The Lotus 88 The more I think about this car the more I think this car had aero absolutely right and due to silly rules the automotive industry has continued to go down the wrong road ever since. Putting aero load through the sprung bodywork of a car is just silly when it only needs to be on the wheels. But if you do connect it straight to the wheels the components are jarred and vibrated as they become part of the unsprung components. The 88's twin chassis idea, with one being completely for aero, is the ultimate solution since the wing and ground effects was invented. I will admit that active suspension made putting aero loads through the bodywork effective but that was still a compromise. Just imagine were road and race cars would now be if this concept had been allowed to mature! Pete
It was a truly brilliant solution to the regulations at the time. IMO perhaps the most inspired Lotus of them all and one of the least recognized.
+1 For those who don't know, a couple of pix may help. Another example of Colins genius. Cheers, Ian Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
Chapman and his team were pushing the boat out and testing the definition of "moveable aerodynamic device". The opposition didn't like it and it was banned. Just like the Brabham fan car, the Lotus 88 was too clever to be accepted.
That's debatable, of course. In both cases, they represented the way F1 design would have to go if the rivals wanted to stay competitive, and the authoritis took fright of that. Had it been allowed the Lotus 88 would probably have led the field for a couple of years, until inevitably copied, its design would have become the norm. The same had happened with the ground effect ...
I think it was the case, if I remember right. But Gordon Murray knew that everything resided in the interpretation of "movable aerodymanic device" to define the fan if it was protested and team owner, Bernie Ecclestone, didn't want to start a legal wrangle about it. So, always the pragmatic, Bernie told Murray to can the project after its only victory, rather than defending it in court. The car was, to my knowledge, never actually banned. It was merely "abandoned".
CORRECTION--IMO the BT 46B violated the SPIRIT of the regulations and the Lotus 88 did not. It was patently clear to all that the primary purpose of the fan wasn't to cool the engine, it was to generate downforce.
Found a basic, but cool explanation on youtube: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOkyAzZPa_g[/ame]
And the 88 should not have been banned. The other teams realised they were going to loose and ***** themselves and panicked. And unlike the fan car you would not have had to have multiple types of cars to suit different circuits (I don't think you would have needed different fan cars either, just different fans ... but it did spit stones out the back). The second aero chassis acted just like their single chassis did, ie. aero loads acted through springs/suspension on to the wheels, it was not adjustable while on the move which is what the rule is for. In the end we all lost out on probably the Lotus teams best idea that would have changed, not just racing cars, but all cars that use aero. Pete
The banning was political according to what I've now read. BTW, this is an interesting read: http://www.auto123.com/en/racing-news/formula-1/f1-the-stunning-twin-chassis-lotus-t88-of-1981?artid=115680 And quite understandably Colin lost interest in F1 after the 88's banning. Stupid and such a pity. Pete
Of course it was, supported by a spurious interpretation of the rules. Had the 88 been accepted, Lotus would have been handed over a certain advantage and all the other cars on the grid would have become obsolete. The other teams would have been 1 or 2 years behind, and I don't even know if Chapman hadn't patented his device. In this case, in the interest of keeping a level playing field, and to prevent a revolt among the opposition, FISA had to ban it to keep F1 going. Jim Hall had the same problems having his Chaparral accepted and left in disgust when it was banned.
Damn, these cars were so beautiful, and they were all so diferent, that alone made f.1 so much more interesting to watch....this was indeed lotus last "great" project, but i guee we'll never know just how good it really was....
Most cars I know don't get sucked closer to the ground the higher the engine revs..lol. Yes, the claim was to cool the engine; Sweden is known for their tropical temperatures. Credit to Murray for stealing a victory there-and for thinking outside the box.
Btw, does anyone know if the 88 was able to turn in any competitive lap times? I'm talking free practice, tests , etc. I know that nige & elio loved the car. Would have loved to see it do one race like the brabham fan car was allowed to do.
IMO, those ideas that don´t go against the letter of the law but only against its "spirit" shouldn´t be banned until the next rule rewrite (i.e. next season). It´s not the teams´fault that someone left a backdoor open in the rules. In the case of the fan car, I think there was more ground to ban it for safety reasons. Having said that, I´m not sure that a double chassis would be very useful in modern F1 cars, or even in post-82 cars; and would be completely useless for road cars because of lots of practical issues. Maybe Lotus´ advantage would only have lasted that season, if we take the Lotus 78 as a precedent, and we should not forget that quite often Lotus was unable of getting good ideas sorted out (Lotus 80, active suspension, 4WD, etc...). So maybe this is another case of idea with overrated historical relevance because it looked good on paper but it wasn´t tried.
IIRC, it did a few timed laps, free practice at Silverstone I think. Their lap times were not good, but as it was free practice and the car was undeveloped I don´t think they were really significant.
thanks, that's what i figured. just showing up with something radical (whether it worked or not) made everyone freak out, a testament to colin's genius....
I think that is the sad thing, the car was not as good as it was thought. of course the active suspension stuff took care of all that as well.... except there was no ground effect ... but basically the same premis - keep the COP and GE generator at a static height... and alow the driver to have an "easier" time controlling the car. The car is owned and matintained by Classic Team Lotus and while interesting - has not really been that effective as built, but I'm sure Chapman would have developed it into a very good car... that with a Renault Turbo engine... and Senna ... WDC... as a matter of fact had Chapman lived ( and stayed out of prison) he and Senna would have been winners.
And sorry but this is just wrong. Motor sport is supposed to improve designs and this did nothing but that. Lotus deserved a few wins because of their good thinking. Heck, otherwise why wasn't the Cosworth DFV banned ... as everybody needed to have one of those to be competitive when they first came out, and only Lotus had them. No wonder Colin lost interest. I consider this banning the turning point and F1 really fncked up! Pete
