Bottom post of the previous page:
Yea, the 49 wasn't the first to do the stressed member thing. In fact, there was a car that tried it many years before even your example but the name escapes me. Thing is, the 49 actually did it properly, so many people think it did it first. The BRM P83 on the other hand was a design failure in every way conceivable. As for 'which ones aren't (designed for pure speed)', those designed to balance speed and reliability over only speed.jimclark wrote: ↑4 years agoWhich one/s haven' been/aren't? You can say it about any designers cars. You've really got me curious as I've been following F1 a looonnngggg time and never noticed dual (or more) purpose F1 cars.
btw, think BRM H-16 re: stressed engine/box...in the P83 and the Lotus 43. So guess where the idea came from for the Cossie'd 49?
Here ya go; an excerpt from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRM_P83
"The P83 chassis
Like contemporary designs such as the Lotus 33 and Cooper T81, the P83 chassis was a riveted monocoque made of Duralumin with integral fuel tanks running down the chassis on either side of the driver. Unlike these cars though, the engine was designed to be a stressed member of the chassis in the same configuration that the much more successful Cosworth DFV would later establish as the norm, and was mated to a 6-speed gearbox, with the gear lever unusually situated to the left of the driver. The front suspension was conventionally arranged, with unequal length double wishbones and inboard coil springs and dampers. The rear suspension consisted of twin radius arms, reversed lower wishbones, single top links and outboard springs and dampers, attached to the gearbox and engine."
Also, the 43:
https://web.archive.org/web/20101222151 ... 7_p327.jpg
https://web.archive.org/web/20160304185 ... 7_p328.jpg
You shoulda been there....good times....
Life...a learning experience (or, best be...).