Dario Franchitti drives the banned Lotus 88

At the 74th #Goodwood Members' Meeting four-time IndyCar Champion and three-time Indy 500 winner Dario Franchitti drove the Lotus 88, a ground effect Formula 1 car which was so technologically advanced that it was banned by the FIA. #74MM
Official Website 👉 www.goodwood.com/grr/
Facebook 👉 / goodwoodrrc
Instagram 👉 / goodwoodrrc
Twitter 👉 / goodwoodrrc
SUBSCRIBE for more racing cars, supercars, new car reviews, historic motorsport and Goodwood event coverage 👉 bit.ly/GoodwoodTV
Buy your Goodwood Event tickets 👉 bit.ly/GWBuyTickets

[@GoodwoodRR]

Find out more about the Lotus 88! kzbin.info/www/bejne/en7XnIWZptt6l7c

[@silentqueue2344]

Got to see this car in practice at Long Beach all those years ago though I didn't fully understand the controversy at the time. Really great to see it in action once again.

[@freddieb1903]

That Lotus 88 was the future of F1

[@freddieb1903]

@Emerald Lx Haha I guess you're right

[@dakkan5433]

Well your statement was correct, 2022 will see the return of ground effect

[@thethirdman225]

*_"That Lotus 88 was the future of F1"_* Nope. The drivers complained about how difficult it was to drive. De Angelis said at the time it would take at least a year to sort out. The car looked very promising in the wind tunnel but proved a nightmare, alternately gripping hard and letting go at unpredictable points on the track. At Long Beach it was nine seconds off the pace.

[@elpatolucas22]

No

[@thethirdman225]

@@dakkan5433 Ground effect never went away.remember diffusers and double diffusers?

[@anthoslykos6294]

absolutely gorgeous car.

[@1BCamden]

While disputed, it was/is the stuff of formula one, unfortunately it will remain unproven, but thank you ACBC for pushing the envelope of the day.

[@SiVlog1989]

Interestingly enough, the author of Formula One Technical Analysis, Giorgio Piola, spoke with on of the Lotus drivers of this time, his fellow Italian, Elio De Angelis about the handling of the car. In his view, based on the testing carried out on the car, he was in some ways relieved that the 88 didn't race. In his words, the 88 was "a disaster." As you probably know, the idea behind the twin chassis concept was that the outer chassis was supposed to adapt its height to allow the skirts to be lowered to exploit the seal from the skirts touching the ground for Ground Effect. However, in testing, this didn't always happen. Sometimes, instead of the airflow under the car sucking the car down to the track surface with low pressure, a high pressure airflow under the floor would generate lift instead

[@y_fam_goeglyd]

Beautiful car! Great to see Dario behind the wheel again :)

[@onedayiwillmakesomecontent]

I like the old stuff better than the new stuff! (Thanks Regurgitator! Great Aussie band, lookem up!)

[@glennvandenberg3912]

Oh yeah the gurge👍

[@manofwar577]

Well, its like the kung foo sing, its the king!

[@conradleudeuter8762]

such a awesome car & driver !!!

[@stephenphillips6212]

Innovation. How to win in F1 without much money.

[@jstewlly4747]

I'd they kept this up cats would be so efficient right now high DF very very low drag makes me wanna cry for Chapman rip to the innovated GOAT

[@Paulinthewyld]

It would be great if motor sports would take a by-year and instead of pushing boundaries, run a season built off of old skool/skill tech. Fans would revel in it!

[@thethirdman225]

*_"It would be great if motor sports would take a by-year and instead of pushing boundaries, run a season built off of old skool/skill tech."_* What is 'old school tech'?

[@mitchell-wallisforce7859]

​@@thethirdman225 Yeah I can't get enough of the irony of posting a luddite comment under a video about one of F1's most radical tech experiments. Talk about missing the point, right?

[@displaychicken]

This idea (but done in a safer way) would solve all of the close racing problems in F1.

[@emuniz1107]

This is for me the greatest genius of Colin Chapman

[@Cam-jv7qy]

The best F1 race car ever built.

[@nanominardi4084]

Nice car

[@alecreek7081]

Lotus 88: banned immediately Mercedes’ das 2020: banned after 1 year

[@thethirdman225]

It wasn’t banned immediately.

[@iFuzion77]

2.5 / 3 years. The FIA knew about it in 2019 and since the 2021 regulations are being pushed back to 2022, that leaves DAS known about and legal for around 2 / 3 years.

[@carlfrye1566]

@@iFuzion77....so it was "legal" until protested? That sounds like FIA governance.

[@helpfatbloke]

Actually what Chapman said was "Screw you guys, I'm going home"

[@promotedfacepulling2913]

For some reason, the Ferraris of the late-'70s and early-'80s looked out of place and behind the times of technological leaps forward. I think it was mostly the front wing, the exposed aluminium and slab body that were to blame. Despite this ugly start to the decade, by 1990, Ferrari had produced some of the most gorgeous modern F1 cars.

[@philipcooper8297]

When you build a car that's faster than other cars, there are the rules to slow you down.

[@thethirdman225]

*_"When you build a car that's faster than other cars, there are the rules to slow you down."_* Except it wasn't. It was between 4 and 11 seconds slower.

[@timothyfisher5008]

I'm surprised dario didn't flip it

[@RegM86]

Commentator sounds like Jeremy Clarkson.

[@guillermohoffmann8417]

I thought he was Gordon Murray

[@filipposstavro1233]

If Chapman was allowed to tinker on his creation , he would certainly make another legend. Shame the FIA banned it like they always do.

[@thethirdman225]

It was banned because it was illegal. Chapman knew it was illegal, which is why he had the 87 available. Spare me the FIA conspiracy.

[@carlfrye1566]

@@thethirdman225.....wrong. The reg's didn't allow WINGS to be suspension mounted, it was banned for violating "skirt" reg's.....a bogus mash-up to satisfy the other teams who protested. You know howF1/ FIA works had the car been slow it would have not been protested.

[@thethirdman225]

Carl Frye I don’t know where you get such confidence in your opinion. The rule actually says that aerodynamic devices must be firmly fixed to a suspended part of the car. The outer chassis was an aerodynamic device - a wing - and it was attached to the outer ends of the suspension arms. Are you trying to tell me this car was fast? Because it wasn’t. It was something like four seconds off the pace at the beginning of the season and it never raced. The drivers said it was at least a year away from being sorted. The stewards banned it at every meeting it turned a wheel at. It was driven in practice at the British Grand Prix, despite draconian warnings to Chapman of what would happen to the team if he elected to race it. No less than eleven of the fifteen teams protested against it. It had virtually nothing to do with the FIA.

[@drbelli]

"its godamn witchcraft!!! burn them!!!"

[@klepetar]

don't crash my car..!!

[@clanrobertson7200]

A very nice snip of history, but couldn’t you snip it at a full lap? A little frustrating based on the title used! The old professor

[@wewantourdarbyback]

It's more than a full lap...

[@WizDaGod]

Why exactly was this car banned?

[@displaychicken]

Sixx6OD it had two chassis, one sort of contained inside the other. One of them was movable and I guess movable chassis were banned.

[@thethirdman225]

Eric Schick Close. The rules prohibited suspension mounted aerodynamic devices. The outer chassis was suspension mounted and thus illegal. This wasn’t something cooked up by the FIA to frustrate Lotus. It had been a rule since the 1960s and everyone, including Chapman, knew it.

[@carlfrye1566]

@@thethirdman225 ...yet Red Bulls flexible nosecone was allowed to race, and win a championship.

[@carlfrye1566]

@@thethirdman225 ...the car passed Long Beach scruteneering, but was protested when other teams saw how fast it was. The regs didn't allow WINGS to be suspension mounted, that's why it passed scruteneering. Do you really think Chapman would design and build something that did not comply with the reg's? It was banned because the remote aero chassis allowed the skirts to operate more efficiently with the ground...and FIA deemed it illegal on grounds of "skirt design". In other words Chapman held no favor with the FIA so they found a way to ban the car. Good thing FIA wasn't that petty when he brought the lotus 49 to the 1967 Dutch Grand Prix. "The rear suspension bolts to the engine and transaxle, no chassis back there, what's that crap.......banned!"

[@thethirdman225]

Carl Frye The car wasn’t fast. It was well off the pace and the drivers De Angelis and Mansell said it was about a year off being ready. As for skirts, there were no skirts in 1981. They had been banned at the end of 1980 but were reintroduced in 1982. This was a 1981 car. Do I think Chapman would deliberately design something illegal? Yes. He was hoping that by calling the outer shell a chassis, he could persuade the FISA that it was legal. As for Red Bull, well, history shows that rules were frequently unevenly applied. Skirts were a moveable aerodynamic device that started with Chapman in 1978 and were used by all teams in 1979 and 1980 and again in 1982. Spare me the FIA conspiracy nonsense. No less than eleven of the 15 teams protested against the Lotus 88 and Chapman had the 87 on standby in case things didn’t go to plan. He knew exactly what he was doing.

[@carlfrye1566]

The car passed Long Beach scruteneering but teams protested when they saw how fast it was, the protestors won.

[@steviem8466]

Yep. They all knew that Lotus was gonna whop there arses again big time!

[@thethirdman225]

*_"The car passed Long Beach scruteneering but teams protested when they saw how fast it was, the protestors won."_* I don't know where people get this nonsense from. It was 11 seconds _slower._ Elio De Angelis said it would take at least 12 months to sort it out.

[@thethirdman225]

@@steviem8466 *_"Yep. They all knew that Lotus was gonna whop there arses again big time!"_* That's just wrong.

[@szewei85]

Haha nice

[@jeromeinen7912]

First of all: if you ask any Lotus employee they will tell you that the car did not work, it was very dangerous because air would come between the two chassis. Elio de Angelis hated the 88, for example. Second: the only way that problem could have been solved was with computer technology which at the time was not available. Three: the FIA had banned skirts to get rid of ground effect and one could agree or disagree with that, then88 was a clever idea by Chapman to flout the rules. I love the 88, it is a lovely car but to paint is a potential world beater or Chapman as a victim of then FIA is just a romantic and incorrect narrative.

[@Dr.Bigglesworth]

This "Second: the only way that problem could have been solved was with computer technology which at the time was not available." is incorrect if you mean on-board processing power to react to changing conditions and make adjustments. In the very early 80's. there were plenty of high (enough) powered microprocessors or bit-slice components and ancillary circuits to do what ever computations *may* have been necessary for this system. Some examples are the Motorola 68000 and the AMD 2901/29203 bit-slice series. Having used both during this era to design image processors and graphics workstations among other things, I know what they were capable of, and this was definitely not a stretch. If you are talking about simulation modeling, that too, was possible and available on systems from ComputerVision and others at that time. If there were issues, and computer technology could have solved it, it sounds like they didn't have the right people at the time...more than it wasn't available.

[@thethirdman225]

*_"I love the 88, it is a lovely car but to paint is a potential world beater or Chapman as a victim of then FIA is just a romantic and incorrect narrative."_* ^^ This ^^ Exactly so.

[@sandralavinia5908]

Why it was banned?

[@DMalek]

Sucked itself to the ground basically with a huge ass fan on the back. Created vacuum so that they could pull insane G's in the corners, even higher than they can do today with aero. With todays aero+vacuum, I think the G-force would be so high they would pass out in the corners pulling 10G+.

[@Torta--is--PLUR]

I think this is the one with dual engines or something like that I forgot

[@3DFamily76]

It was a dual chassis car. It had a main chassis with the suspension and main frame that was like a massive ground effect wing, and a floating inner upper chassis for the cockpit area. The air could move under and around the inner upper chassis creating a lot of downforce.

[@GoodwoodRR]

Full story here kzbin.info/www/bejne/en7XnIWZptt6l7c

[@Torta--is--PLUR]

And I was completely wrong. Guess that's what I get for speaking before google-ing

[@aklapotherpotherpothikrebh603]

Gta v r88

[@killstacy8088]

The lotus 88 was banned for violation of the spirit of the rules of f1 aka it didn't break any rules but a bigger manufacturer didn't like it

[@thethirdman225]

*_"The lotus 88 was banned for violation of the spirit of the rules of f1 aka it didn't break any rules but a bigger manufacturer didn't like it"_* You know, don't you, that 11 of the 15 teams protested against it.

[@mirrorblue100]

Its a nice looking car - too bad it wasn't allowed to be developed.

[@fw1421]

Disappointed Dario didn’t show its capability. He soft pedaled it all the way.

[@thethirdman225]

The car was extremely difficult to drive and was never fully sorted.

[@Heavywall70]

F1 should be a gloves off affair. The rules have made the cars ugly (they look like a flip flop sandel and a roller skate had a malformed child) and only those with massive budgets can glean those last thousandths of seconds out of a lap. They say the rules keep the cost of being competitive down but it’s not the case at all.

[@langhamp8912]

The modern F1 car is much bigger than any previous cars. They're about half again bigger. Bigger, way faster, corner way harder, and crash way better. And they are showing instantaneous 5.5 G's of side force. That's enough to knock a fit but untrained person out. I mean, what more do you want? These cars are bigger than LMP1 cars, footprint wise, and they're extremely taxing physically. Instantaneous G's while turning is everything, because that's the limit you can expect drivers to safely race.

[@ToreDL87]

@@langhamp8912 But they look so boring from the outside, just racing so nice and tidy and clean, and yeah 5.5G's and all is cool but it just doesn't look like it. Fit drivers, yeah, it's all just computers telling drivers what to eat and how to train and what consistency their shit needs to be or else they're out, it's like theyre fighter jocks rather than drivers! And there's the stupid rules for building a car, oh god... "half a milimeter too tall YOURE OUT" "0.0002g too light YOURE OUT", it's gotten so directly nazi that the weight of the humidity on the bodywork is enough to get a car banned at inspection. All that money spent on hybrid mumbo jumbo and it couldn't be more boring! When Jackie Stewart was on about safety, it was mostly about track safety and that was after 47 drivers had died mostly because of horrendous safety practices at the race tracks with almost no marshalls and if there were any they were piss drunk and firehoses gambled away the night before or something, with drivers stopping to try and dig each other out of their wrecks while the Marshalls were still getting over their hangovers. That's what he bloody meant, todays F1 racing is NOT what he had in mind. Back in the day they smoked and drank and had sex and still drove cars that were just a collection of ever evolving technological marvels/suicide machines with really nervous handling with side to side battles through corners while sliding just ever so slightly just absolutely CLAWING for grip, how's that for fit drivers and 5.5G's? Oh I forgot the 5.5G politically correct droids get to click a button and pass safely and politically correct once in a while. What did they do to relax and keep fit? Today's drivers go to spa's and have computers calculate their piss or what not, back then they got over their hangovers and took their personal Alfa Romeo, Fiat, Ford and Lotus twin cam's and raced each other rubbing door to door anyway, that's how they kept fit ROFL

[@jjmoto65]

@@langhamp8912 doesn't change the fact that they are ugly as hell as he stated and sound like shit. Just because its newer doesn't mean its always better. The older cars had character. 20-30 years from now people won't be looking at the current cars with awe and reverence.

[@thethirdman225]

langhamp8912 How would 5G of lateral acceleration knock someone out?

[@steviem8466]

@@langhamp8912 Yeah, but its all vanilla. the Drivers don't drive anymore, the crew in the Pit lane on monitors control the cars remotely via onboard computers. All the cars look the same which is also a turn-off. And what 's with this HALO crap? F1 lost its soul years ago. It's all about the money. Todays drivers wouldn't have a clue how to use a proper clutch and gear lever and there all prima donors with bling FFS! Give me Graham Hill, Mario Andretti and Colin Chapman anyday.