{"id":14014,"date":"2014-07-07T18:35:08","date_gmt":"2014-07-07T17:35:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/issue_content\/an-enduring-beauty-that-couldnt-last\/"},"modified":"2021-07-07T16:20:52","modified_gmt":"2021-07-07T15:20:52","slug":"enduring-beauty-couldnt-last","status":"publish","type":"issue_content","link":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/archive\/article\/april-2009\/68\/enduring-beauty-couldnt-last\/","title":{"rendered":"The stunning, underachieving Lancia LC2"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

Pole position by the better part of a second. Some early glory at the front of the field. And then a dramatic technical failure. The story of the Lancia LC2\u2019s debut at the 1983 Monza 1000Kms set the tone for the career of a car that has come to be regarded as a glorious failure.<\/p>\n

Glorious for a multitude of reasons. Lancia\u2019s attempt to take on Porsche in the still-new Group C category resulted in a car that was nearly always quick. Witness Piercarlo Ghinzani\u2019s debut pole on home ground at Monza and the 12 that followed. It also turned up a thing of beauty, with or without the Martini Racing stripes. Yet more glamour was provided by the car\u2019s alternative name, the Lancia-Ferrari, a reference to the source of the V8 developed into a twin-turbo Group C powerplant by Lancia.<\/p>\n

Then there were the drivers. The line-up chosen by Lancia\u2019s factory Martini Racing squad, run from out of Fiat\u2019s famed Abarth workshops in Turin, reads like a who\u2019s who of Italian Formula 1<\/a> in the 1980s. Ghinzani, Patrese, Alboreto, Nannini, de Cesaris, Fabi, Baldi and more were all given a turn behind the wheel of the LC2.<\/p>\n

The LC2 was a failure for just one reason. One that explains why the Lancia barely made a dent into Porsche\u2019s Group C hegemony. The LC2 struggled to finish races at the start of its career in 1983 and was still struggling to finish them, at least cleanly, three years later. There were victories along the way, but each of its three successes can be regarded as in some way tainted. The reality is that Lancia never beat the Rothmans Porsche team in a straight fight over a 1000km race distance.<\/p>\n

Not just for those glorious reasons listed above \u2013 the speed, the looks, the drivers \u2013 did the world expect more from the Italian manufacturer when the LC2 was unveiled to the world at the Mueso Martini at Pessione, near Turin, in February \u201983. The Group C contender is the Lancia sports car everyone remembers, but it was far from the most successful. The Group 5 Beta Monte Carlo won three world titles for Lancia, including the overall World Championship for Makes crown ahead of Porsche in 1981. Its successor, the Group 6 LC1 barchetta of \u201982, may have fallen a few seconds shy of making Riccardo Patrese a World Champion, but it did win as many races in one season as the LC2 did in its multi-year career. The reason Lancia built a Group 6 contender around the Monte Carlo\u2019s 1.4-litre straight-four turbo when Porsche, Ford and others were developing the first Group C coup\u00e9s is the same reason why the LC2 was never a match for the Porsche 956\/962. So argues Lancia competitions boss Cesare Fiorio.<\/p>\n

\u201cSports car racing was a side programme for us because Lancia\u2019s main motor sport activity was and, to my mind, should always be rallying,\u201d says Fiorio, who never engaged the LC2 in a full season of World Championship events. \u201cThe LC1 was a very cost-effective programme, partly because we used the engine from the Monte Carlo at a time when we had no suitable engine for Group C. The LC2 was a bigger investment, but the budget we had compared with what some people imagined we had was very small.\u201d Fiorio argues that it would be wrong to compare Lancia\u2019s efforts with those of Porsche.<\/p>\n

\u201cGroup C was a big, big programme for Porsche,\u201d he says. \u201cDon\u2019t forget it was Porsche\u2019s main programme; we always had rallying to look after.\u201d<\/p>\n

Gian Paolo Dallara, whose company developed the LC2 in conjunction with Lancia, backs up Fiorio\u2019s claim. \u201cWe used an off-theshelf gearbox from Hewland, for example, and there was never enough development,\u201d he recalls. \u201cIt was a low-level programme with a low-level budget.\u201d That much was obvious to the drivers. It was evident to Teo Fabi, a regular with Lancia from 1981 to \u201983, that the Italian manufacturer wasn\u2019t putting the same resources into Group C as Porsche.<\/p>\n

\u201cI don\u2019t know the figures, but it was clear that we were definitely spending less money than Porsche,\u201d he says. \u201cYou could see that just by looking at the effort at the tracks.\u201d Porsche had been in at the start of Group C with the 956 and Lancia\u2019s efforts to catch up weren\u2019t helped by the fact that the LC2 was rushed out, argues programme manager Gianni Tonti.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe had to do a completely new car \u2013 chassis, aerodynamics and engine \u2013 in less than eight months,\u201d says Tonti, who would remain in technical control of the LC2 project until leaving for the Euroracing run Alfa Romeo F1 team in May \u201984. \u201cPorsche had been studying Bob Wollek took pole at Le Mans in this updated LC2 in \u201984, but engine problems persisted, even with a new 3-litre unit (right) Group C for a long time before 1982 and it used an engine that was not new. We had a white sheet of paper.\u201d<\/p>\n

The first LC2 didn\u2019t run until the month after its launch, or just one month before its race debut. It was no surprise that the car had a troubled debut at Monza. Ghinzani had badly damaged one chassis in practice, but still managed to claim pole by nearly eight-tenths of a second. He did use qualifying tyres, but denies today that it was a big-boost effort designed to secure Lancia some Sunday morning headlines on the debut of its new machine.<\/p>\n

\u201cI had done most of the testing in the car and I knew Monza very well because it was my local circuit,\u201d he recalls. \u201cI had a good feeling with the car and managed to make the pole.\u201d Ghinzani, who was still a couple of months away from his Grand Prix debut, led the first 23 laps before his left-rear Pirelli exploded. He was fortunate to avoid a \u201cvery big accident\u201d when the tyre let go on the start-finish straight rather than 500 metres before in the Parabolica. Tonti and Ghinzani disagree on the reasons for the blowout. The engineer claims that Lancia\u2019s tyre partner in the World Rally Championship merely lacked experience in top-level sports cars and was incapable of building a tyre that could carry an 800kg racing car at speeds upwards of 180mph. Ghinzani believes Pirelli misinterpreted the data given to it by Lancia and Dallara.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe construction of the tyres ended up being not strong enough, because there was a misunderstanding in the level of downforce the cars would be generating,\u201d recalls Ghinzani. \u201cThat was why it was a big issue at Monza where there were many high-speed corners.\u201d Pirelli\u2019s problems resulted in a late switch of tyre supplier to Dunlop for Silverstone and the rest of the season. Running crossplies on a car designed for radials undoubtedly took the edge off the Lancia\u2019s competitiveness.<\/p>\n

There were only flashes of Ghinzani\u2019s Monza pace, but plenty of retirements. Engine maladies, precipitated by the use of UK-spec petrol, forced both cars out at Silverstone. Differential failure did for the two LC2s \u2013 one factory, one customer \u2013 at the N\u00fcrburgring. Gearbox, fuel pressure and turbocharger issues resulted in an early bath for all three Lancia crews at Le Mans. An 11-week gap in the World Championship schedule allowed Lancia to regroup. The result was that three LC2s finished the Spa 1000Kms in September, while the works team notched up a fourth place in the European Endurance Championship round at Brands Hatch later that month.<\/p>\n

The next round of the Euro series, which encompassed the five World Championship rounds in Europe at the start of the season, gave the LC2 the first of its three victories. Unlike at Brands, there were no Rothmans 956s at Imola, but Joest and John Fitzpatrick Racing, who\u2019d both vanquished the works Porsche team that season, were present. Fabi and Hans Heyer, who rejoined Lancia in the absence of the team\u2019s F1 stars, took what the former describes as \u201ca much-needed victory\u201d. It was something Fiorio \u201cclearly wanted\u201d, recalls Fabi. Imola may have broken the LC2\u2019s duck, but arguably a more significant result occurred when Patrese and Alessandro Nannini split the Rothmans Porsches in second at Kyalami. The updated \u201984-spec LC2, of which the car pictured here (chassis 005) is the first example, allowed Lancia to continue that improvement. Revised suspension geometry changes, facilitated at the back by a new gearbox casing designed in-house, aerodynamic modifications and, from Le Mans, a 3-litre engine kept Lancia near the front of the field among the best Porsches. More poles followed, including one at Le Mans for new signing Bob Wollek in chassis 005. There were some strong results, too.<\/p>\n

Barilla and Baldi finished third and then fourth in the opening races at Monza and Silverstone, though each time they encountered engine problems in the closing stages. There was a further podium at the N\u00fcrburgring, this time for Barilla and Nannini, and then a barren spell until victory number two for the LC2 right at the end of the season. Patrese and Nannini\u2019s win at the Kyalami 1000Kms came against opposition even more limited than at Imola the previous season. There was just one other Group C car on hand, a second-string Porsche, and that encountered problems. So weak was opposition that the second-placed Lancia driven by Barilla and Wollek finished 40 laps ahead of the car in third, a locallyentered Nissan Skyline.<\/p>\n

The 1985 season should have been Lancia\u2019s year. There were more of what Dallara calls \u201csmall development steps\u201d. Crucially, the team switched from Dunlop to Michelin tyres. Patrese was on pole at each of the first three races, but could finish no better than third with Nannini. There were cases of what might have been, as always with Lancia, most notably the race gifted to the Kremer Porsche team at Monza when a fallen tree brought a premature halt to proceedings. The LC2\u2019s third, final and most worthy victory was notched up at Spa by Baldi, Wollek and pole winner Patrese, who switched cars for the final stint of the shortened race. The result is there as a Lancia win, in the history books, but in the psyche of sports car racing that event is remembered for the death of Stefan Bellof. \u201cNo one remembers Lancia for finally beating the factory Porsches, and that includes me,\u201d says Baldi. \u201cI don\u2019t recall much about that race, just arriving on the scene of the accident a few seconds after it had happened and knowing it was bad.\u201d<\/p>\n

The LC2 may have a \u2018proper\u2019 victory ahead of the factory Porsches on its CV, but over time it has done little for the reputation of the car. The Lancia Group C car is remembered more for its failures \u2013 or should that be retirements? \u2013 than its successes. Four-time Le Mans winner Henri Pescarolo, who made a one-off appearance at the 24 Hours in the LC2 in \u201985, reckons it was a question of mentality within the team.<\/p>\n

\u201cI am not sure it was a question of money, more the team\u2019s philosophy,\u201d says the Frenchman, never one to pull his punches. \u201cI felt they were working to have the quickest car, rather than the most reliable car.\u201d<\/p>\n

Pescarolo\u2019s most bizarre Lancia story is its attempt to nurse the LC2\u2019s Hewland VG200 gearbox through Le Mans. \u201cFifth gear was always the problem, so we used the same ratio in fourth and fifth,\u201d explains Pescarolo. \u201cEach driver had to use a different fifth gear ratio. One driver was doing one-twothree- four, the other one-two-three-five.\u201d Fabi concedes that Lancia sometimes had a hit-and-hope attitude to finishing races.<\/p>\n

\u201cOn reliability it seemed to me that Lancia was hoping for good luck rather than doing a serious development programme to make the car last,\u201d he says. \u201cWe never had enough time or resources to do enough kilometres to check the car\u2019s reliability.\u201d That last statement backs up Fiorio\u2019s claims. \u201cI could not put all my best people on the Group C programme,\u201d he insists. \u201cYou might see that as a mistake, but I had to make choices and we chose rallying over long-distance racing.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt is wrong to say that Lancia could not build reliable cars, because our reliability in our rally programmes was always strong and is the reason why we won 15 World Championships.\u201d The LC2 factory programme petered out after just two races, entered at the last minute, at the beginning of 1986. Le Mans was never on the schedule, but the week before Nannini was scheduled to take part in the Norisring sprint round of the WEC, test driver Giacomo Maggi was killed in an LC2 at Fiat\u2019s La Mandria test facility near Turin. A factory Lancia sports car would never race again, although privateer LC2s raced on sporadically until as late as 1991.<\/p>\n

Another tragic accident involving a Lancia, little more than a month before Maggi\u2019s death, actually had the greater impact on the sports car programme. The fatal crash that claimed the lives of Henri Toivonen and co-driver Sergio Cresto in an S4 Delta on the Tour de Corse not only precipitated the demise of Group B, but also Lancia\u2019s involvement in sports cars.<\/p>\n

\u201cAll the manufacturers were called together and told that there too many accidents because the cars had become too fast,\u201d explains Fiorio. \u201cWe, more than anyone else, were in no position to complain and we were faced with having to throw everything away and build a brand new car in just a few months.<\/p>\n

\u201cThat required all our engineers and available people focusing on rallying. We knew we\u2019d have to work 24 hours a day, seven days a week if we were going to have a competitive car for the start of 1987.\u201d<\/p>\n

Lancia\u2019s fleeting success with the S4 and its subsequent domination of world rallying with a line of Group A Deltas in the late \u201980s is justification of the LC2 programme, according to Fiorio.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe went racing as a means of improving our experience and increasing the experience of our engineers,\u201d he says. \u201cThe LC2 gave us the possibility of building a supercar like the S4.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe gained a lot of knowledge of composite construction and lightweight materials from racing. Many things we used in rallying weren\u2019t in our technical culture before we went racing.\u201d Many of the drivers who were part of the Lancia programme went on to greater things in sports cars. Fabi was a future World Champion with Jaguar, while Baldi would drive for the Mercedes, Peugeot and Porsche factories.<\/p>\n

\u201cI wasn\u2019t really interested in sports cars when Fiorio called: I thought I was an F1 driver,\u201d recalls Baldi, who is a member of that select band of drivers to have won the big enduros at Le Mans, Daytona and Sebring. \u201cI didn\u2019t start enjoying long-distance racing until a little later, but Lancia was the beginning for me.\u201d The programme was also important in the growth of Dallara Automobili into the world\u2019s
\nmost successful racing car constructor.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe relationship with Lancia was a milestone in the growth of the company,\u201d says Dallara. \u201cWe had been used to dealing with small teams with little money; with Lancia it was the first time we were working with a manufacturer.\u201d<\/p>\n

Glorious failure? Perhaps not. Maybe it\u2019s time to reassess the legacy of the Lancia LC2.<\/p>\n

Thanks to Jan B Luehn for his help with this feature. This car is for sale: www.janluehn.com<\/em><\/p>\n\n <\/div>\n<\/section>\n","protected":false},"author":740,"featured_media":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","template":"","categories":[],"tags":[35090,167,44632,35238,34121,251,226,115462,35745,60786,60788,34148,36567,346,278,37279,37178,249,289,225,53768,213,36314,34574,115466,115465],"issue_decade":[121591],"issue_year":[121612],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issue_content\/14014"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issue_content"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/issue_content"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/740"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=14014"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issue_content\/14014\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":792024,"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issue_content\/14014\/revisions\/792024"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=14014"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=14014"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=14014"},{"taxonomy":"issue_decade","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issue_decade?post=14014"},{"taxonomy":"issue_year","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issue_year?post=14014"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}