Alfa 33 - In the Beginning

Quitting when you’re ahead has always been a difficult decision to take.  Jackie Stewart managed it in 1973, but how many other drivers have hung on too long, meandering down grid order and shedding much of the lustre they’d worked so hard to establish in the early days of their career?  Alfa Romeo did bow out at the top, in 1951, having won the F1 World Championship that, and the preceding, season.  But 10 years later, having stepped up its production capacity, the company was in need of the marketing momentum provided by successful association with top-flight motor sport.  At the same time, a group of people were quitting another famous Italian car manufacturing house - Società Esercizio Fabbriche Automobili e Corse . . . i.e. Ferrari.  Several key engineers were fired by Enzo Ferrari for insubordination in a dispute over management authority.  Two of these men, Carlo Chiti and Giotto Bizzarrini, would be of the utmost importance in the process by which Alfa Romeo would achieve its sporting ambitions.

Fig.1. Ferrari, Chiti and Bizzarrini.

Courtesy Rosso Automobilii

Chiti and Bizzarrini were at work in 1962 at the newly formed, Count Giovanni Volpi-funded, Automobili Turismo e Sport, (ATS), determined to show Ferrari what he’d lost in dismissing them.  Thus, their initial focus was on the creation of a Formula One car to rival the Championship-winning F156 ‘Dino,’ powered by a 1,494 cc V8 engine intended to outdo the 120° V6 Chiti himself had designed for the Dino.  The car, Tipo 100, was raced at just five Championship events in the 1963 season and was notably unsuccessful.  However, the engine provided the basis for a larger capacity version which ATS required in order to build the road car that would be needed for the generation of profit and thus funding for future racing activities.  In a bold move, with the aim of maximising the appeal of the new car, that engine, with a capacity of 2,468 cc, was located in the central position, only the second production road car featuring this configuration; (the first being the Rene Bonnet Djet which first appeared in mid-1962).  In its original iteration, the ATS engine produced 220 bhp, and with the car weighing around 800 kgs, performance was good – 0-60 mph in 5 secs and a top speed of 150 mph.  However, the ATS 2500 GT, despite its sporting attributes – and there was an even quicker GTS version – and attractive Scaglione styling, was not a sales success.  Between its launch in April 1963 and the company’s financial failure some 20 months later, only 12 cars had been manufactured.

Fig.2. Left to right: ATS F1 engine (Phil Hill driving). Courtesy Pete Lyons; ATS 100 (Baghetti at Zandvoort, 1963). Courtesy F1-photo.com; ATS 2500GT engine; ATS 2500GT. Both courtesy Autoneuroticfixation-com

Meanwhile, at Alfa Romeo, Orazio Satta Puliga and Giuseppe Busso had been charged with responsibility to determine the best form of elite motor sport in which the company should now participate.  Their view was that sports prototype racing was the most appropriate, offering a direct emotional and technical link to the type of road cars for which the Marque was most renowned.  While this planning was developing, the entire organisation was under considerable disruption and stress, since the completion of the new factory at Arese and the transfer of production from Portello had been in progress since 1960.  CEO Giuseppe Luraghi took the view that this situation would make it difficult for an internal sporting department to be fully effective – what was needed at that point was something similar to what Scuderia Ferrari had offered so successfully pre-war.  Such a thing was found – in Udine, far to the east in Northern Italy, where Chiti together with Ludovico Chizzola had founded Autodelta in the wake of the collapse of ATS.  Naturally, Chiti was keen to impress Luraghi and thus took a strident line when making an initial review of Satta and Busso’s proposals and tentative prototype work.  He suggested he could take a different approach and achieve rapid progress.  Consequently, Progetto 105.33 really got underway as Chiti’s vision of a Group 6 open sportscar with a  two litre engine.  Where Satta/Busso’s early experiments had utilised the twin cam 1600 cc inline four cylinder as deployed in the TZ1, Chiti favoured a V8, and in his head, and on-paper, he had a design ‘ready to go,’ from his recent work at ATS.

Fig.3. Chiti’s V8 for the 33. Courtesy Supercar Nostalgia

With the enhanced resources now available to him, Chiti was able to improve on his ATS-branded design.  In its launch form it was a four cam with induction by four Weber 46 IDF2 carburettors and set up for – though not initially equipped with – twin spark ignition.  Power output from the 1,995 cc capacity in early 1967 was around 250 bhp.  The chassis was a carry-over from the Scarabo concept car.  Fabricated by the specialist firm, Aereaonautica Sicula, it was composed of three main elements rivetted together – a pair of stout, tubular aluminium longitudinal members/centre crossmember, with a magnesium front crossmember and transverse rear suspension carrier.  Drawn in-house at Autodelta, the body was fabricated in fibreglass and was distinctive in featuring a domed windscreen and large air intake tube above the engine deck, giving rise to the nickname for the car – ‘periscopica.’  Its weight was 580 kgs.

Fig.4. 33/2 chassis frame. Courtesy Vladimir Pajevic Archives

Testing was entrusted to Teodoro Zeccoli, initial mileage being accrued at the Alfa Romeo Balocco test track, midway between Milan and Turin.  At a further session, with chassis #002, at the Monza circuit, Zeccoli had the misfortune to crash heavily in the cold, grip-limited conditions of a January morning.  Owing to fire on top of the impact damage, this car was written off.  Nevertheless, the design – designated model 33/2 – had shown itself to be effective and capable of competitive lap times.  So it was presented to the Press on 6^th March at Monza.  Luraghi made a point of attending, signalling the importance of the car in its role of re-establishing Alfa Romeo’s commitment to motor sport at World Championship level.

Fig.5. 33/2 as presented at Balocco, March 1967.

Courtesy Centro Documentazione Alfa Romeo, Arese

Immediately after the Press launch, chassis #001 was transported to Belgium and made the 33’s maiden race appearance at a hillclimb south-east of Liege.  The event was held at the Course de Côte de Fléron.  Zeccoli achieved the fastest time overall, outperforming a 5.0 McLaren M3A and 2.7 Brabham BT23B, 2^nd and 3^rd respectively.

Fig.6. #001/Zeccoli at Fléron, March 1967. Courtesy Centro Documentazione Alfa Romeo, Arese

For the 33’s first circuit race, the 12 Hours of Sebring, (The Alitalia Airlines Trophy), 1^st April 1967, Autodelta entered 3 cars, although one – for Giacomo Russo and Enrico Pinto - did not appear.  At this point, Lucas fuel injection was under evaluation and said to be giving 270 bhp – around 20 bhp more than available with Webers.  In practice, the 33 of Andrea de Adamich and Zeccoli (#004) qualified 9^th, and fastest, in the 2 litre class.  This performance was especially significant – and encouraging – since it bettered that of the two factory Porsche 910s, (a model which had already benefitted from over six months more development than the 33), and three Ferrari Dino 206 S entries.  Less successful was the second chassis, (#005), driven by Nanni Galli and Roberto Bussinello, down in 21^st.  In the race it was an early retirement – after just 36 laps – as a result of ignition system failure.  The de Adamich/Zeccoli car ran to one third distance before dropping out with suspension trouble.

Fig.7. #004 (de Adamich/Zecolli) at Sebring, April 1967.

Courtesy Primotipo Files

Soon after, three 33s were shipped to France for the Le Mans test weekend.  One of the cars featured the first Tipo 33 variant body – a long tail, and on which the ‘periscope’ was deleted, with speed and stability on the Mulsanne Straight being the objective.  The configuration proved effective, with de Adamich able to wring the 10^th fastest lap (and make it the quickest 2.0 car) from it.  The other two cars were as run at Sebring, with Bussinello in 12^th – 2^nd in the 2.0 class – and Zeccoli, in a brand new chassis, 25^th overall.  So, once again, despite their still relative newness, the 33s were proving fully competitive.  Clearly, the focus now required was on improving reliability, especially with the 24 Hours race in mind.

Fig.8. Longtail 33/2 in which de Adamich recorded 10^th fastest time at Le Mans test.

Courtesy Patrick Dasse/Martin Übelher

Four cars were entered for the Targa Florio run on 14^th May.  There were some minor body detail variances – mainly involving openings/ducts for cooling air intake – but no distinct alternative forms as had been seen at the Le Mans test with the longtail.  In practice, in car #170, de Adamich, (partnering with Jean Rolland), recorded the 6^th fastest time.  This seemed quite promising since, over the 45 miles lap, Nino Vaccarella’s (Ferrari 330) pole lap was only 1 minute, 34 seconds quicker, despite having twice the engine capacity.  However, the Autodelta team was soon feeling considerable concern for the cars’ race-length reliability because gear selection was problematic and, most ominously, three front suspension breakages were experienced. 

In the race, de Adamich carried through his practice pace, running 2^nd overall until yet another suspension failure occurred, putting the car out with 7 laps (of 10) completed.  Car #190 of Jo Bonnier and Giancarlo Baghetti succumbed to the same fate, but much earlier, needing to be retired on lap 2.  In #200, Nino Todaro (partnering with Russo) left the circuit on lap 7, damaging the sump with terminal consequences.  The fourth car, #192, driven by Galli and Ignazio Giunti, did keep going to the finish, but was unclassified.  To some extent that car’s lack of pace was due to excessive heat affecting the ignition system – another problem that had been encountered earlier in the year – at Sebring, for instance – and indicating that further modifications to the air intakes needed to be developed.

Fig.9. 33/2 of de Adamich/Rolland refuelling on the Targa Florio.

Chiti is seen on the far left. Courtesy Schlegelmilch.com

Next up was the 1000 Kms of Nurburgring – another track which would present a severe challenge to the robustness of the 33’s suspension.  The lead chassis, of de Adamich/Galli, failed the challenge, its suspension breaking on lap 18, though it had run as high as 9^th, (against heavy Porsche competition, especially in the form of the 910 model).  This was a compounding of disappointment for this pairing, its intended race chassis having been damaged beyond immediate repair in a practice session accident.  However, some compensation was provided by Chiti’s decision to let de Adamich and Galli take over the car struggling down the order in the hands of Bussinello/Zeccoli, a move vindicated when it was seen to have reached 5^th place at the finish.  But no exuberant celebrations were appropriate in the Autodelta pit, a DNF being recorded for the 33 of Russo/Baghetti, (gearbox).

Fig.10. Autodelta team in the pits at the Nurburgring 1000 Kms.

Courtesy Accursio Cassarino/Primotipo.com

Although there was clearly a need to find solutions for the suspension fragility and distributor overheating issues, Chiti diverted some focus to the 33’s aerodynamics.  It was determined that the high ‘periscopica’ intake was causing problems, disturbing the flow of air to and over the rear deck, whilst at the same time helping to create lift at the front axle.  As a result, at the cars’ next major event appearance – at Mugello - they sported a new longtail which promised not only improved stability but also a higher top speed potential.  This race itself however did not see these objectives proven – all three cars entered retired after just 3 laps (of 8).

Fig.11. New tail for the 33/2 at Mugello

No 33s were seen again in 1967 at the remaining World Championship meetings, though a one-two was scored at the non-championship race at Vallelunga in mid-October.  Autodelta’s priority was to make improvements, with the emphasis on ensuring better reliability.  In their maiden season the cars had shown many good attributes and were certainly able to be fast enough at all the various circuit types.  The suspension failures in particular however had been far too severe and frequent, and had caused several retirements.  Pressing though the need was to resolve such shortcomings, Autodelta was at the same time required to provide time and resources to the development and production of the Stradale version.

Fig.12 Early 33 Stradale. Courtesy Centro Documentazione Alfa Romeo, Arese