NOMINATIONS: Best Looking 1960s F1 Car [Open 11/04-17/04]

[Liquid]

Rules

Nominate four cars with a photo to match each.
Don't clog up the page with lots and lots of videos; links to videos are fine.
You can change your post and your nominations right up until the closing date.

Provide any supplementary information you wish, but don't give us an 8 page essay.

The top four cars with the most nominations will go through for polling next week.

Eligibility

The 1960s has a few eligibility criteria due to the fluid nature of the championship itself and some of the races having F2 entries:

Cars which competed in World Championship events during the 1960-1969 Formula One seasons.​

Important: Cars which only competed in non-championship races are not eligible.
Cars which competed in the 1960 Indianapolis 500 are not eligible.

The Maserati 250F, which did race in 1960, is not eligible.

Formula Two cars which competed in races alongside Formula One cars are not eligible.
This excludes the 1960 German Grand Prix by default because it was a Formula Two race and not on the F1 calendar.


If you have any quibbles about your nomination, tag me in your post and I'll get back to you.

Reasoning

If possible, please give some justification or reasoning for your nominations.
You can choose based on livery, body shape or a combination of the two. It's up to you.

---

Nominations close in the evening of SUNDAY 17th April.​

 

[Jimlaad43]

Ferrari 156 F1 "Sharknose"

Lotus 49b

 

[lxmmy]

Honda RA300

Ferrari 312

McLaren M7C

Lotus 49B

 

[Panoz]

AAR Eagle Mk1

Lotus 49

Honda RA300

Ferrari 156 F1 "Sharknose"

 

[Dotini]

I take the distinct honor and pleasure of nominating the Lotus 25/33, specifically the 1962 model. Subsequent editions of the Lotus 25 and 33 looked slightly less attractive due the whittling away of the engine cover and windscreen.

Car: Lotus-Climax 25 Engine: 90 Deg V8 Coventry-Climax
Maker: Lotus Bore X Stroke: 63 X 60 mm
Year: 1962 Capacity: 1, 498 cc
Class: Formula1 Power: 195 bhp at 8,200 rpm
Wheelbase: 2286 mm Track: 1346 front, 1372 mm in rear
Notes: Total weight: 452 kg. Dunlop 500-15R5 front, 650-15R5 rear tires
- See more at: http://www.grandprixhistory.org/lotus25.htm#sthash.8fxrMZRE.dpuf

The Lotus 25 set revolutionary standards for low height, slim width, and cleanliness of lines and aero details.

It should be remarked parenthetically that the Lotus 25, more importantly than its good looks which is the subject of this thread, set revolutionary standards for road holding due to its very stiff and revolutionary monocoque chassis (obsoleting the tubular space-frame) and advanced suspension design.

The Lotus 25 literally set the design standard for all subsequent F1 cars from every constructor, and must rank among the most significant of all GP cars ever raced. Clark took two World Championships with the 25/33. Many of the cars of the latter sixties took on a brutal and improvised look, and suffered commercial advertisements from '68 on. Not the Lotus 25! It has the clean, elegant and pur sang good looks of the perfectly designed and executed Grand Prix car presented in traditional national colors.

The car served from 1962-1965 in the 1.5 liter formula 1, and had a brief afterlife in the 3 liter formula utilizing a slightly enlarged engine displacement.

The car is emotionally significant to me as it was driven by my hero Jim Clark during the first few years of my love affair with motor racing.​

 

[Dotini]

My second nomination is the BRM P261 of 1964.

It is notable due to its full engine cover and tail cone, missing on most F1 cars of the day. With it dark blue livery with orange "lips" around the radiator inlet, it was a real beauty, and a favorite with slot car modelers at the time.


A rear view of an ex-Jackie Stewart BRM P261, showing the distinctive, barrel-shaped engine cowling

• 
  
  
• 

(click on photo to enlarge)

 

[Hun200kmh]

My first Formula 1 idol (I was 5 years old, lol). Sorry if it is neither red nor green


MATRA COSWORTH MS80

 

[Pupik]

Ferrari 156 "sharknose" (1961-62):
The classy take on the little 1.5L cars.

Honda RA272 (1965):
Advanced for its limited time; clean lines and all.

Lotus 49 (1967-68):
The classic shape of the early three-liter era.

Cooper T86-Maserati (1967-68):
I always loved this brutish machine...a pity this monster wasn't successful.

To me, 1960s Grand Prix cars lacked the visual beauty of the sports-cars of the era, and they're a bit tougher to distinguish compared to the various F1 marques of 1950s and the 1970s.

 

[Dotini]

American World Champion at the controls of the dominant Ferrari 156. Note wire wheels.

Enzo was well prepared in 1961. Even Giancarlo Baghetti scored a win. Sadly, "Taffy" von Trips came to grief on the Monza banking.

The Ferrari 156 was produced with both 60 degree (below) and 120 degree V-6 (above) engines. It had a very tasty tailcone with horizontal slots.

Edit: This is not a new nomination, merely additional information about a previous one.

 

[Dotini]

With its beautiful lines, stylish eagle beak nose, blue and white livery replete with titanium exhaust system, the Eagle-Weslake had high fit and finish as well. AJ Foyt was heard to mock what he called the "bird****" welding on the Lotus he bought for Indy.

• 
  
• 
  
  
• 
  
  
• 

Clarification: This is not a new nomination, merely additional commentary.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Lotus 49

Eagle-Weslake

Ferrari 312

 

[-Fred-]

The 1968 Matra MS11. Not the most successful car (I do believe it only has a 2nd place at the Dutch GP, 1968 as its claim to fame) but I always loved the French racing blue, and there's the sound as well... I can't link to Youtube without embedding the video for some reason, so just search for it, it's worth it.

I want to nominate the Brabham BT24 as that was my weapon of choice in GP Legends back in the day, but then there's the Lotus 49, the Eagle Westlake, the Ferrari 312 & 156, the Honda RA300, the Cooper Maserati T81 and etc... I'll have to chose wisely.

 

[Liquid]

For me, the 3 litre era was just sublime. I've got three definites and one space left up for grabs.

Lotus 49

The 1968 Matra MS11.

I'll second this. Not as successful as the identical-looking but Cosworth-powered MS10 but for the Matra V12 alone it gets the nod. Speaking of which...

NOTE: The Matra MS10 and Matra MS11 will be counted as a joint-effort in terms of nominations.

But yeah. What a fabulous looking machine.

Matra MS11

There've been two different Hondas nominated so far but I'll have to echo Pupik and go with one from the 1.5L era.

Honda RA272

 

[Wiegert]

Two primary nominations I've had ready and waiting since last month:

Eagle Weslake T1G

Matra MS11

Both stunning in their respective blue shades and rear pipework.



These last two I had to put a little more time into choosing. For the inevitable Honda nomination:

Honda RA300

Fussier than some of its predecessors. But there's definitely beauty to be found in its outlandishness prior to the wing experimentation years.


Lastly:

Ferrari 156 F1 "Sharknose"

Definitive early-'60s F1 shape. This just about beats the later Aero variant in the looks department.

 

[brocky31]

First, Aston Martin DBR5

The Brabham BT3

Brabham BT26A

And the Porshe 804


I'm new here, is that there already had nominations for 1950s and is he will be for 1970s ?

 

[DK]

@brocky31, yeah, the 50s have already been decided and the 70s are next.

 

[Legro]

I can't really say I'm being very original with my choices, but here's my personal favourites from the 60s.

Ferrari 156 F1

Lotus 49

Eagle Mk1

 

[Dotini]

Several folks have nominated the Honda RA300 and the Ferrari 156 "sharknose", and I'd like to make a few remarks of aesthetic criticism about these cars.

The RA300 was actually a beefy Lola T90 Indianapolis chassis cobbled up by Eric Broadley and John Surtees in a hasty attempt to resurrect the failing Honda F1 program of the time. Referred to by the motoring press as the "Hondola", it rather luckily led one lap of one race and was succeeded by the RA301, which performed even worse. Aesthetically, it was less a pur sang F1 design than an ad hoc abortion, or hotrod. I suspect it was nominated less for it's chunky superspeedway looks and more for the hairy bundle-of-snakes exhaust surmounting the engine. If bulky exhaust systems are really the criterion for "good looks", then why not nominate the "stack-pipe" BRM with its 8 separate nearly vertical exhaust pipes?

On the Ferrari 156 everyone seems to dote on the peculiar "sharknose". But let it be confirmed that it was aerodynamically ineffective, never copied, and hastily dropped by Ferrari itself. The chassis of the 156, with its simple tube frame, flexible wire wheels and ridiculous suspension system with wheels pointing at all angles, was inferior to every other car on the grid. It succeeded by power and power alone, as the opposition was condemned for a year to utilize obsolete Coventry-Climax fire-pump derived 4-bangers until bespoke V-8's became available in 1962. The car was a primitive and very bulky first attempt at a rear engine car by Enzo Ferrari. It is commonly said that when a car wins it suddenly looks better, more "right", more beautiful. When four of these things circulated the Monza banking in line astern, nothing ever looked so good to fans of the Italian marque.

I'll make one other aesthetic criticism of the Honda RA272, also a car placed in nomination. To me and fans of the time it looked bulky and obese. This was due to its transversely mounted 1.5 liter V-12 taking up excessive width. The Ferrari 1.5 liter V-12s, whether flat or in vee, where mounted longitudinally and made for a very slim and attractive car.

 

[Liquid]

It's still quite incredible that Honda was a winner in Formula One just four years after building their first ever car, even. The RA272 looks fantastic even with a transverse engine making the rear end a bit of a mechanical labyrinth.

The sharknose Ferrari is an okay looking car but I'd never call it one of the best ever. It's distinct, yes, but not beautiful. Much like the Cooper T51 as discussed in the 1950s threads, the cars from that era struggle to look anything but junior league. They look like F3 cars and many of them were; both the Cooper T51 and the Lotus 18 of Stirling Moss Monaco fame have their origins in lower formulae.

 

[Dotini]

My 3rd nomination, the diminutive 1964 Ferrari 1512, a 1.5 liter flat 12.

Note the under nose spoiler to kill aero-lift on the Ferrari.

Extended inlet trumpets = more torque!
Note the tiny, sinuous exhaust system. Each cylinder was under 125 cc, a piston sized like a kart motor would use.

 

[axletramp]

Another one for the Porsche 804. Just for those horizontally opposed fans.

Mmmmm...

 

[Dotini]

• My friend John wishes to place in nomination the 4 following cars:

• BRM P57
• 
• 
• 

The Lola Mk 4

• 
• 

The Ferrari 156 - but the 1963 version

• 

• The well monikered BRP-BRM with its bilious green paint.
  
  1963 BRP-BRM Formula 1
  

 

[-Fred-]

Since everyone is already nominating the other two I wanted to nominate (the 49 and the Eagle T1G), I'll go ahead and nominate the Brabham-Repco BT24.

Back when I was a kid, I used to play Grand Prix Legends a lot, which was a wonderfully hard game, as were most PC racing games of that era. The BT24 was in there, and I remember it was one of the only cars I was able to drive properly. I remember searching and reading about its history, and how I thought it was a fantastic car.

And it's just oh so pretty as well.

 

[Dotini]

Since everyone is already nominating the other two I wanted to nominate (the 49 and the Eagle T1G), I'll go ahead and nominate the Brabham-Repco BT24.

Back when I was a kid, I used to play Grand Prix Legends a lot, which was a wonderfully hard game, as were most PC racing games of that era. The BT24 was in there, and I remember it was one of the only cars I was able to drive properly. I remember searching and reading about its history, and how I thought it was a fantastic car.

And it's just oh so pretty as well.

Nice choice - the championships winning car of 1967.

The last winning F1 car with an all-tubular frame. The last winning F1 car with a production based engine. IMO it was the last F1 car to even compete with a tube frame and production based engine, let alone win, win, win. A quart of machinery in a pint-sized F2 chassis. Known to be one of the best handling F1 cars of the day. Trivia question: Did the BT24 employ front spindles/uprights adapted from the Triumph Herald, or did Jack Brabham and Ron Tauranac make their own by then?

 

[Ryk]

Obviously only one choice here.

The BRM P115

The Beast of Bourne - a monstrous 3-litre, 32-valve, 8 camshaft, BRM p75 H-16 engine.
Maybe a smidge overweight but that just means there is even more car to like!
This is the Tyrannosaurus of the 1960's, and it comes in a proper British Racing Green.
Don't be swayed by the trivial fact it never actually finished a Grand Prix.

 

[Liquid]

Going into the weekend, these people still have free nominations:

@Liquid - 1
@Jimlaad43 - 2
@Hun200kmh - 3
@Johnnypenso - 1
@-Fred- - 2
@Legro - 1
@axletramp - 3
@Dotini - 1
@Ryk - 3

Anyone reading this thread who hasn't posted any at all, you still have four nominations free to submit.

Nominations close on Sunday!

 

[Pupik]

Obviously only one choice here.

The BRM P115

View attachment 537224

The Beast of Bourne - a monstrous 3-litre, 32-valve, 8 camshaft, BRM p75 H-16 engine.
Maybe a smidge overweight but that just means there is even more car to like!
This is the Tyrannosaurus of the 1960's, and it comes in a proper British Racing Green.

Don't be swayed by the trivial fact it never actually finished a Grand Prix.

It's still kind of amazing the H16 won a race when installed in a Lotus.

Meanwhile, in today's F1, this couldn't happen unless there was a ghastly three car accident.

 

[Liquid]

I'll be going with the flow with my last nomination.

Eagle TG1

 

[Dotini]

Let's face it (as Mario Andretti likes to say), there were a lot of years in the 60's when F1 cars didn't look all that good. Or even sound very good, for that matter, though that's a separate subject.

1961-1965 were a sort of low ebb in F1, when the FIA due to safety fears stemming from LeMans, '55, exerted a way-too-small 1.5 liter formula for engine displacement. After its first year, dominated by the Ferrari 156, it produced a parade of cars that mostly copied the Lotus 25, became very low and slender, and were generally painted in national colors. Although they "didn't have the torque to peel the skin off a grape", as Stirling Moss famously quipped, they did set new lap records compared to the preceding 2.5 liter formula. But aesthetically they were unsatisfying simply because they were underpowered, even compared to sports cars of the day.

The 3 liter formula introduced in '66 righted the picture as far as power and raw speed were concerned, but the trend to openly exposed engines and exhaust systems reduced the impact of bodywork and livery to make the car "good looking", the subject of our thread. And it's questionable whether livery grossly affected by commercial advertising made the cars look any better. This really became important when Team Lotus presented Graham Hill's Lotus 49, not in national colors, but in the colors of Gold Leaf Tobacco at the '68 Monaco GP. So we can choose to limit what's good-looking by excluding commercialized livery, or we can accept it. If we exclude it, I might nominate the 1960 Scarab, with its exquisite paint and detail craftsmanship.

If we accept commercial livery - it was inevitable anyway, as we know, we could choose the Lotus 63. It looked much like cars to come, and had the engine and gearbox fully clothed. But did you know that Hill and Rindt generally refused to race the 63 because their feet had to be threaded under the spinning front axles in order to operate the pedals?! Or that the test drivers ultimately preferred a front/rear torque split of 0/100?! So the car was a disastrous failure, as was the Scarab. And that reduces its good looks, as we all know that winning cars automatically look better, more "right", after they start winning.

So, bottom line, I'm making my final nomination for the Eagle. It was and still is beautiful, both from a distance and from up close. Craftsmanship was top-notch. It was a winner in F1, and even more so in F5000 and Indy racing. It was in proper national colors and not despoiled by advertising.

Dan Gurney on 85th birthday.

 

[Liquid]

Was the 63 the 4WD Lotus? Nice shot of Hill driving it without the rear wing.