VOTE: 3rd Place Play-Off! Best Looking 1960s F1 Car

[Liquid]

1961-1963 Ferrari 156 "Sharknose" vs 1967-1968 Honda RA300

The Ferrari picked up a handful of votes against the Lotus 49 but the Honda RA300 came mightly close to toppling the Eagle T1G; just one vote in it.

There's still the "best of the rest" to sort out here. Who will claim 3rd prize?

1961-1963 Ferrari 156 "Sharknose"

Engines: 1.5L Ferrari V6
Noted Drivers: Phil Hill, Wolfgang von Trips, Giancarlo Baghetti, Richie Ginther

1967-1968 Honda RA300

Engine: 3.0L Honda V12
Driver: John Surtees

 

[Dotini]

The poll header information of this thread is in error, as it is in the other "play-off" thread.

The Ferrari 156 "sharknose" ran only in 1961 and 1962, never in '63 as is proclaimed.

Likewise in the other thread, the Lotus 49 was raced in '67 and only briefly in early '68, never in '69. Although why you exclude the 49B and 49C is beyond me. The big print giveth but the small print taketh away!

 

[TenEightyOne]

The Ferrari 156 "sharknose" ran only in 1961 and 1962, never in '63 as is proclaimed.

That's correct, the 156 "Aero" ran in '63 but didn't have the "sharknose" by then.

 

[Dotini]

That's correct, the 156 "Aero" ran in '63 but didn't have the "sharknose" by then.

View attachment 540854

It was also a monocoque!! (BIG changes)

 

[Legro]

Perhaps not too surprisingly, if you take the close result in the earlier poll into consideration, the Honda is leading this by a rather large margin.

Personally I don't belong to the group that voted for the Honda though. In my opinion it's not even their best looking design from the 60s, even the exhaust system, which is great from the back, isn't enough to get me over the fact I think that the body is far from clean, or good looking, design.

The Ferrari on the other hand is a fantastic looking thing with that 'sharknose' front.

 

[Ryk]

Never a fan of the sharknose look, but a big fan of the Honda V12 noise.

 

[Dotini]

Never a fan of the sharknose look, but a big fan of the Honda V12 noise.

But we're not supposed to be voting on the basis of sound, but on the basis of looks!

It looks to me as though a great, hairy tarantula is clinging to the stern of the Hondola.

It was considerably larger and heavier than F1 designs at the time, as it was designed to complete the Indy 500 mile race on a minimum of two pit stops, running on methanol. It has a a wide tub to carry the fuel cells. Not required for the smaller bore F1 Honda engine car use to complete much shorter distances.


Graham Hill, Indy winner of 1966 in the winning Lola T90. This is the base chassis of the 1967 Lola T90, or "Hondola" RA300. Note the hood scoop appears to be functional in Indycar spec.

The RA300 a big fish out of water, a freak. Carrying a tarantula on its back. Despite its big, complex V-12, it was no faster and certainly no quicker than the sohc production based Repco-Brabham. Very inefficient, in other words.

The Ferrari, always designed as an F1 car, has the much better pedigree. It will hold an honored place in motor racing history when the RA300 is forgotten.

• 
  The Ferrari 156 was raced en masse, four entries per race. The RA300 was a one-off "special", a mongrel for John Surtees to play with.

 

[Dotini]

Truck-like Indy Lola-Honda racing with Formula 2-sized Brabham-Repco. Aero-lift on nose is noticeable.

 

[UnkaD]

We get it. You hate the Honda.

 

[Pupik]

A pity the slimmer RA 272 couldn't make it. And that the shark-nose won't progress...

I'm going to have trouble deciding on the next three decades, so this at least this one is more decisive, to me.

 

[Liquid]

A comfortable victory in the end.

3rd Best Looking F1 Car Of The 1960s: Honda RA300
4th Best Looking F1 Car Of The 1960s: Ferrari 156 "Sharknose"

Thanks for voting. 👍