BMW v Ford 1970 to 1975

[Peter Mallett]

Following on from Jonners’ post in the Capri Shell thread, concerning the input to racing that the Blue Oval has had, I was reading the article in Motorsport magazine January 2007 about the 3.0CSL BMW and its success in racing. According to them this doyen of the tracks won major championships from 1973 to 1979, and this was more special because they stopped making the car in 1975!

Although they admit that Ford (with its 2600 RS) "romped to victory" in 1972 (not strictly accurate they finished second overall) the article suggests Ford were “caught napping” after the defection of Neerspach and Braungart to BMW in 1973 and thus lost something.

Let’s not forget that Ford were competing through privateer teams essentially until 1971 when they first approached Broadspeed to build the RS 2600 (with the Weslake headed 2900cc engine) and indeed won it (were BMW caught napping?). So it would be fair to say that rather than caught napping, Ford had seen the wisdom in getting more involved and then in 1972 started putting the plans in place to win the ETCC (let’s concentrate on that record). Interestingly Ford beat BMW in 1972 but the title went to Alfa Romeo for it’s under 1300cc class wins. Subsequently BMW and Ford lobbied the CSI to remove this class from the championship and thus this would not occur again.

So, moving on to 1973 when the new BMW 3.0CSL (Batmobile) deservedly took the championship. Ford needed to produce a car with a rear wing and this took a long time, mainly because of the type of company it is/was. A major popular carmaker couldn’t just redesign/design a new car from scratch. Indeed, according to the article BMW took over the original CSL concept from Alpine.

We all know the story of 1974, the oil crisis and big cars and Motorsport suffering. Corporate Ford didn’t really want to continue its involvement but the RS3100 was on the stocks (albeit clashing with the Mark 2 hatchback model), the economics were also impacting BMW but as an "upper level" manufacturer perhaps they had a different view. Ford's RS3100 came out complete with ducktail and apart from one race, won the 1974 ETCC.

By 1975 the manufacturers had stopped development of the cars and either moved away from ETCC and into regional championships or sold the cars off to privateers.

So my point is that as much as the BMW is a fantastic car, the poor old Blue oval appears to get a kick in the nuts because (heaven forbid) it actually dared to compete and win with a bread and butter car!

Or am I missing something?

My thanks to Frank de Jong for the ETCC facts. http://etcc-history.it4us.nl/

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

So my point is that as much as the BMW is a fantastic car, the poor old Blue oval appears to get a kick in the nuts because (heaven forbid) it actually dared to compete and win with a bread and butter car!

Do we know what the difference in price between the following roadgoing cars at the time was :

o Ford Capri RS2600 and BMW 3.5CSL Batmobile [the semi-race adversaries]
o Ford Capri 3000GT and 3.0CSL [the top end available to joe bloggs]

[Peter Mallett]

Apparently the BMW was priced somewhere near an Aston Martin. The RS 3100 was not vastly more expensive than a 3000 GT.

[Alan Raine]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

So my point is that as much as the BMW is a fantastic car, the poor old Blue oval appears to get a kick in the nuts because (heaven forbid) it actually dared to compete and win with a bread and butter car![/SIZE]

I'd go along with that, but they were great to watch. The sight of Jochen Mass 3 wheeling through Stowe is unforgetable

The BMW's were used in the Group 5 section of the World Sportscar Championship in 1976, although I guess in a higher spec. They only just lost out to the Porsche 935's.

[Frank de Jong]

I haven't read the article, so just a few facts.
Ford already entered the ETCC in 1970, they learned the way to do it and were near unbeatable in 1971-1972.
If anyone was napping it was BMW; the lightweight CSL racecar was ready at the start of 1972 (Broadspeed (!) built it) but the car was only homologated at the start of 1973.
Comparing the price of the street version brings you nowhere - the racecars had different engines, gear boxes, brakes and even the rear suspension of the Capri was unique. The Capri had a slightly better aerodynamics, the BMW a better base engine - until 1974.

[davyboy]

For sure the race cars were night and day different to the road cars, but I was just trying to draw emphasis to the Peter's point which is that Ford were working from an affordable popular car as a base point, whereas BMW began with something altogether in a different league.

[jonners]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

So my point is that as much as the BMW is a fantastic car, the poor old Blue oval appears to get a kick in the nuts because (heaven forbid) it actually dared to compete and win with a bread and butter car![/SIZE]

Interesting point.

History scholars would probably nod knowingly at this point but (to the extent that we're 'studying' anything important here...) there is also a tendency to view the glorify the CSL's in a way that overlooks the excellence of the Capris and the team who ran them.

Alongside all things Lotus and Ford I love BMW's but I do get annoyed with the BMW crowd who seem to believe that the CSL was the true aristrocrat walking all over the upstart Blue Oval. That BMW raised its game because of the Capris doesn't fit in with many BMW owners' delusions of grandeur, so in their minds history has sort of reinvented itself.

Yes - in saloon car racing BMW is one of the Grandee manufacturers. But so is Ford.

[John Turner]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

...... So my point is that as much as the BMW is a fantastic car, the poor old Blue oval appears to get a kick in the nuts because (heaven forbid) it actually dared to compete and win with a bread and butter car

I agree; it does seem wrong. As Peter knows, and it must be obvious to all (look left!!), I'll take BMW over Ford, but the fact that I am an enthusiast for one does not make me a detractor of the other. I felt obliged to defend the blue oval on the thread which triggered Peter's post here. Anyway, just as it takes two to tango, it takes two to have a race. These two models are inseparably linked from that period, and it clearly did BMW no harm to beat that 'bread and butter' car. I don't think Ford's input to motor racing across the board over the last 40 years can be matched by anyone, can it?

It would be great if Peter could fulfill one of his ambitions to own a Gp 2 Capri. It would be better still, if I had the wherewithall to own a Gp 2 CSL and be able to chase him around Silverstone or Brands in it, even though he would probably lap me after about 5 laps!

Oh, you beat me to it, jonners! And I don't know how that upside down camel appeared at the top of my post either!

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by Frank de Jong

I haven't read the article, so just a few facts.
Ford already entered the ETCC in 1970, they learned the way to do it and were near unbeatable in 1971-1972.
If anyone was napping it was BMW; the lightweight CSL racecar was ready at the start of 1972 (Broadspeed (!) built it) but the car was only homologated at the start of 1973.

Comparing the price of the street version brings you nowhere - the racecars had different engines, gear boxes, brakes and even the rear suspension of the Capri was unique. The Capri had a slightly better aerodynamics, the BMW a better base engine - until 1974.

Good points and very interesting Frank. I think what I'm getting at is the bias shown against the Ford when, if anything, it can be said that they did a better job in the period I mention. Of course after '75 the BMW went on on IMSA, Group 5 et al but in its purest sense the competition between these two was honours even. And brilliant it was too.