Letters - Weslake v Cosworth

Author

admin

Browse pages
Current page

1

Current page

2

Current page

3

Current page

4

Current page

5

Current page

6

Current page

7

Current page

8

Current page

9

Current page

10

Current page

11

Current page

12

Current page

13

Current page

14

Current page

15

Current page

16

Current page

17

Current page

18

Current page

19

Current page

20

Current page

21

Current page

22

Current page

23

Current page

24

Current page

25

Current page

26

Current page

27

Current page

28

Current page

29

Current page

30

Current page

31

Current page

32

Current page

33

Current page

34

Current page

35

Current page

36

Current page

37

Current page

38

Current page

39

Current page

40

Current page

41

Current page

42

Current page

43

Current page

44

Current page

45

Current page

46

Current page

47

Current page

48

Current page

49

Current page

50

Current page

51

Current page

52

Current page

53

Current page

54

Current page

55

Current page

56

Current page

57

Current page

58

Current page

59

Current page

60

Current page

61

Current page

62

Current page

63

Current page

64

Current page

65

Current page

66

Current page

67

Current page

68

Current page

69

Current page

70

Current page

71

Current page

72

Current page

73

Current page

74

Current page

75

Current page

76

Current page

77

Current page

78

Current page

79

Current page

80

Current page

81

Current page

82

Current page

83

Current page

84

Current page

85

Current page

86

Current page

87

Current page

88

Current page

89

Current page

90

Current page

91

Current page

92

Current page

93

Current page

94

Current page

95

Current page

96

Current page

97

Current page

98

Current page

99

Current page

100

Current page

101

Current page

102

Current page

103

Current page

104

Current page

105

Current page

106

Current page

107

Current page

108

Sir

I was saddened to see from your ‘Valve Angles’ piece in the October issue that you are perpetuating an untruth: Keith Duckworth was not ‘the first engineer to use a narrow-angle, four-valve cylinder head with the valves operated by twin overhead camshafts’. You are following unwittingly in Graham Robson’s footsteps in failing to give credit where it is due to the late great Harry Weslake!

Back in May I put the record straight in a lengthy letter to Graham, following his ‘Auotocar & Motor’ article which in effect was an abridgement of his book and repeated the same untruth. I realise, though, that he was serving only as Keith’s mouthpiece and naturally would expect to be told the truth. In ascribing the invention to Weslake I am talking at first hand. I saw an experimental engine with the subject configuration (and its dynamometer results) about two years before the Cosworth FVA was announced. The engine was a Shell research project with which BRM were involved, and moreover it was not the first Weslake unit with four narrow-angle valves.

While Keith was undoubtedly the man who put the narrow-angle four-valve DOHC layout ‘on the map’ thus making a very praiseworthy and major contribution to engine technology, it should now be clear to you that he was certainly not first in the field. Hence he should not have made his rather boastful claim to be the inventor and he should have given credit to the Weslake company for having antedated him, not least as some posthumous kudos for Harry. Honesty and magnanimity would have done his reputation more good, with me anyway, than dubious ego-boosting.

Alan Baker
Ripley, Surrey

While anxious to give full credit to Weslake Developments lid, I was thinking in terms of racing car engines rather than experimental test-bed engines and the Cosworth FVA was in use before the Eagle Weslake had been raced, although as Graham Robson, whose book ‘Cosworth’ I was quoting from says, ‘I don’t think one was a copy of the other’. He was also quoting throughout the book what Keith Duckworth told him. ED.