alpine_64
Donation Time
John remember the B roadster also had optional removable hardtops
Iirc the BGT was actually a Pininfarina design, he extended and changed the height and angle of the B screen
-
Welcome to the new SAOCA website. Already a member? Simply click Log In/Sign Up up and to the right and use your same username and password from the old site. If you've forgotten your password, please send an email to membership@sunbeamalpine.org for assistance.
If you're new here, click Log In/Sign Up and enter your information. We'll approve your account as quickly as possible, typically in about 24 hours. If it takes longer, you were probably caught in our spam/scam filter.
Enjoy.
Harrington Design Proportions
- Thread starter Jay Laifman
- Start date
Warren
Bronze Level Sponsor
Gag me with an Astro Tupperware , I mean fiberglass top...
What a way to foul a perfectly good roadster...
alpine_64
Donation Time
The normal non fastback astro top was even uglier...
With some tweaks you could make the astro fastback top look decent .. but if doing that... May as well mold up your own design.
jdoclogan
Platinum Level Sponsor
Well, maybe. However, the fiberglass top addition certainly improved the "Sunbeam Alpine's" performance. At the 1961 24 hour Le Mans a Harrington Alpine (3000RW), sporting a fiberglass top, took the Thermal Index Efficiency Award for the automobile that goes the farthest, with the least amount of fuel, based on the power to weight ratio. Performance was clearly improved with the fiberglass topped Sunbeam Alpine. Also, the full top performance concept was reflected in the GT40s when Carol Shelby fanatically rejected the roadster as a race car (even though Ken Miles won the 1966 12 hour Sebring race in a GT40 Roadster) and preferred the coupe design. Aesthetically the HLM's lines present subdued splendor. Every time I show one of my HLMs or share photos to people there is always a visceral response, "I've never seen one of these." That is usually followed by "This is amazing." My most enjoyable moment was when an 8 or 9 year boy was pulling his mom across an ABFM meet's field headed directly to my Harrington Le Mans. As they got closer I could hear the boy say, "That's the one I want Mommy. That's the one I want." From that lower to the ground eye set he had compared many other British car representations. Only to pick the Harrington Le Mans as the car he wanted. I appreciate the asthetic critque of any art form and that applies here. While most of my thoughts are at the molecular level. Beauty of an Automobile is very personal and idiosyncratic. Hard to break it down into little pieces because the feeling is really deep seated and a unique perspective.
alpine_64
Donation Time
Jerry, I have to caveat your statement about 3000RW and the impact of the fastback on its performance and it's win the the IOTE .
3000RW had a streamlined "xke style" nose and also the addition of an aluminium undertray to assist drag reduction. But interestingly enough the car was not notably faster than the stock bodied car with the factory aluminium hardtop.
I also note the Sunbeams win in the IOTE also had to do with an ironically mitigating factor.. compared to most of the cars they were HEAVY on a short or twisty track this would be a big issue.. but.. LM was reasonably flowing and the then chicane-less mulsane straight allowed the cars to sit at reasonably steady speed.. apparently the drivers in the sunbeam were smoking a cigarette down the Mulsanne and then putting it out before braking at the end... So the cars weight and decent handling helped it to the win.
Indeed this discovery led to the kamn tail cars the following year with the factory tops which were faster than 3000RW ..
I won't campare the speed of the 63 cars as they had highly developed motors and telescopic rear dampers.. so we're mechanically and chassis superior.
Also the original road tests showed the series I Alpines were 3 mph faster with the soft top up over the open configuration.. the hardtop slightly faster again.
A closed car will be quicker than the same car with an open top and windscreen.. due to the turbulence created off the screen and over the open area.
if you switch to an aero screen and tonneau that balance can be reassessed and the open car can become quicker.
The performance figures for the stock A Harrington road tests are not ideal as they had slight mods to the motors... But it is worth considering the Nerus Alpine road test on a stock series II .. light head mods and stock zeniths.. that car was the quickest alpine tested other than the stage 3 Hartwell tuned Harrington with twin weber dco. ..
The irony is they ran the stock alpine motors in 3000RW and 3001 at LM as they were in the production GT class which meant the mechanicals were stock production spec .. but you could modify the bodies.. this is what also led to the Dayton Cobras. Note despite never being a production car they ran in the same class as the stock Cobra as the mechanicals were the same and the chassis the same ( but significantly stiffer and more aero efficienct thanks to the coupe body)
jdoclogan
Platinum Level Sponsor
Michael, I knew your memory and expertise would lend to the understandings. So my 1962 Factory Works 12 Hour Sebring car was faster than 3000RW?
I'm aware of the inability for the HLM to compete on the short tracks. My promotional HLM was purchased by Greg Vederoff for the specific purpose of racing in the Pacific Northwest USA's tracks (Westwood, Delta Park, Seattle International etc). Vederoff was an accomplished driver usually finishing in the top three for all races in 1960 and 61 in his class with a Porsche. In the 1962 racing season, with the HLM, he often finished in the bottom three lamenting that the HLM was too heavy for the short tracks. This comes from first person testimony as I spoke directly with Veederoff in 2006. His comments support your assessment.
I'm aware of the inability for the HLM to compete on the short tracks. My promotional HLM was purchased by Greg Vederoff for the specific purpose of racing in the Pacific Northwest USA's tracks (Westwood, Delta Park, Seattle International etc). Vederoff was an accomplished driver usually finishing in the top three for all races in 1960 and 61 in his class with a Porsche. In the 1962 racing season, with the HLM, he often finished in the bottom three lamenting that the HLM was too heavy for the short tracks. This comes from first person testimony as I spoke directly with Veederoff in 2006. His comments support your assessment.
alpine_64
Donation Time
Jerry ,
My comments for the 62 cars were specific to the LM cars that ran in 62 where they used the stock hardtop ( though gutters trimmed off iirc and they made a kamn tail for the bootlid. This I'm sure would be to deal with the Mulsanne straight as it was such a dominating part of the layout and aero was crucial there.
Sebring the aero would be far less an issue which likely explains why they didn't bother changing the bodies shape.. but they did run the alloy panels.
I would assume the 62 Sebring cars would have been better prepared than the 61 LM and Sebring entry's with the gained knowledge.
It is worth noting the Hollywood sports car prepared SII was much faster than the factory cars in the 63 event... And also iirc the Vince Tamburo FP Alpine ran in practice in 61 and was faster than the factory cars.. despite no alloy panels...but being an SCCA car it wouldn't have had long range tanks, dual electric system, no windscreen and windows and no top.. so may have been equal or lighter weight.
How is progress on the Sebring car going?
Jay Laifman
Platinum Level Sponsor
Well, I started this thread with a picture of lines showing how the MGB was designed, and tried to do the same for the Alpine. I just came across another person who did it for a whole different type of car. I'm still not sure what all these lines mean other than a bowl of spaghetti. But I thought I'd share it. And interestingly, the rising line of the Alpine might actually match these better than the MGB!
Last edited:
Jay Laifman
Platinum Level Sponsor
My best shot: 
