***** LOL There was a part 2? Takes all the fun out of it ....

If the same driver is in both cars, I think the Lotus must come out on top based on power to weight ratio.

Cheep nasty us sports car

Ford dfv is English not us

I disagree. It's interesting to know what the ZR1 will turn at COTA, not to mention knowing what the Lotus will turn. But, as one commenter pointed out, it's pretty important to know about the tires on the Lotus. That could make all the difference, although it's hard to imagine that R&T would send Rossi out in a car with ancient tires. Or that Rossi would drive at speed if they did.

No. Have your ears checked. His says "Jim Clark". Two time F1 World Driving Champion and possibly the greatest natural talent to ever drive F1.

fragile? by what standards? you dont win a world championship with a fragile car..... period. Clearly you read to much typical journalism or sensationalist but otherwise generally inaccurate accounts of history. Obviously the DFV was not fragile, and the with the 49 pioneering a design that has literally been used entirely in Formula since then until present day, there wasn't any faulty design details in the car either.... silly.

@@kyongslist In theory your correct but in practice every one was using the DFV so if you managed it well you would win (F1 is a different world, they weren't looking for longevity just to finish a race), Jim Clark won so many races because he was gentle on the cars while still being fast...... the introduction of the DFV didn't eliminate mechanical faults during the race, you can't run a 3lt engine at 11000 rpm making 500hp in the late 60's without it being unreliable so what they used to do is use that for qualifying and then drop the limiter to about 8000 rpm (around 400hp) to make it last a race. There was also a rumor because Cosworth was born at Lotus (Both Costin and Duckworth were Lotus employees) Colin Chapman used to get 'special treatment' for example the DFV's that performed better on the dyno would go to Lotus and two seasons monopoly on the engine...... Then Colin Chapman him self said 'Any car which holds together for a whole race is too heavy' when the 49 came out with the engine used as a part of the structure it was 10 years ahead of it's time and as soon as they fixed all the reliability issues to finish a race the car cleaned up. Touch naive imho to think a 50+ year old F1 car worth millions is going to be driven 10 tenths......

@@kyongslist I am so sorry to have not realized you replied. I never said there was "faulty design" in anything but if you want an example of "faulty design", let's talk about wing failures. I said it was fragile. You want examples in a world championship car? OK then, Hill's car retired *one third of the time it raced F1 in 1968* which was Hill's Championship year in the 49. Robust cars do not retire 3 times in 9. In addition I did not talk about the DFV. I talked about the Lotus 49. I did not cite journalism or sensationalism. You just take a look at the times a 49 failed and why. I cited the *fact* that Jimmy Clark- who was famously easy on his cars- had the suspensions break on 49s. That is *fact* not sensationalism. Robust cars do not break when driven gently. Just who are you to tell me that I am citing sensationalist journalism when I quote facts to you? I am using in part the standards of races in which the car had to retire. Hill retired in 7 of 8 races in the 49 in 1967. Jimmy Clark retired in 3 out of 9 races driving the 49 in 1967. Neither of the other Lotus drivers finished a SINGLE race in a 49 in 1967. Conversely, BT24s retired twice in 1967: Once by Jack Brabham and once by Denis Hulme. Each driver completed 7 of 8 races they entered and that is precisely how Hulme was WDC in 1967. I am also using the standards by which other F1 cars were designed and built, and which won many races without being so fragile. I am also using driver's statements and if you read this and wnat to see what they said, go to Google and spend an hour on a legit attempt to find some. Now tell me some more about sensationalism and journalism. By all means we can talk about the number of times it retired in subsequent seasons: 33% of the time for Hill in '69, 60% of the time for Rindt in the same season. Crunch those numbers for me and then tell me more about the journalism I subscribe to.

That's the "American" style; crude and underdeveloped. Thanks to a lack of electronics, some crazy things have been achieved; like a Hummer that can nearly drive underwater (no electronics to short out), or a dragster that reaches 300 MPH before you finish reading this sentence (no transmission to break).

Alex Paulsen + You sound like one of the foolish women. Corvette has been, in some years, the best handling. Your envy is showing. We didn't see you on the moon.

@@senatorjosephmccarthy2720 best handling? haha ok. if it wasn't for the germans, americans would never have gotten into space.

@@sultanabran1 I mean the latest ZR1 ACCIDENTALLY set laptime records but ok

Ha, ha and my mate worked at Hethel when they developed the first Z version of the Corvette at Lotus, that was when GM briefly owned Lotus. Under the skin it was all Lotus engineering.

Mike, I’m not sure what the point of your yammering is, but the Cosworth DFV came from a clean sheet of paper. You make it sound like they took an existing engine and slapped twin-cam heads on it. Other than Ford USA owning Ford UK, I don’t know what American bragging you’re going on about.