Clark, Jim

[Yoong Montoya]

I haven't seen him race, but he sounds like a brilliant driver. How good would you say Jim Clark was in your opinion?

[mickj]

My Opinion

I saw Jim Clark race here in Australia in the Tasman series 1964,65,66,67,68 at Sandown and Longford.

In the 1968 race (Sandown) he raced Chris Amon they finished a car length apart (in stifling heat) Jim got out of his Lotus and looked as if he could do another 100 laps and poor Chris Amon had to be lifted from the Ferrari.
A TOP driver and a Gentleman.
To me he is the Best ever.
In 2001 I visited his grave in Chirnside Scotland.

[SPman]

Aaahhh.. but Chris Amon to a party.....

[JGM]

It's impossible to compare drivers of different eras but suffice to say that he ought to feature on anybody's list of the ten best-ever drivers. Quite a lot of people regard him as THE Best Ever but I think people's judgement on thse things tends to be dictated by their age. Whoever was the best when they were aged 18 - 25 remains fixed in their mind as the greatest ever.

[Vitesse]

Definitely in the top 10 of all time and the benchmark against whom all early 60s drivers were measured. A natural driver who could get into any car and drive it on the limit immediately, simply driving round any problem. Jimmy could handle with ease cars which others considered undriveable - the Lotus 40 for example, a lethally overpowered sports car with evil handling, often described as "the Lotus 30 with ten more problems".

In 1964 Jimmy was invited to try a pre-War ERA at the French GP meeting. He'd never even sat in the thing before, yet managed to better the owner's fastest lap by two seconds: on his first flying lap! Awesome.

The previous year he should have won the Indy 500, had Parnelli Jones' team not managed to avoid a rightful disqualification for dropping oil. That was Jimmy's first trip to the Brickyard. He was in contention in 1964 before his car failed, won in 1965 and came second in 1966 (Clark thought he'd won, but as Graham Hill put it: "I drank the milk, mate!")

This remarkable ability to drive any car in any condition made him a terrible test driver though - he'd just shrug and get on with it! Graham Hill was hired back by Lotus in 1967 for his testing abilities - Chapman knew that Clark was not the man to develop the 49 to raceworthiness, but nevertheless Jimmy put his car on pole in its first race.

Ironically, it may be those very abilities which led to Clark's death at Hockenheim: there is a widely-held belief that one of the rear tyres on his Lotus 48 was slowly deflating. Lesser drivers would have stopped to change the wheel, Jimmy perhaps just drove around the problem, only for the tyre to deflate even more and cause the car to leave the road ....

A true Great.

[ensign14]

The very best ever.

[krt917]

Quite apart from his Grand Prix successes - 25 wins in 72 starts, Jimmy was quick in anything:
-Won the British Saloon Car Championship in Lotus Cortina (1964?)
-Raced an aging DBR1 Aston to third at Le Mans in 1960, having 'done a Moss' to lead the early stages.
-Shocked the big teams at the Nurburgring by leading them at the Nurburgring in the little Lotus in the early stages.
-Showed all the rally drivers how to do it in the 1966 RAC before sticking it into the scenery (well, nobody is perfect!).

He probably should have been 1964 and 1967 World Chmapion to add to '63 and '65 had it not been for car failures and a pants scoring system.

[Anuauto]

Originally Posted by krt917

-Showed all the rally drivers how to do it in the 1966 RAC before sticking it into the scenery (well, nobody is perfect!).

As a J.Clark fan who has spent many hours discussing him with my next door neighbour (she was brought up on a neighbouring farm to Edington Mains, so knew him as a child), I think the rally drivers need to be allowed to put things a little more in perspective.
By the end of 1966, more than was ever appreciated at the time, the Mk1 Lotus Cortina had at last become the dominant rally car it could have become 2 or even 3 years earlier. J.Clark was familiar with the car and tested under the instruction of Roger Clark before the 66 RAC. R.Clark took the first 3 stages then went out. Vic Elford had engine problems from the start. Bengt Soderstrom, never the fastest in the team, eventually cruised to an easy victory. BMC, after problems in the snow in 65, ran standard camshafts in all the 6 works Cooper S except Makinen's. Makinen was thus the only serious challenger to the works Fords and led (once R.Clark was out and V. Elford never got going properly) until mechanical failure.
J. Clark showed exceptionally well on that event but not that much better than he should have been expected to in that car and with his background. Throwing it into the scenery twice was to be expected of anyone when reaching for that pace without enough forest rally experience - and he did so.

[Vitesse]

Originally posted by krt917
He probably should have been 1964 and 1967 World Chmapion to add to '63 and '65 had it not been for car failures and a pants scoring system.

Car failures are a fact of life in racing, especially if you drove a Lotus in the 60s, but you can't blame the points system for him not being champion in those years. However you stack it up, Jimmy was outscored by Hill and Surtees in 1964 and by Hulme and Brabham in 1967.

If anyone was robbed of the title in 1964 it was Graham Hill.

[Heebeegeetee]

A magazine in the UK fairly recently (Motorsport?)tried to detemine the best driver ever out of the world champions since 1950. They came up with Clark.

I once enjoyed reading an article by one of the Lotus mechanics of that era. He said that Clarks brake pads would last for ever, whereas they would change Hills' after a meeting. I think the quote went something like "...I mean, we used to change them after a few races 'cos it would get embarrasing..."

[gfm]

Clark was IMHO an absolute star. I think the thing I learned from watching him, was that like a truely great conductor, his input was effortless. I was always impressed by those at the front who didn't look as though they were trying.
Certainly a top ten contender.
I didn't warm to his character though, because there was little sign of it.
His relationship with Chapman was interesting though and I was always surprised when Graham Hill got near or beat him.

[krt917]

Originally Posted by Vitesse

Jimmy was outscored by Hill and Surtees in 1964 and Hulme and Brabham in 1967

I take your point on car failures and 1964 - Graham was certainly unlucky to be punted off by Bandini.

1967, however, is different due to the points scoring system. I'm afraid I am one of those people who believes that the point of a race is to find a winner, therefore the point of a championship (ie. a series of races) is to find the car/driver who wins the most often. As a result, Clark's 4 wins in '67 - superior to anyone elses - should have given him the title. I know consistency is important, but it shouldn't overcome actual winning (unless in exceptional circumstances, like loads of 1 or 2-time winners such as in 1982).

The worst example of these are Moss in 1958 against Hawthorn - 4 wins should NEVER be beaten by 1 - and the Mansell-Piquet years in 1986-87.

One thing is indesputable - we are talking about one of the greatest.

[glyn parham]

Originally Posted by krt917

Quite apart from his Grand Prix successes - 25 wins in 72 starts, Jimmy was quick in anything:
-Won the British Saloon Car Championship in Lotus Cortina (1964?)
-Raced an aging DBR1 Aston to third at Le Mans in 1960, having 'done a Moss' to lead the early stages.
-Shocked the big teams at the Nurburgring by leading them at the Nurburgring in the little Lotus in the early stages.
-Showed all the rally drivers how to do it in the 1966 RAC before sticking it into the scenery (well, nobody is perfect!).

Absolutely true, a real racer and a gentleman as well. As a young, easily impressed boy, Jimmy was my hero and I can still remember asking for his autograph at Brands Hatch, the response being very polite, despite my asking a very juvenile question at the same time.
Those who saw his drive at Brands in the Cortina in 1965 when he seemed to take his brain out and really fling the car round the track was something else. If I remember he all but broke the outright saloon lap record that day and the car was hardly ever pointing in a straight line (his namesake Roger Clark would have been proud).He probably saw most of the race that day through the side windows!
He wasnt afraid to drive cars that would not win races either, hands up all those who saw him drive the Felday at the 1966 Gaurds trophy meeting, when Surtees, Hill, Mclaren etc were in Group 7 cars.
A great driver, sadly missed, but never forgoten.

[Roger Clark]

Originally posted by Vitesse

This remarkable ability to drive any car in any condition made him a terrible test driver though - he'd just shrug and get on with it! Graham Hill was hired back by Lotus in 1967 for his testing abilities - Chapman knew that Clark was not the man to develop the 49 to raceworthiness, but nevertheless Jimmy put his car on pole in its first race.

Ironically, it may be those very abilities which led to Clark's death at Hockenheim: there is a widely-held belief that one of the rear tyres on his Lotus 48 was slowly deflating. Lesser drivers would have stopped to change the wheel, Jimmy perhaps just drove around the problem, only for the tyre to deflate even more and cause the car to leave the road ....

I have to disagree with this. By 1967, Clark had become a very fine test driver according to Chapman. The reason that Hill did the initial test driving in the 49 was that Clark was a tax exile and unable to enter the UK, except for the British GP.

It was Hill, not Clark, who put the 49 on pole at Zandvoort, though Clark won the race.

Lastly, I thought the post-accident investigation concluded that Clark's tyre would have remained fully inflated by centrifugal force until he slowed down. There was no way that even he could have detected that anything was wrong until it was too late.

[John Turner]

Copies of a couple of posts taken from an even earlier (1999) thread:-

Originally Posted by Gary,US Fan

Given that Jim Clark always got the most speed out of whatever he was driving his approach has always been of interest. The more I learn about his style the less I understand how it all added up to such marvelous success.

"Thoroughbred & Classic Cars", Dec. 1999, Alan McCall, Clark's mechanic:

"Take brake pads. We used to replace them after four or five races on his car because it ws embarrassing. Graham (Hill) might go through two sets per meeting...(Clark) had the ability to carry extra speed around the corners so easily, without molesting the machinery."

"...Jimmy at the wheel of his big Galaxie was absolutely magic. It was all at more than 100mph, drifting into roundabouts - you really appreciated his car control. No sliding or clipping kerbs, just whoosh, whoosh, whoosh and you'd be through...I used to try (it) but it never worked out for me."

"I've driven with many racing drivers over the years but I've never had the same feeling as when I was with Jimmy."

"The big difference was his commitment before a corner...whoosh,whoosh...didn't clip kerbs, actually ran in the middle of the road...most drivers would say (his car) understeered like a pig! Not that it understeered for him...that's why I don't think he was a good guy to set a car up."

In Eric Dymock's "Jim Clark", Clark is discussed as a master of the four wheel drift. Could it be that by drifting the car at a greater angle than others would or could, the inherent understeer would be canceled? Were tires so hard then that they could withstand such abuse? All this discussion about understeer brings to mind the resultant scrubbing off of speed, in lieu
of brakes? Also mentioned was that Clark didn't use all of the available road. With all due respect to Alan McCall, I wish I knew what "whoosh" means.

Originally Posted by Steven Roy

Graham (Graeme ?) Gauld who was a friend of Clark's has written a book about him and came up with the same opinion as Jackie Stewart. Jim Clark didn't know why he was so quick and genuinely couldn't understand why everyone wasn't as quick as him. To use a much overused word he was a natural.

For those who don't know there is a museum in Duns, Scotland which contains all his trophies and other momentoes which is definitely worth a visit if you are anywhere near. I have only been once and was in a hurry so I was only there for an hour. Rumour has it that when Senna visited he signed the visitors book and gave his real address in Brazil. Unfortunately I didn't have time to check this.