefault.jpg)
An absolute visionary. For my eyes; the Lotus 72 in JPS colours is the quinessential F1 car. I don't see anything more beautiful arriving now...
until the Lotus 79?
@@malcolmsimpson781 the 79 looked great too - particularly in JPS colours - but I'll stick with the '72... ;o)
I still have my Corgi model of the JPS. Coolest F1 race car ever.
Putting numbers on the cars so that you know who's driving. What a great idea they should do that. The combination of Lotus, Clark and Coventry Climax created a legend that will never be beaten.
The more I read about Lotus, the more I admire sir Chapman. Absolutely genius.
My '74 Elite was a fun car. Oliver Winterbottom made the ultimate station wagon coupe. 😊 I miss it, as I do my '67 E-types & '67 Alfa spyder & GTV. Good memories thanks to a great British mechanic, Arthur Tweedale, (retired racer & service manager at the Jag dealer in D.C.) Being my neighbor he inspired all the kids to appreciate sports cars.
the skip from the 16 to the 25 missed some key Lotus evolution. The 18 was their first mid-engine F1 car, and was evolved with somewhat better aerodynamics as the 21. Those cars won Lotus' first 5 GP races, 4 in the hands of Stirling Moss. And while the accomplishments of the 25 are discussed, the car shown being driven is a 49. Which won one Constructors Championship, in 1968. The49 contributed points in 1970, but the large majority of Lotus' points that year came from the 72.
Yes, some pretty large historical holes in this video. Certainly not a 'history' of Lotus cars. Not to mention, it actually fails to state what I think is the most obvious thing you can say about the 72: it defined what an F1 car is. To this day, with minor exceptions, every F1 car followed its example. Generally wedge shape, radiators on the side, wings front and back. We just 'assume' this is what an F1 car should be now.
Thank you for your feedback, I will make sure to revisit the story of lotus in the future to give the whole picture. Being that this was my first shot at a historical videos I definitely haven’t perfected the craft.
@@peterf1
Although the 72 wasn't the first racing car to adopt the modern layout. The first example I recollect is the Chaparral 2E, the car that really started the era of current aerodynamics in 1966. All the attention was on the large rear wing, which a pedal in the cockpit switched from a low-drag position on straights to high-downforce in braking zones and corners. (The car could use that pedal because it had an automatic transmission).
But the 2E had radiators mounted on either side of the cockpit. It also had vents in the front fenders, which were designed to direct air out from underneath the car to reduce lift, so you could argue that the 2E was an early attempt at something that looked like ground effects.
@@jimiverson3085 Thanks for the comment Jim, but I was talking F1. Well familiar with the 2E but it also had a front radiator so not like the pointed nose 72 in any case. And, just letting trapped air out, is not really using ground effects principals. That was the 2J. 🙂
@@peterf1
Yes, the 72 was the first in F1 with the current layout. But in the aerodynamics revolution F1 teams were really followers behind sports cars up until Lotus introduced the 78 in 1977.
And, for the record, the 2E did NOT have a front radiator. The radiators were in pods beside the cockpit. The duct in the front was entirely for the purpose of diverting air from the bottom of the car to the top. The best illustration is the photo in the link below of an Exoto model of the 2E. It's a model, but Exoto is exhaustive in reproducing all the features of the original car.
i.ebayimg.com/images/g/rtUAAOSwgidjtGi8/s-l1200.jpg
Nice to see the old Zandvoort Circuit at 7:49 😊
Good but missing some key cars. Lotus 18, Lotus 78.....pretty critical.
After witnessing the absolute route of the rest of the field with Chapmans 79, the other teams realised that Chpman and his 88 were going to do it to them again. So they made sure, that Chapman would never be able to run it. So scared they were, and jealous, that Lotus would rip there arses again!
Absolute rout* rip their* Britishers don’t even know their own language anymore. What a bellend.
That's what you get for innovation, the FIA sticking its conk in and ruining things. At least the FIA is consistent in that respect I suppose 😂
10:15. Those aren't the side mounted radiators. They're the rear mounted transaxle coolers.
Such an underrated channel
Thank you for the support
When talking about the 25 why were we seeing the 49?
This program - when it thundered onto TH-cam - was an unparalleled showcase for over-the-top euphemisms - indeed it reached new heights, breached new barriers and layed out a new paradigm for bloviation - all thanks to the genius of Colin Chapman and Team Lotus.
RIP Colin and the Lotus F1 Team, you are greatly missed.
This was the best era if F1. Amazing though that this documentary ignored Lotus' Indianapolis 599 efforts.
I’ll make sure to revisit the topic of lotus in the future to tell the full story, being that this was the first historical or documentary video I’ve ever made I unfortunately left things to be desired. Thank you for your feedback.
@@lumemotivethis is an amazing first effort.
Thank you, yeah when I was working on the video I was wondering if I was making it too long as is. But I’ll definitely be making more in depth videos in the future. It was extremely fun going through the history. Hopefully I improve my storytelling skills lol. Again thank you for the nice words.
72 to 79 what happend to the 78
16:09 - Yes, that's Nigel Mansell on the right. He started his career with Lotus in the early 1980s.
I always have wondered what Mario's total F1 record would have looked like if he had signed on with Chapman after his initial shocking rookie pole at Watkins Glen in 1968 and stayed all through the seventies. I believe he would have won three or four world championships. But of course, he may not have survived either.
Yes..."Mario Andretti 1940-1970 RIP"
Goofy guy talking about the 25 while showing the beautiful 49. Obviously he was just reading a script and they forgot to sync with the video.
This is the year I started watching F1 and Indy and soon Ford and Lotus were married in business to win and they soon became dominant in both, and as a kid fell in love with Lotus and Jimmy of course, who was in a class by himself. I was already a Ford guy as my dad worked for the local Ford dealership. Along with my other favorite Dan Gurney.
How could one say that the 7 "sliced though the wing like an arrow"? Many virtues in the car and video but 7's aerodynamics are lacking.
Not for it's time. You're thinking in the context of modern low drag coefficient cars. At the time the Lotus WAS aerodynamic especially given it was such a small, lightweight car.
Rules are for the birds 🦅. Run Whatca Brung!
didn't watch this yet, Lotus 72
Lotus is still a drivers car , unfortunately their marketing isnt the greatest
Just have to say.
Andretti was in fact much slower than Peterson.
Chapman handed Andretti the Championship, because he wanted to sell more cars in the US.
Peterson wasn't allowed to win!
SAD fact really.
Anyone else notice that Enzo Ferrari spent his life being beaten by the Germans, the British and the Americans? He also made some of the most stupid, ignorant comments ever spoken. Every time Mercedes-Benz got into racing the Ferraris looked like boat-anchors. He called Lotus "garagistas" as if he was some device entity and then immediately got his ass kicked by said British "garagistas". He then said "Aerodynamics is for those who cannot build engines" and again got his ass kicked by those same British "garagistas". He then said "Jeep is America's only real sports car." So Ford said "hold my pizza and wine" and kicked his ass so bad Ferrari didn't win again at Le Mans for almost 60 years. The British were the first to use disc brakes, Ferrari was one of the last. The British were the first to use a mid-engine monocoque chassis, Ferrari one of the last. Rudolf Uhlenhaut, Collin Chapman, John Cooper, Carrol Shelby and others were all leaps and bounds ahead of the silly little Italian man with the funny nose. The British and everyone else had to show Enzo Ferrari how to build race cars.
ChatGTP really is quite good isn’t it? Not perfect but it really does make script writing a breeze.
O Pai de todos os projetistas da F1, perdendo somente Bruce MacLaren, na mesma época.
Who sells mono coke btw?
Is this a really good AI reading?
Yes I used a text to speech program, hopefully it added to the f1 vibes and wasn’t too distracting. I’m debating on having different voices for each video depending on the origin of the cars.
The "Mono coke" and "Chaseee" is incredibly distracting, but beyond that it isn't too bad.@@lumemotive
@@lumemotive
I can't believe how AI narration has moved on, the clipped English accent does indeed gel nicely with the eras covered in this video.
Well done, subbed! 😊
“Safety paradigms” and Lotus cannot be mentioned in the same breath. More uncritical adulation of a brilliantly innovative designer who shaved safety margins and gambled with other peoples’ lives. Mike Spence, Jochen Rindt, Jim Clark, and Ronnie Peterson paid the price for Chapman’s hubris
Yeah, race car engineering is always on the edge, but Colin cannot be blamed for operating within the regulations set for him and all others. Too many driver's died in the 60 s and 70s until Jackie Stewart initiated design regulations on track and in cars which saved lives
These guys were racing "shopping trolleys" with 300hp V8's with a skin of tin on the outside of the trolley. Just seeing them sitting in the cockpits stationary in this movie sent a shiver up my spine. My first reaction was one of vulnerability.
They all could have decided to not race. Also , if they weee told he was pushing the envelope and the danger was higher, most of those guys would have still raced. Those days were groundbreaking and people paid for progress with life and limb
And what about all the drivers from other teams that died? If you say this about Chapman, you have to say the same about other designers too. What a narrow minded opinion and completely unfair.
@@RichardMcLaren I've already summed it up mate
😉✌️
🛑🛑 Although Chapman was an innovator, he also took chances with his drivers; by creating a car that was not survivable in the event something went wrong. 💯
I think all the F1 cars at that time were quite the same regarding safety.
I'm confused as to why Graham Chapman is being made out to be such a bad person.
All teams were in pursuit of better performance, race winners make money.
No one held a gun to anyone's head and the drivers knew full well what the risks were and accepted them.
Today F1 make stupid rules and spending limits to make cars more competitive, this does not work, that's why F1 has been crap for a decade at least. Even worse since bernir e sold it, it's all about the show and the pretty and wealthy walking around the vip areas, F1 is shite, I shadow of it former glory, F1 was the Ultimate race formula, no expense spared, cars were faster years ago, and don't say it a safety thing, drivers gets millions to race
How many drivers were killed other than Clark and Rindt due to Chapmans “genius”😢😢😢
You could say the same about Test Pilots in experimental aircraft.
Oh come off it. Plenty of drivers came to grief in the quest for performance at the behest of their teams.
Fact is, F1 wanted an "American" to win the title (little mario was born in Italy) As even back then, F1 wanted American dosh. And so, the team set about compromising Peterson, who was the faster of the two. Even when compromised by the wrong tires and a compromised set-up. Peterson was faster.
Phil Hill already had a title before Mario.
@@machtschnell7452 Yes, that is a given. Some of you are so very dense. The goal to be in the US was not a thing when Hill was racing. Something that you should have known. If you actually understood how F1 has evolved over the decades.
One little problem with your conspiracy theory - Andretti was consistently faster than Peterson in qualifying. And it was Andretti who worked through what it took for the car to be fast, including staggered tire diameters (an oval racing trick he brought to Team Lotus). Peterson's weakness throughout his career was in setting up a car, so there is no reason to believe he would have gotten more out of a car with a lot of setup options than Andretti did.
And for the record, Andretti was also the driver who brought Lotus back from the dead in 1976 and helped develop the 78's speed in 1977. Peterson was racing for other teams in those seasons.
@@jimiverson3085 I am referencing a first hand account. Even when they compromised Peterson with set-up and tires. Peterson was faster. Facts matter. As an analyst I only traffic in facts in my life. Something you should start doing.
You reference nothing and just said he is faster. The poster above referenced several specific reasons supporting what he is saying. You reference nothing. You come across as more dense by a long shot. Extraordinary claims and all that…
Worst way of telling a story of genius but also cheating and total ignorance of drivers safety.
All right champ.
Utter Bollox!
@Boatleak, what are you on about?