Blog posts tagged with 'norman dewis'

On Friday, 16th December 2011 a small group gathered around the XJ13 at Jaguar Heritage to mark the launch of Peter Wilson's book, "XJ13 - The definitive story of the Jaguar Le Mans car and the V12 engine that powered it".

This was no ordinary gathering, as those present included many surviving members of the team that were originally involved in the original XJ13 car as well as the development of the engine that powered it. Those present included Norman Dewis, George Buck, Frank Philpott, Jim Eastick, Ron Greves, Mike Kimberley, Roger Shelbourne, Robert Berry, Peter Taylor and Peter Wilson himself.

Click the images below to see videos and more detail of the proceedings

The videos include introductions by Tony Duckhouse (on behalf of Jaguar Heritage), Paul Skilleter (renowned Jaguar author and publisher) and further insights by Mike Kimberley (XJ13 Project Manager - later to join Colin Chapman and become CEO of Group Lotus):

More details of the book itself are available from Paul Skilleter Books or the Jaguar Clubs of North America.

As the build of the "trial" all-steel monocoque/chassis progresses, I wanted to consider the materials that should be used for construction of the component parts of my final version. Jaguar themselves went through a similar exercise in 1964 when the XJ13 had reached an advanced design stage.

Before then, in the few years leading up to 1964, various studies/reports were made on things such as the shape of the overall body, the design of the underlying chassis structure and suspension design. One, quite advanced, design was for a rather more integrated monocoque design as shown in the following sketch from the November of 1963:

Early monocoque design for the XJ13.
© Image - reproduced with permission.

However, the above design was not progressed further and, instead, a separate monocoque/chassis unit was developed which was to be clothed by a largely unstressed outer skin:

Representation of original XJ13 monocoque/chassis.

In essence, the final design for the monocoque/chassis consisted of three main elements:

The design of the front suspension went through a few different incarnations as the car was being assembled. Derrick White, Jaguar's talented Race-car Engineer argued for a cutting-edge design (for the time) using widely-spaced upper and lower wishbones. This would have given better handling and a greater possibility of maximising the benefit of the wider tyre widths which were increasingly being used in the mid-1960s. His persistent arguments were repeatedly blocked by Bill Heynes who favoured a more tried-and tested production-based suspension. Heynes eventually prevailed and a design, based on the 1964 Lightweight E-Type was adopted - albeit with coil-over shocks in place of torsion bars.

This decision was one of the things that led to Derrick White becoming increasingly frustrated and his eventual defection to Cooper - a great loss to Jaguar. White went on to design the GP-winning Cooper-Maserati of 1966. Heynes, at the time, had been given direct supervision of the XJ13 project and it has been argued that his enormous workload at the time contributed to the slow development of the XJ13. Fortunately, Mike Kimberley was eventually given day-to-day responsibility for the car and development then continued at a greater pace.

Meanwhile, in 1964 when the car had reached an advanced design stage - on paper at least - Jaguar conducted an investigation into the best materials of construction for the chassis/monocoque. They considered mild-steel, aluminium and titanium. The investigation concluded:

In the end, the chassis sections coloured yellow/green in the drawing above were fabricated from mild-steel. The main centre section was fabricated from aluminium.

According to Peter Wilson, who actually lent a hand in constructing the XJ13:

The modern equivalent, Aluminium 5251 (NS4), is available and will be used for the recreation along with steel pressings where appropriate. I must admit to some relief that Jaguar didn't choose titanium

For those engineers amongst you, and those well-versed in the mysteries of things such as Young's Modulus (I certainly don't include myself here!), the following summarises some of the data presented in Jaguar's investigation into material choice:

As is well-known, there is no such thing as a chassis that doesn't flex, but some are much stiffer than others. The choice of material is critical in this respect. The range of chassis stiffness has varied greatly over the years from about 500 lbft/degree in the 1930s to more than 20,000 lbft/deg in a modern race car. I should be able to measure the stiffness of my completed chassis and it will be interesting to compare the all-steel "trial" chassis to the final version.

Different chassis designs each have their own strengths and weaknesses. Every chassis is a compromise between weight, component size, complexity, vehicle intent, and ultimate cost. And even within a basic design method, strength and stiffness can vary significantly, depending on the details. There can be no such thing as the "ultimate chassis" for every car, because each car presents a different set of problems. The XJ13 chassis gave a whole new challenge because of the intention to mount the engine as a fully-stressed member - with the whole of the rear suspension hanging off the engine/transaxle. I believe this would have beaten Colin Chapman's Lotus by a few years had the XJ13 actually raced. Jaguar carried out a number of theoretical investigations into how well the car should stand up to the torsional loads applied to the chassis because of this arrangement and the final rear chassis design took these anticipated loads into account. The front suspension arrangement bears many similarities to the E-Types with steel tubing attached to the front bulkhead and Jaguar will have built up much experience of this design.

It may seem that an aluminium chassis was always the logical choice, but this is not necessarily true. Aluminium is more flexible than steel or titanium. Indeed, the ratio of stiffness to weight is almost identical to steel, so an aluminum chassis must weigh the same as a steel or titanium one to achieve the same stiffness. Aluminium has an advantage only where there are very thin sections where buckling is possible. This certainly applies to the large sill and floor sections.

In the end, the "unintended crash test" crash at MIRA in 1971 demonstrated better than anything else the soundness of Jaguar's basic chassis design. Although there was considerable damage to the outer structure, the basic chassis/monocoque survived almost intact. More importantly, the legendary Test Driver, Norman Dewis, survived unscathed.

The XJ13 first ran in April 1966 and, by the summer of 1967, development was still continuing apace with an extended test at Silverstone in August of that year. This was the ninth test carried out over a period of less than six months which does demonstrate Jaguar's commitment to the project at that time. These tests were carried out with the full knowledge of Jaguar's senior management with test reports widely distributed internally by the project leader - Mike Kimberley.

Michael J. Kimberley (“Mike”) C.Eng., F.I. Mech. E., F.R.S.A., F.I.E.D, F.I.M.I has had a remarkable career in the motor industry over the last 56 years, working with some of the great engineers, innovators and leaders of the worlds motor companies. Mike started as an apprentice with Jaguar in 1953 before rapidly progressing to becoming in Section Leader, Special Projects at Jaguar in 1965 where he lead the team developing the Jaguar XJ13 Le Mans car, under such famous names as Jaguar founder Sir William Lyons and Jaguar race director Frank (Lofty) England ...."

Mike Kimberley - Jaguar XJ13 Project Leader.

During this active development phase it seems that most of the testing was carried out by David Hobbs with additional drives by Richard Attwood and Norman Dewis.

It was David Hobbs who set the closed course record (167.5 MPH) for UK with the XJ13. This record lasted for 19 years. Hobbs' first race was in 1959 driving his mother's Morris Oxford. He turned professional in 1964 and raced extensively world wide for 30 years. His last race driven was the Masters Championship in 1993.

David Hobbs - racing driver and former Jaguar apprentice. Picture taken at the 2009 Motorsports Hall of Fame Induction.

Richard Attwood was born in Wolverhampton, Staffordshire. Richard James David "Dickie" Attwood (born 4 April 1940, Wolverhampton, Staffordshire) is a British former motor racing driver. During his career he raced for the BRM, Lotus and Cooper Formula One teams. In his whole F1 career he achieved one podium and scored a total of 11 championship points. He was also a successful sports car racing driver and won the 1970 24 Hours of Le Mans race, driving a Porsche 917.

Richard Attwood - racing driver and former Jaguar apprentice.

Norman Dewis is Jaguar's legendary Test Driver. Dewis is best remembered for a career spanning 33 years at Jaguar. In the words of Paul Skilleter,

Norman Dewis - Jaguar's legendary test driver.

A quick search of the internet will uncover the commonly-held view that it was an impending change to Le Mans engine capacity regulations alone which led Jaguar senior management to halt further development of the car. However, the truth is perhaps a little more involved than this and it seems a number of factors may have conspired to halt further development of the XJ13.

• An impending change to the Le Mans regulations to limit engine capacity to 3 litres. In Lofty England's own words, in a memo to William Heynes, he stated "... the 3-litre maximum engine capacity formula for Group 6 prototype cars will be applied to all sports car championship races, which includes Le Mans, for the next three years, i.e. up to and including 1970, which period coincides with the remaining period of the current Formula 1 racing car regulations ..."

   

• The spectre of the "GT40 Armada" in 1967. In the spring of 1963, Ford heard that Enzo Ferrari was interested in selling his company to Ford. Ford committed millions of dollars researching and auditing Ferrari's company only to have Ferrari unilaterally withdraw from talks at a late stage. This angered Henry Ford II who directed his racing division to find a company that could help them build a Ferrari-beater on the world endurance-racing circuit. The Ferrari-beater turned out to be the Mark IV GT40 which, although american-built, was based on a collaboration between Ford and England's Lola. Ford did not, at this time, have the racing prowess to take on the likes of Ferrari so had earlier engaged in discussions with England's Lotus, Cooper and Lola - eventually choosing the latter as a partner.

   

• The BMC takeover of Jaguar. On 11 July 1966, the "merger" of Jaguar with the British Motor Corporation was announced. In reality, this was a takeover by BMC of Jaguar, but Sir William Lyons maintained control of most of his his empire. One reason that Lyons agreed to the 'merger' was to get financial backing for future model programmes. Lyons saw Jaguar's future success lay in introducing new road cars. Jaguar's finances were stretched at the time and racing had reached a new level of professionalism and expenditure that Lyons could not now justify.

On the 29th September 1967, Lofty England said:

The fact that Jaguar were actively considering a 3 litre version of the XJ13 indicates it wasn't this rule change alone that would have prevented them racing. England's other comments in the same memo give an indication of the real reason development of the XJ13 was shelved:

In other words, reading between the lines, not only would development of a competitive car be very expensive, it would also have to compete against the equivalent of then-current Formula 1 cars. It would have seemed very unlikely that Jaguar could have triumphed under those circumstances. Finances, since the BMC takeover, were tight and Lyons' emphasis would have been on new production models - not racing - especially not where Jaguar would stand little chance of winning.

The decision was made - late in 1967 - to stop active development of the XJ13 and emphasis switched to a V12 engine for the future lineup of road cars.

It is interesting to see what might have been if a 3-litre version of the XJ13 had been developed. Would it have been along the lines of one of Malcolm Sayer's drawings from around that time?

3 litre successor to the XJ13?

On the 3rd June 1965 an internal "Instruction to Proceed (XJ13 Car)" was issued by Jaguar’s Bob Knight – it started, “Build one prototype competiton car …”. Responsibilities for all aspects of the car’s design were allocated – the responsibility for the body being given to Malcolm Sayer, Phil Weaver and Bob Blake.

The body was to be, “Light alloy skin on monocoque structure. Comprising of three main sections”. These three sections were:

• “Body Front Structure” (main skin, front bulkhead, headlamp diaphragms, air-ducts for radiator/brakes etc, internal structure to suit 1964 Jaguar Lightweight E-Type independent front suspension and a boot lid).
• “Body Centre Structure” (floor & sills, fuel & oil tanks, seat back bulkhead, doors and windscreen).
• “Body Rear Structure” (main skin, engine cover, spare wheel, cooling ducts for transmission & brakes, rear lid and rear valance).

Other responsibilities were allocated as appropriate. Rather telling was the comment “For the first car only” which does confirm the prototype XJ13 was planned to be one of many.

By the June of 1965, the quad-cam V12 engine project for the XJ13 was well underway – with the emphasis very much on racing. The first V12 engine to be fitted to any car was my engine (engine number 2) which was fitted to a car codenamed “XJ5/5” – XJ5 being the code name for the Mk10 successor. This engine was fitted to this sable-coloured “test mule” in April 1965 – complete with Lucas Mechanical Fuel Injection and modified dry sump - some two months before the XJ13’s “Instruction to Proceed” was issued. The engine in the “test mule” was built to the same specification as the first engine (number one) which was to be installed in the XJ13 a year later in April 1966.

Overall responsibility for the shape was given to the late Malcolm Sayer – the man already responsible for the Jaguar C-Type, D-Type and later to be responsible for the iconic designs of the E-Type and XJS.

Malcolm Sayer, 1916-1970

Malcolm Sayer was a student of aerodynamics at Loughborough University’s Department of Aeronautical and Automotive Engineering in 1938. He was one of the first designers to apply the principles of aerodynamics to cars with his scientific calculations, creating some of the most beautiful forms of the era. Sadly he died in 1970, at the relatively young age of 54.

After graduating from Loughborough he joined the Bristol Aero Company where he worked on various projects including their radial engine. One of Sayer’s colleagues at Bristol was Phil Weaver who was later to work to take charge of Jaguar’s Competition Department and work alongside Sayer on the XJ13. In an interview with Phil Weaver, Paul Skilleter (well-known Jaguar Historian and Author) recorded Weaver’s recollections of his time with Sayer at Bristol.

Malcolm Sayer joined Jaguar in 1950 and his talent was soon recognised. One of his first tasks was to design a suitable body for Jaguar’s XK120C (the “C-Type”). The chassis had already been designed by Jaguar’s Technical Director Bill Heynes. Sayer worked alongside Bob Blake who had been given the responsibility of producing a body. Sayer brought his aerodynamic skills to bear on the project and added a large element of science to the body design. He was one of the first to use wind tunnels in automotive design and photographs exists of the various small-scale models he had made to investigate the aerodynamic characteristics of his various designs.

Norman Dewis, Jaguar’s renowned Chief Tester, joined Jaguar not long after Malcolm Sayer and recalled how Sayer worked:

A number of contemporary sources cite Sayer’s habit of drawing a full-size car on the walls of his office or even with chalk on the floor. I don’t doubt that some of his initial designs for the XJ13 were done in this way. He had at least one small-scale model made up for testing before Bob Blake began the task of clothing the chassis/monocoque.

Sayer’s final designs were “formalised” as side, front, rear and plan view documents which may have become internal “standards” for his designs and used for things such as centre-of-gravity studies etc. The detail shapes of compound curves etc were established mathematically using a technique peculiar to Sayer.

Examples of these final standardised documents are shown below:

XJ13 “dimension summary”© Jaguar Heritage

In late 1967, after he had designed the XJ13, Malcolm Sayer designed three more V12 mid-engined sports racing cars. The drawing above shows one of these designs in the form of a “dimension summary”.copy; Jaguar Heritage

It is interesting to note that Sayer’s original design as shown above differs in many respects from the rebuilt “original”. It is my aim to reproduce the XJ13 exactly as Sayer had intended and before the addition of “1970s wide wheels/wheelarches” and other “updates”. It is important to me to recreate the car as close to its original specification as possible – not only to satisfy requirements for potential racing against cars of the period, but also because the historical significance of the surviving original prototype engine demands this. After all, Jaguar had always intended to produce more than one car and I feel an authentic copy could be considered to be a “continuation” in line with Jaguar’s original intentions.

Malcolm Sayer was very much a man “ahead of his time”. There is much talk nowadays of Computer Aided Design (CAD) and Computer Aided Manufacturing (CAM) but it seems that as early as the 1950s Sayer had developed his own longhand version of similar techniques. He kept his calculations and means of representing complex shapes mathematically very close to his chest and there is little information on his methodology available today.
Paul Skilleter reported that Cyril Crouch, who worked in the Body Drawing Office in Sayer’s time, recalls him “using Chambers seven-figure log tables to calculate all the shapes, as one would do on a computer now.”

Bob Blake had joined Jaguar from Briggs Cunningham and was a legendary body-builder. He was able to interpret Sayer’s data and successfully translated his drawings into the full-scale XJ13. He was joined in this task by Roger Shelbourne and Geoff Joyce. Peter Wilson also worked on the car and was responsible for making some components of the car and chassis. Wilson confirms that, contrary to popular belief, the original car wasn’t built by Abbey Panels – their involvement was limited to “the fabrication of skin panels to our formers, and roller-seam welding of the inner sill panels to the main floor and outer sill sections.”
Peter, in his book “Cat Out Of The Bag” goes on to say,

Much of this data has survived – including the precise location points of items such as suspension components, steering rack, anti-roll bars in 3D space. This data will be used in the construction of my 1966 XJ13 copy. The main difference being that technology allows us to carry out this operation on a computer screen before the actual car is manufactured.

To help achieve a faithful copy of the original design, the technique of 3D scanning coupled with digital techniques to incorporate data from period photographs, original technical drawings and eye-witness accounts is being used.
An example of how digital data can be built up from an original document (in this case an accurate drawing used in 1965 for a centre-of-gravity study) is shown below. The pictures show initial work on reproducing the original centre monocoque structure.

© Neville Swales
Not to be reproduced without permission.

© Neville Swales
Not to be reproduced without permission.

© Neville Swales
Not to be reproduced without permission.

This digital data can be supplemented and cross-referenced with original photographs, reports and original technical data – as well as the “original” prototype. Once the information has been captured, it is possible to estimate things such as weights, roll-centres, centre-of-gravity etc. It is also possible to virtually “trial-fit” components to reduce the possibility of an error during the actual build.

Once sufficient digital data has been assembled and the on-screen 3D images have been verified with photographs etc, the next step will be to use the data to produce a physical scale model using CAM techniques including the use of a 3D printer. The scale model can be painted in the correct shade of 1965 BRG (British Racing Green), handled and verified for accuracy. It also gives an opportunity to see how the light catches the car in comparison with period photographs and the current “original”. Once this has been accomplished, the digital data can be used to manufacture millimetre-perfect full-scale formers and bucks – even to the extent of pre-marked or drilled rivet locations.

As well as being able to use these powerful techniques to faithfully reproduce the original car, they can also be used to reproduce unobtainable and unique parts such as cylinder heads etc. The following picture shows this scanning technique in action on the prototype engine:

© Neville Swales
Not to be reproduced without permission.

The item to be scanned (anything from a small component to a full-size car) is covered in a non-reflective white powder. Small adhesive dots are applied across its surface and the item is laser scanned. The small dots allow the sophisticated software to locate specific points in 3D space. Internal passageways may be scanned using similar techniques using lasers on probes.

Manipulation of the resultant data and production of a final digital representation of the scanned item is a skilled operation. Once the item has been captured in this way, faithful clones can be reproduced using computer aided manufacturing techniques.

noun. Zeit·geist

… is a German word. Zeit meaning “time” and Geist meaning “ghost,” Zeitgeist means the spirit of the age or times.

Original 1966 XJ13 - MIRA 1971

The 1966 Jaguar XJ13 is no more.

Its spirit and identity live on in a Jaguar-built replica constructed from the mortal remains of the original car which suffered a calamitous crash during a demo run in 1971.

The event was a promotional exercise to publicise the soon-to-be-launched Jaguar Series 3 V12 E-Type. The venue was the high-speed banked track at the British Motor Industry Research Association (MIRA). The date was 20th January 1971.

In the words of Norman Dewis , Jaguar Test Driver, in his book "Developing the Legend

" ... "It was all the fault of the Series 3 E-Type and the new Hassan/Baily 'flat-head' production V12. The idea emerged that the new Jaguar V12 engine in the Series 3 E-Type should be launched to the press at Geneva in March 1971 amid the sight and sound of a previously unrevealed, mid-engined V12 Le Mans car emerging into sight from behind the trees. This involved getting the XJ13 out of hibernation, and as a backup to the press launch, a film would be made for wider distribution."

So it was that on 20 January 1971 a film crew from London met up with the XJ13 and Norman at MIRA.

XJ13 awoken from hibernation before that day in January 1971 Photo © Jaguar Daimler Heritage Trust

After being under wraps for over two years, the car had needed a complete check-over and, as the wheels it was on had done most of the development work, they were substituted by new wheels and tyres which had remained in the stores.”

Photo © Jaguar Daimler Heritage Trust

Break during filming Photo © Jaguar Daimler Heritage Trust

All went well at first, with a good number of laps put in at modest speeds for filming. “

“All went well at first …” Photo © Jaguar Daimler Heritage Trust

Then to conclude”, Norman relates, “I was asked if I could do four fast laps. I did three, and they were quite quick, although not as quick as I had gone in testing.”

"Then on the third lap I came onto the banking, which was the one opposite the tunnel banking where the film crew were, at about 135, and gave it full throttle to hold it in as usual. About two thirds of the way round the banking, the car lurched to the right and almost instantly went into the safety fence ..."

“... the car somersaulted off the track into the muddy field ... tyre tracks showed how the car had almost left the banked section ... then spun down the banking to end up in the field ...”

“ I was asked if I could do four fast laps. I did three, and they were quite quick ..” Photo © Jaguar Daimler Heritage Trust

The XJ13 Log Book simply states "20.1.71 Written off" at the top of the entry ..

Extract from XJ13 Log Book © Jaguar Daimler Heritage Trust

Luckily, the driving skills and lightning reflexes of the Jaguar test driver Norman Dewis meant that he survived the crash unscathed. He walked away from the crash having buried himself in the narrow confines of the cockpit. The state of the car was, however, a different matter …

The fact that the car survived at all to participate in this promotional exercise after development had ceased in 1967, was simply down to the fact that the Jaguar management felt it could play some part in promoting their production V12 engine. A memo from the late Lofty England to the late William Heynes in the September of 1967 outlines the reasons for shelving the XJ13 project as well as the justification for keeping the car in storage and not breaking it up as was the fate for many earlier projects.

“… we are about to commit ourselves for considerable expenditure with ZF for the supply of special gearbox units for the current XJ13 5-litre competition car and also a 3-litre version, which is a new project.

I feel I should point out that there now seems no doubt that the 3-litre maximum engine capacity formula for Group 6 Prototype cars will be applied to all sports car championship races, which includes Le Mans, for the next three years, i.e. up to and including 1970, which period coincides with the remaining period of the current Formula 1 racing car regulations.

There does not, therefore, appear to be any point in doing any further development work on the 5-litre car or, in fact, on a 3-litre version, unless it is our intention to produce a lightweight 3-litre Formula 1 type engine, as cars which will be competing in sports car championship races in the next three years will be in effect Formula 1 racing cars with bodywork to meet the sports car regulations. These regulations may well be amended in 1969, whereby it will no longer be necessary to provide a spare wheel or luggage accommodation, or have a specified windscreen height on open cars.

I suggest we ought to keep the 5-litre competition car as a complete unit, since we could possibly get some publicity value from it when we announce one of our production cars with a 12-cylinder engine.”

What caused the crash?

Norman Dewis confirmed that new wheels and tyres were added prior to filming. The XJ13 Log Book states these wheels were made new after testing of the car only four years earlier (late in 1967). Excepting possible manufacturing defects, it is perhaps unlikely that they could have deteriorated to the point of failure in that short space of time in storage? The use of magnesium as a constituent of alloy wheels was not a new technology in the 1960’s – indeed, magnesium wheels were used on every car that won the Indy 500 from 1946 to 1963.

When the tyres were fitted to the car’s new wheels in 1967, they were fitted without the benefit of inner-tubes. It is possible that the new tyres fitted before filming in 1971 were also fitted without inner-tubes. This, in itself, should not have caused a tyre failure. A more likely culprit may have been the unsubstantiated rumour that a rear tyre was “plugged” to prevent a slow leak before the final high-speed laps?

It is believed that the incident occurred at a speed below those attained during the short period of the car’s active development – although the speed may have been well in excess of 135mph it is unlikely the accident could have been caused by “lifting” or other “aerodynamic” reasons.

Another possibility could have been failure of a rear radius arm. Using the engine block as a stressed member, the rear wheels were mounted by a driveshaft (as upper link), a fabricated lower link and two forward-facing radius arms fixing directly to the engine mounting block. This was a rather innovative solution for the mid-1960s. Examination of the wreckage revealed a damaged upper radius rod on the rear right-hand side (offside)6. However, this damage could have been sustained during the impact. If not, a failure such as this could explain why the car “lurched to the right” before making contact with the safety-fencing at the top of the banking.

Perhaps the true facts and cause of the crash will never be known – the important facts are that the driver, the legendary Norman Dewis, and the car both survived.

What was the extent of the damage?

Except for occasional snippets of information, relatively little information has previously been made available on the development history of the XJ13 – this “vacuum” has been filled by a host of commentators/enthusiasts over the years with a range of statements and opinions – some of whom have probably never even seen the original car least of all been involved with Jaguar! As a consequence of this, an almost “mythical” status has been attached to the car. One therefore has to be careful when sifting through the “established facts”. Fortunately, at least one piece of original documentary evidence survives in Jaguar’s archive and that is the “XJ13 Log Book”. This book gives an account of the development and testing of the car including details of its post-crash examination. This document can be supplemented and cross-referenced, not only with other original surviving records, but by information from known and respected authors such as Paul Skilleter, Philip Porter, Andrew Whyte as well as surviving ex-Jaguar participants such as Peter Wilson, Mike Kimberley, Norman Dewis etc.

The XJ13 Log Book simply states "20.1.71 Written off" at the top of the entry ..

Extract from XJ13 Log Book © Jaguar Daimler Heritage Trust

In the words of Paul Skilleter in 1975 , “… there wasn’t a straight panel left on the XJ13 – a more written-off looking racing car you couldn’t imagine. It was a crestfallen party that took the remains back to Browns Lane and pushed it back into its dark corner of the development department.”

Back at Browns Lane the car was later stripped by G Gardner to assess the extent of the damage. It does seem that the damage was not as extensive as first appeared. Suspension and steering was relatively unscathed with the notable exception of the upper offside rear radius arm. Major mechanical components such as engine and ZF transaxle also survived with the only significant damage in that area being the transmission oil cooler brackets (fitted above the transaxle). However, Norman Dewis confirmed in his autobiography that the car had glanced a sand-filled oil drum as it spun towards the MIRA infield. The impact was in the offside cockpit area (the driver’s side) and Dewis’ helmet was damaged when the windscreen pillar made contact with the oil drum and hit it. This contact was further compounded by a series of end-over-end and sideways rolls.

Damage to the body/monocoque structure was extensive and these sections were beyond economical repair. The body structure of the XJ13 is entirely monocoque consisting of two wide sills (containing fuel tank-bags) which run from front to rear wheels. Between the two sills is a section of stressed floor and three bulkhead sections – two at the front and one immediately behind the driver. A further boxed section forms part of the rear bulkhead and serves to connect the sills at the rear . This entire body structure needed renewal – doors and windscreen surround included.

The two front wheels were found to be OK but both rears were broken. Incidentally, this may support the argument that a broken wheel may have been a consequence of the crash and not a cause?

What was changed during the car’s 1972/73 rebuild?

The car remained in its sorry state for more than a year. As the time for the launch of the new SOHC V12 production engine loomed, Lofty England decided the car should be restored as a promotional, rather than a competition, vehicle. I feel the car’s new status both permitted and defined changes that were made to it during its rebuild to fulfil its new role. As a consequence, certain cosmetic changes were made that deviated from Malcolm Sayer’s original design.

Ted Loades of Abbey Panels spotted the crashed XJ13 stored at Jaguar and offered that Abbey Panels would rebuild it for £1,000 - “Lofty” England accepted without hesitation ….

Luckily the original wooden bucks/formers had survived. They had been stored outside at Jaguar’s store at Radfords and had escaped the periodic “clean up” that components stored inside were subjected to.

There are many so-called “eyewitness accounts” of the damage suffered by the car and others claiming to have intimate knowledge of exactly what was damaged/replaced during its rebuild. The following represents the facts that I have been able to establish so far (further changes still under investigation):

• Completely new body/monocoque/doors built by Abbey Panels. Some of the critical dimensions were varied slightly – including the overall length and details of the rear section. A major deviation was the addition of “1970’s” wide wheelarches to enable the fitment of wider tyres/wheels. This deviation from the original design was done to improve “strength and appearance”.
• Further stiffening sections were added at the front of the car as evidenced by an additional row of rivets that appeared across the nose of the rebuilt car.
• A different means of attaching the windscreen to the surround was employed.
• The existing wheels were repaired by Jaguar and Sterling Metals. It has been suggested that new wheels were made by machining the outer section of Concord undercarriage wheels but no documentary evidence to support this has yet surfaced.
• The original light alloy radiator was found to be corroded and so a new one was made by modifying a XJ12 saloon item.
• Twin lightweight Lucas batteries were added to replace the original (which had been found to be not quite up to the job).
• The original seats were retained although retrimmed in a different material to original.
• A different style of gear-lever was used as the original had been “mislaid”.
• The car was painted in a different, lighter, shade of British Racing Green.

So … to answer the question posed earlier – “Why recreate the Jaguar XJ13?” 

Because it doesn’t exist in its original form – completely true to Malcolm Sayer’s vision…

Because there is only one car and that car is in the capable hands of Jaguar Heritage. I am unlikely to be allowed to experience the “zeitgeist” of this car and era by driving it at its limit....

Because the chances of the “original” being raced are nil – my dream is to see a recreation of the 1966 car on a racetrack racing against the cars it was designed to compete against - those from Ferrari and Ford in particular. The “original” will never race – a recreation perhaps could?….

You are invited to join me in my quest to recreate the legendary XJ13 - your contributions, support and interest will be welcomed. The journey continues!

In the words of Norman Dewis, Jaguar Test Driver, in his book "Developing the Legend" ... "It was all the fault of the Series 3 E-Type and the new Hassan/Baily 'flat-head' production V12. The idea emerged that the new Jaguar V12 engine in the Series 3 E-Type should be launched to the press at Geneva in March 1971 amid the sight and sound of a previously unrevealed, mid-engined V12 Le Mans car emerging into sight from behind the trees. This involved getting the XJ13 out of hibernation, and as a backup to the press launch, a film would be made for wider distribution. So it was that on 20 January 1971 a film crew from London met up with the XJ13 and Norman at MIRA. After being under wraps for over two years, the car had needed a complete check-over and, as the wheels it was on had done most of the development work, they were substituted by new wheels and tyres which had remained in the stores.

All went well at first, with a good number of laps put in at modest speeds for filming. 'Then to conclude', Norman relates, 'I was asked if I could do four fast laps. I did three, and they were quite quick, although not as quick as I had gone in testing. Then on the third lap I came onto the banking, which was the one opposite the tunnel banking where the film crew were, at about 135, and gave it full throttle to hold it in as usual. About two thirds of the way round the banking, the car lurched to the right and almost instantly went into the safety fence ..."

... the car somersaulted off the track into the muddy field ... tyre tracks showed how the car had almost left the banked section ... then spun down the banking to end up in the field ...

The XJ13 Log Book simply states "20.1.71 Written off" at the top of the entry ..

The following quoted text is © Jaguar Daimler Heritage Trust and should not be copied without their permission.

20.1.71
Written Off. Subsequently stripped by G Gardner to assess total damage.
Car rebuilt (commenced March 1972) completed June 1973.
Body panels - front & rear also doors by Abbey Panels at their works. Formers found intact at Radfords sent over to Bayton Road, also main chassis platform.
Damage not really extensive as regards suspension, steering etc, only one (upper) radius rod at rear o/s & transmission cooler brackets.
Engine stripped and rebuilt up to best show standards. Headlamps supplied FOC by Lucas. Tanks, oil and fuel overhauled by Marstons at cost of £55. Water rad - light alloy - corroded & u/s. XJ12 modified to suit. Two rear wheels u/s, repaied by ourselves & Sterling Metals. Tyres supplied FOC by Dunlops. Brakes OK. Steering column and rack OK. New formers made for windscreen & doors. Perspex used although laminated Triplex ultimately to be fitted to screen.
Flairs added to wheel arches to improve strength and appearance.
Twin lightweight batteries (Lucas) used.
Cooling fan (XJ12 type) fitted.
Pipework cleaned up to improve appearance.
Throttle mechanism reworked.
Seats retrimmed in black cord.
Body painted by Service Dept in new BRG
Dunlop Trackmark used as tread step protection.
New gear lever fitted as original was mislaid?

Rebuilt by G Mason & P Dodd

Car shown to Motor, Autocar, BBC etc & subject to write up in all journals.

Taken to Silverstone on July 13th 1973 for show purposes & demonstration laps (British Grand Prix) also to Shelsey Walsh for Jaguar Owner Drivers Club Rally (Aug 18th & 19th 1973) and XK Register Rally @ Woburn Sun Sept 2nd 1973.

Took it over to BBC Pebble Mill for television programme Thurs Sept 20th 1973.

Weights after rebuild
Less petrol. Plus oil & water

Front LH Wheel - 456lbs
Front RH Wheel - 450lbs
Front axle complete - 926lbs

Rear LH Wheel - 716 lbs
Rear RH Wheel - 640 lbs
Rear axle complete - 1364lbs

Total car weight - 2290lbs

--- END OF XJ13 LOG BOOK ---

On Friday, 22nd January I attended a signing of a limited-edition print of this original painting by the artist Nicholas Watts:

Nicholas' superb painting of the XJ13 at speed on the banking has been reproduced as a limited-edition of 150 high-quality, giclee prints. They will soon be available for retail sale (contact Trevor Wilson of TWR Replicas for details).

Following a rendezvous around the XJ13 on display at the Jaguar Daimler Heritage Trust's museum at Coventry, the signing took place in the JDHT boardroom.

The event was organised by Trevor Wilson of TWR Replicas - suppliers of the XJ13 replica in the UK. Each print was signed by Norman Dewis (Jaguar test-driver), Mike Kimberley (current CEO of Lotus and a member of the XJ13 design team), Peter Wilson (author of "Cat out of the Bag" and also a design team member) and Peter Jones (design team member).

Left to right .... Peter Wilson, Peter Jones, Mike Kimberley, Norman Dewis

Norman Dewis

In a career spanning 33 years at Jaguar, Norman Dewis tested and developed a remarkable series of cars including:C-type, D-type, XK 140/150, 2.4/3.4 and Mk 2 saloons, Mk VII/Mk VIIM, E-type, XJ13, XJ/XJ-S and XJ40. Plus, he rode with Stirling Moss in a C-type in the 1952 Mille Miglia, drove a 190mph works D-type in the highly dramatic 1955 Le Mans, raced in the Goodwood 9 Hours, and set an amazing 173mph production car record at Jabbeke in Belgium with an XK 120. Completing over a million test miles at 100mph-plus average, Norman also played a crucial role developing the revolutionary Dunlop disc brake, and survived high-speed crashes and rollovers in the days before seat-belts – and without ever breaking a single bone.

Mike Kimberley

Michael J. Kimberley (“Mike”) C.Eng., F.I. Mech. E., F.R.S.A., F.I.E.D, F.I.M.I has had a remarkable career in the motor industry over the last 56 years, working with some of the great engineers, innovators and leaders of the worlds motor companies. Mike started as an apprentice with Jaguar in 1953 before rapidly progressing to becoming in Section Leader, Special Projects at Jaguar in 1965 where he lead the team developing the Jaguar XJ13 Le Mans car, under such famous names as Jaguar founder Sir William Lyons and Jaguar race director Frank (Lofty) England. In 1969, he joined Lotus as Manager of Continuous Engineering, with the Lotus Europa Twin Cam being one of his most notable projects. Mike rose steadily but rapidly through the Lotus ranks, joining the Board of Lotus aged 37, and becoming Managing Director of Lotus Cars in 1976 and Managing Director of Lotus Engineering by 1980, being responsible for such Lotus icons as the Esprit, Eclat and Elite.

During the 1970s and 80s, Mike had the unique experience of having worked closely with the company’s founder Colin Chapman, with whom Mike set up the world class Lotus Engineering consultancy to enable Lotus to work for many other cars companies around the world. Lotus Engineering is now a globally recognised high technology engineering consultancy and serves many of the world’s car companies. After Colin Chapman’s tragic and untimely death in 1982, Mike became C.E.O of Group Lotus plc, as well as holding board positions with a number of Lotus associated companies such as Chairman of Millbrook Proving Ground and President of Moog Systems Inc. With Lotus under General Motors ownership, Mike became Chairman of Group Lotus plc before leaving Lotus in 1992 to become Executive Vice President (General Motors Overseas Corporation) based in South East Asia. Two years later, Mike became director of the Vector Aeromotive Corporation, and in 1994, he became President & Managing Director of Automobili Lamborghini S.p.A, being responsible for the rebuilding of Lamborghini after Chrysler’s ownership and prior to its sale to Audi AG, as part of the VW Group. In the mid 1990s, Mike left Lamborghini and worked directly for Tommy Suharto as a board member of Timor Putra Nasional (owners of Lamborghini) until retiring with an undiagnosed tropical fever. Returning to the automotive industry a few months later, Mike worked in a consultancy role for a number of organisations including Tata Motors Ltd. In August 2005 Mike was appointed to the Lotus Group International Limited and Group Lotus plc Boards as well as other Boards of Proton. He was appointed acting Chief Executive Officer of Group Lotus plc in May 2006, confirmed as Chief Executive Officer of Group Lotus plc in September 2006. During his second tenure at Lotus, Mike has been responsible for the creation and execution of a new 5 year strategic business plan, and the new, already award-winning Lotus Evora is the first of the range of new Lotus cars to be designed, developed, manufactured and sold by Britain’s most iconic and innovative sportscar company. Lotus Engineering has expanded to become a world-class consultancy employing over 500 highly qualified engineers in five technical centres around the globe. It is revered for innovation, outstanding driving dynamics, exciting niche vehicles and efficient performance engineering. Mike (70) is married with 3 children and 3 grand children and lives in Norwich.

Peter Wilson

Peter Wilson began his career at a small Carlisle garage but in 1961 embarked on an engineering apprenticeship at Jaguar. Within two years he had progressed to the company’s competition department where for over five years he was involved in a multitude of exciting projects - E2A, the new works competition car * The Mk 2 GT saloon * the four-seater E-type * the E-type goes racing * the Mk X convention * building the lightweight E-type * E2A and Maxaret brakes * the 2+2 E-type * the Cunningham Le Mans E-type * Bob Blake and the S-type * * the Coombs power boat * racing 4 WPD * E-type works tuning booklet * XJ13. Peter knew many of the Jaguar ‘giants’ including Bill Heynes, Malcolm Sayer, Bob Blake and Harry Mundy.