Small Scale Style from Scaglione

During the late 19^th and first half of the 20^th centuries, Neckarsulm Strickmaschinen Union – NSU – dabbled with automobile production, but was mainly known for its motorcycles.  However, a more concerted fresh new start with cars began in 1957 with a model type named Prinz.  A small saloon, the Prinz was powered by an air cooled, rear located 583 cc twin cylinder engine.  A distinctive feature of the NSU twin was its utilisation of a connecting rod driving the overhead camshaft from the crankshaft.  The system, known as ‘NSU Ultramax,’ clearly had reliability/durability advantages compared with the more usual chain, gear or belt drive, but would have added to costs somewhat significantly. (See here).

Despite the limitations of its size and small capacity powertrain, the Prinz was successful in terms of sales, with about 95,000 units made in the period ’57-’62.  Not quite a microcar – more a super-compact - it met the needs of a large, city-dwelling demographic seeking economic motoring.  Such owners had no need for full four seat capacity for lengthy journeys.  The ‘economy’ criterion was met by the Prinz being a car that cost all of £425 brand new.  But, as throughout the history of automobile manufacturing and marketing, modesty is never absolute and it wasn’t long before designers at Neckarsulm were doodling sporty body shapes over the basic Prinz platform.  After all, Volkswagen had not long ago put a sports coupe body jointly developed by Carrozzeria Ghia and Karmann GmbH onto the Beetle chassis, and the resulting car had proven an aesthetic and commercial success.  NSU turned to another fast-developing carrozzeria to explore a similar project.  This was Bertone, where Nuccio, son of the firm’s founder, was intent on modernising and expanding its operations, especially in terms of vehicle assembly in addition to body styling and construction.  And Bertone had been benefiting since ’52 by having the talented stylist, Franco Scaglione, in-house.  Scaglione was at the time riding a crest of success and acclaim through his recent work for Alfa Romeo, (the startling Berlinetta Aerodinamica Tecnica (BAT) concepts, the Giulietta Sprint and the Sprint Speciale), Abarth and Aston Martin.  Confident and adventurous, Scaglione drew a distinctively attractive fastback body which the NSU management found very much to its liking.  Little wonder as Scaglione had flattered the executives at Neckarsulm by presenting them with the opportunity to market a Prinz that had a similar look to the glamorous Maserati 350 GT Bertone which was on his drawing board around the same time.  The Sport Prinz was first presented at Frankfurt in ’58, with series manufacture and deliveries beginning in ’59.

Left: Sport Prinz; right: Maserati 350 GT – both by Scaglione

According to most sources, Bertone built the first 250 Sport Prinz bodies in the Carrozzeria’s Grugliasco workshops near Turin. This operation was then transferred to the firm of Drautz, conveniently also located in Neckarsulm.

From the outset until ’62, the 583 cc engine with Bing carburettor was rated at 30 bhp DIN (or, claimed, 36 SAE), with torque at 42 Nm.  The car’s kerb weight was quoted as 530 Kg, allowing a top speed of over 80 mph, though the 0-60 mph acceleration time was over 20 seconds.  However, being nimble and handling well, the model was to be seen on race circuits in 1960 and with some success, for example at the Nurburgring in September, where Siegfried Mullers and Bernd Degner were GT600 class winners in the 500 Km. 

In ’61 two cars ran in the Monte Carlo Rally. Eugen Schaefer/Henri Benveniste’s #116, which finished 60^th, is seen below:

Courtesy Getty Images

The second car, in the hands of Jose Behra/Jean Berges, was an excellent 8^th . 

During 1960/61/62, SCCA racing in the U.S, saw Sport Prinz participation from time to time, notably with Alfred Zantzinger at the wheel.  At the Sebring 12 Hours in ’61, Fred Fischhof and John Eisenhauer took the GT600 class honours.  Remarkably, in June ’63, six Sport Prinz entries were seen at the Nurburgring 6 Hours, a round of the European Touring Car Challenge.  Most successful was the Isar Racing Team car driven by Ernst Hamberger and Manfred Gieth to 1^st in the up-to-600 cc class – indeed, the model recorded a 1-2-3 finish at this arduous event.  The winning car is #8, centre, in the photograph below.

’63 Nurburgring 6 Hours Courtesy Holger Vogel

A few weeks later, Hans Braun won the same class at the ETCC round at Zandvoort.  In the Tour de France, Sport Prinz cars were 2^nd and 3^rd in class.  There was some Sport Prinz representation at the major hillclimb events at Rossfeld and Mont Ventoux in ’64, while Christian Chauvin was class winner at the ’65 running of the Coupes de Paris. 

The Sport Prinz was the subject of a road test report in the November ’60 issue of Motor Sport magazine.  Comments included: 

(The engine) . . . idles unevenly but once under way smooths out, although the noise is still very reminiscent of a two-stroke engine.  The gearbox operates in the rather disconnected way of so many rear-engined cars, and the synchromesh tends to obstruct gear selection, especially in first gear.  To obtain good downward gear changes it is advisable to double-declutch, a manoeuvre which is aided by reasonably sensibly placed pedals. With 36 b.h.p. to move just over 10 cwt. along, the acceleration is more than brisk and the Sport Prinz will certainly never get in the way of other traffic.  Normal cruising speed is an indicated 60 m.p.h., while the needle will swing round to 80 m.p.h. on a slight downgrade, and a more fully run-in car (our test car had covered 1,500 miles) would probably reach the claimed 85 m.p.h. top speed. Remember, this car has a capacity of 583 c.c. ! 

On first acquaintance handling appears fussy but this is due to a combination of fairly firm suspension and rack-and-pinion steering having only 2.4 turns lock-to-lock. When the driver becomes more accustomed to the car he begins to fling it about in complete confidence, and although the Sport Prinz oversteers quite strongly it is difficult to make the rear end break away. 

On the open road it becomes a very pleasant car to drive . . . cornered with great verve . . . it is possible that the claimed 47 m.p.g. could be reached if a less aggressive driving technique was employed. The brakes of the test car required quite heavy pedal pressures and fade could be induced after two or three stops from above 60 m.p.h., but in normal use they appeared to be adequate. 

Rather expensive in this country the sporting version of these interesting economy cars from Neckarsalum will obviously find a limited market, but the man who wants to own a car of individual character could well consider the Sport Prinz. 

The magazine’s observation about expense was driven by the test car being priced at £970 – nearly twice that of the Prinz saloon.

 

An early-production (probably ’60) survivor is #4102499, sold for restoration in September ’24.

Courtesy Hagerty - RacineJoe

Two other ’60-made cars have featured in recent media coverage.  Another red one, chassis number unknown, is owned by a resident of Foley, a town to the North West of Minneapolis, U.S.  The owner’s experience with the car and details of his restoration work can found at https://www.oldcarsweekly.com/features/car-of-the-week-1960-nsu-sport-prinz.

Courtesy Active Interest Media

Another, again finished in red, was recently photographed as body/paint restoration was concluding.  Location of this one was Astoria, New York, U.S.

Courtesy Peter Kumar

The quality of classic car restoration standards has benefitted from technological advances in recent years, with some stunning results to be seen at the premier international concours events.  At the same time, an appreciation of ‘naturally aged’ cars and their patina has gathered momentum, generating interest in preservation as a principle just as valid as craft/artisan based restoration.  For those liking patina-porn, the ’62 Sport Prinz below will surely prove attractive.

Courtesy Wannenes

The ’63 #4112286 displays the various badges/plate in rather better condition:

Courtesy Artcurial

The car was sold by Artcurial in ’21 in Monaco for €7,748.  This was below an estimate of €10-15,000.  It appears to be in reasonable, usable condition, but the winning bidder was no doubt anticipating the need for substantial expenditure on a thorough restoration.  This would likely be fully justifiable given that the car apparently has no areas of very serious deterioration.

Courtesy Artcurial

Produced the following year, #4122861 was offered by Osenat (Fontainebleau, France) in 2013 with an estimate of €5-7,000.  A successful, above-reserve bid was however not recorded.

#4122861 Courtesy Osenat

Also a ’64 Sport Prinz, #4113783 was offered at auction in 2023, but the highest bid, €11,500, was short of the reserve.

#4113783 Courtesy Classic.com

#4117939 is unusual in being right hand drive.  First registered in the UK in ’65, it was apparently built to a factory ‘GT’ specification which included front discs and a reprofiled camshaft.  Much later, around ’08, a subsequent owner had the engine replaced with a 4 cylinder NSU unit.  At the same time chassis improvements were made and competition-use modifications – including a roll cage – were carried out.  There are also some bodywork alterations, most notably to the engine deck lid – Abarth GT style - to allow greater air intake/circulation for cooling purposes.  Engine performance is significantly increased at 52 bhp with peak torque of 53 lbs/ft.  Despite these various modifications and expenditures, the car made just a modest £6.900 when sold at auction in February ’24.

#4117939 Courtesy Manor Park Classics

In contrast, #4119347, a ’66 car, appears to be a good example of a Sport Prinz in preserved standard specification.  Bonham’s lot description for its auction sale in ’18 includes the statement, ‘(the car was) comprehensively restored in 2004, though the interior was in such good condition that it was decided it did not need renovation and as a result possesses a lovely patina.’  It was estimated to sell for €18-25,000 but the reserve was apparently not reached.

#4119347 Courtesy Bonhams Cars

Another inconclusive auction involved the ’67-manfactured #4118719, offered on Bring a Trailer in ’20.  High bid – unsuccessful – was $9.400.

Courtesy AaronCCG, BaT

 

The engine bay and front trunk of this car are in particularly pleasing condition:

Courtesy AaronCCG, BaT

Of the same age, #4117627 made for a more successful auction lot when offered also on Bring a Trailer in September ’20, selling for $16,040.

#4117627 Courtesy 246dinoguy, BaT

As with the immediately preceding car, a clean bay allows a good view of the engine’s simplicity and the ease of accessibility for service/repair work.  Given the modest power output, the deployment of twin coils – seen at the bottom of the photograph, might seem somewhat ironic!

#4117627 Courtesy 246dinoguy, BaT

Another ’67 car is #4121650 and, like #4117939, is right hand drive and used in the early years of the century for some historic rallying, though without any serious competition-related mechanical or bodywork modifications.  The car was sold in ’18 for £5,060.

#4121650 Courtesy Brightwells

Once again, a rhd/’67 Sport Prinz, #4121694 was sold in ’21 by Iconic Auctioneers for £8,769.  No other details are currently available, though the car appears to be in good, running condition, as seen below:

#4121694 Courtesy Iconic Auctioneers

The latest-made, (’68), car of which I have a photograph is #4122062.  In describing the car for a sale in July 2012 of cars owned by the Prince of Monaco, Artcurial included a note about the interior: (It) 'has not been touched and offers all its period freshness, with its impeccable carpets, its two-tone cloth and leatherette seats with white piping, its delightfully sporty dashboard nicely painted, the steering in black bakelite with circular chrome-horn, chrome door handles and bellow-like door pockets.’  The hammer price realised was €25,023.

Courtesy Artcurial

As seen in this survey, the NSU Sport Prinz does not generally command high values in the current classic car market.  A clear limitation is the modesty of motive power type since this not only makes for a vehicle with limited dynamic characteristics, but also robs it substantially of technical interest.  However, whilst the provenance, (ownership by the Monegasque monarchy), of #4122062 was no doubt a positive contributing factor, the price realised for this vehicle indicates the potential for well-preserved/original specification examples.

The Low Glow Halo - Alfa Romeo 2600 Sprint Zagato

In 1985 I encountered my first Alfa Romeo 2600 Sprint Zagato ‘in the flesh’ on a visit to Piero Pesaro’s Alfetta Racing Centre in Brentford.  Whilst we were walking around the premises, discussing the possibility of appointing the business as an official Alfa Romeo ‘Service Point,’ we reached a corner where a Junior Z and a TZ1 were at rest.  My attention thus became diverted from the 2600 SZ, at which I’d intended to take a close look.  Some years later (!) I’m now taking the opportunity to do that, even if only on a virtual basis.  Back then, our UK sales were on a marked downward trend, and we needed not only better quality ‘regular’ production cars but also a ‘halo’ model to help re-establish the marque’s reputation and attractiveness to new car buyers.  Two decades earlier, Alfa Romeo , though enjoying improving sales volume prospects with the Giulia family of models, was intent on the same thing, believing that however practical the Giulia was for the current market in volume terms, there should be a six cylinder model at the head of the range to convey brand values related to sport/performance and prestige/technical sophistication.  As a result, the 2600 was created and presented in Geneva in ’62.  Initially there was a Berlina, a Bertone Sprint coupe and a Touring Cabriolet.  On launch these models were not perceived by the Press as ‘halo car’ material, being cosmetically little different from the 2000 models they effectively replaced.  However, the new six cylinder in line engine was recognised as a significant addition to the marque’s inventory and worthy of a more glamorous body form to carry it.  With an established relationship in mind and the success of the recent collaboration resulting in the Giulietta SZ and the ongoing TZ project, it was not surprising that Zagato was looked to for this, especially as a 2600 Sprint body by the Carrozzeria could be expected to enhance performance through light weight, (even though Alfa Romeo specified that it should be made of steel), as well as being aesthetically in tune with the Zeitgeist.  As is usually reported, Ercole Spada, (at Zagato since ’60), drew the initial shape, but said in more recent times that he was not responsible for the finalised, production styling.  In this form, from chassis # 856006, one hundred 2600 SZs were made during ‘65/’66/’67.

Alfa Romeo 2600 Sprint Zagato body. Courtesy Scuderia Azzurra

By the time the Zagato version of the 2600 Sprint was presented at the ’65 Frankfurt Show – three years on from the first prototype – it had a big job to do.  Ongoing evaluation of the Berlina, Coupe and Cabriolet models had not been favourable and it had been generally accepted that the car had failed as a ‘top of the range’ product worthy of Alfa Romeo’s heritage.  Performance and handling were not rated favourably by journalists, test drivers, dealers and customers alike.  The Solex carburettor set-up was considered much to blame for the performance aspect.  The triple 44 PHH carburettors operated on the two stage principle and were therefore dependent on optimum delivery of vacuum.  Less ‘temperamental’ Webers - 40 DCOEs  - were available as a factory option with a bespoke manifold.  The handling shortcomings were attributed to a major extent to the weight and far-forward location of the engine.  With this in mind, it is quite amusing to read Bill Boddy’s report/road test of the Sprint in Motor Sport magazine’s November ’63 issue.  It is a formulaic, bland piece typical of the man, generally complimenting the car, presumably – as was the convention then – as reciprocation for the wining and dining he would have enjoyed on Alfa Romeo-hosted press events such as new model launches, factory tours, etc.  His headline summary read: “A beautifully-appointed, smooth-running, extremely handsome Italian saloon with impeccable handling and controls.”  In fact, the Zagato version was needed as soon as possible if there was to be any chance of salvaging Alfa’s ‘halo car’ aspiration.  As would become ever more clear as time moved on, doing this with a six cylinder car was not an inherent expertise Post-War at Portello/Arese.  The Alfa 6, 164 3.0 and Alfa 90 were 70s/80s duds and it wasn’t until the GTV6, Alfa 75 3.0 and SZ (ES30) arrived that the company had products that in any way fulfilled the desired role.

Left:#856075, Solex 44PHHs. Courtesy SVS Ltd; right: #856061, Webers. Courtesy Milestone Motor Cars

But the 2600 SZ did have ‘ingredients’ that offered hope in ’65.  Thanks to Zagato’s body construction principles, (even though the Carrozzeria was not commissioned to build it in aluminium as was its usual custom), it weighed 9% less than the Bertone-bodied Sprint.  This, along with 20 more bhp from a modified state of tune of the triple Solexes, certainly helped with the performance aspect while also allowing better handling/steering.  The SZ could accelerate from rest to 60 mph in 9.1 secs and reach a top speed of 130 mph.  The original first prototype, #856001, was constructed on a Spider chassis and shown in late ’62.  This was subject to further development the following year and eventually appeared as below, with notable refinements to the front panel, shield grille and bonnet intakes.  Note also that the rear haunches/C post are very different from the forms adopted for the production version.

Courtesy Peter Bovym Fotografie

It was early ’64 before a third prototype emerged.  The front end styling had been further revised, giving a pronounced aggressive appearance characterised by the enlarged shield grille.  #856003 was taken up as his ‘daily driver’ by Elio Zagato.  The car is shown below, left, and in comparison with an early production example, #856015 (Q3, ’65), illustrating how the front end had been ‘tidied’ in finalising the styling.  Of main note are: simplification of bonnet/front panel; relocation of Alfa Romeo badge to incorporation with the grille shield frame; revised grille mesh pattern; relocation of indicator lenses to the leading edge of front wings:

Courtesy Zagato-Cars (left) and Bonhams Cars (right)

Production version of grille, #856061. Courtesy Milestone Motor Cars

Left, #856034. Courtesy Zagato-Cars; right, #856053. Courtesy Fantasy Junction

The rear, chromed bumper bar was one piece with two integrated number plate lamp holders on the upper face in the centre.  On early cars this mainly had a constant depth along its total length with a slight taper towards the wheel arches.  On later examples the corners were flared, as seen, right, below:

Left, rear bumper, early version. Courtesy Lana-Classic; right, #856079. Courtesy Cool Classic Club

The type and location of the tail lamp units and reverse lamp remained unchanged throughout the production run.  Customisation is seen on #8560075 which has a rear plate lamp mounted centrally on the underside of the trailing edge of the boot lid.  #856079 had a boot lid release knob mounted above the tail lamp unit in the rear face of the right hand wing.

Tail lamp unit, #856079. Courtesy Cool Classic Club

A body detail feature often commented on is the absence of an external, body-coloured sill (rocker in the U.S.) panel.  I judge this successful, helping to make the 2600 SZ appear more of a lightweight car than it actually is when metrically assessed.  It does however exaggerate the extent of ground clearance and possibly causes the wheels to look somewhat oversize.

#856029. Courtesy ISSIMI, Inc.

 

As mentioned above, the Alfa Romeo ‘Cross & Serpent’ roundel badge was mounted centrally above the front intake:

#8560079. Courtesy Cool Classic Club

As for other Zagato-bodied cars of the era, ‘Zagato Milano’ badges were mounted on the front wings above the indicator repeater lamp, between the door leading edge and the trailing edge of the front wheel arch at a level slightly above the height of front tyre:

Left, #856053. Courtesy Fantasy Junction; right, #856079. Courtesy Cool Classic Club

The rear badge was a simple chrome ‘2600 SZ’ script with no base plate.  It was applied to the lower, vertical face of the boot lid between its right hand edge and the right hand edge of the number plate niche at a level a little above the lower edge of the tail lamp.

#856053. Courtesy Fantasy Junction

The rear badge is replicated in style terms inside the car, applied to the glovebox door:

#856053. Courtesy Fantasy Junction

The 415 mm, three slotted spoke, black rimmed, steering wheel was of a type commonly fitted to several Alfa Romeo GT/Sport models of the period.  The spokes were chrome plated and the horn button featured a gold coloured rendition of the traditional 'Cross & Serpent' image, as seen below:

As might be expected with a car of this type, some owners specified alternative wheels – some preferring a wood rimmed type by Nardi or Moto-Lita. 

16” magnesium road wheels with chrome hub caps were standard.  Original tyre fitment was with Pirelli Cinturato CA67, 175 HR 400s.  There are example SZs running on Borrani wire wheels.

#856053. Courtesy Fantasy Junction

Despite the relatively exclusive nature of the SZ and its successful aesthetic character, it was not a success.  Value for money may have been a significant factor, for its price was just short of £3,000 – around £45,000 in 2024 terms.  Back in ’67, what you paid for an SZ would have bought you two GT Juniors with plenty of change!  If this brought about any customer hesitation to purchase, a record of achievements on the racetrack, as with any ‘specialist’ car of this sort, could well have been an effective counter-measure.  However, whilst GTs bodied by Zagato for Abarth and Lancia, (and for Alfa Romeo with the Giulietta SZ), had proved highly capable in the motor sport arena, there was little or no such activity associated with the 2600 SZ.  Notable reasons include: thanks to the body being of steel, the car was not especially light weight; a concern that the crankshaft was lacking in durability became a received wisdom; though the wheelbase was shorter than that of the 2600 Berlinetta and Sprint models, it was still regarded as a chassis lacking nimble characteristics; Alfa Romeo was preoccupied in its developments for and support to motor sport enterprises with the 4 cylinder cars, especially the Giulia coupes and the tubular chassis, built-for-racing, TZ and TZ2 models.  It is believed that a factory project to create a twin spark head was initiated, but soon abandoned.  Equally, work to homologate the car with the FIA was not pursued with any vigour.  It has been suggested that #856034 was prepared as a rally car by Autodelta with involvement too of the Etceterina, Patriarca.  Also referenced – but not substantiated – is the modification for competition of #856013 by the tuner/constructor, Conrero; (the car in contemporary times has worn a Conrero sticker on its boot lid).

Left,#856013. Courtesy Route59; right, #856034. Courtesy ClassicCars.com

Although the 2600 SZ did not glow halo-esque as the intended marque/range icon, it did radiate elegant optics and was fast/well handling enough to be rated as an authentic Grand Tourer.  From many angles its appearance is lithe and dynamic.  Those that have survived – mostly by now ably restored – provide a glimpse today of how stylish Alfa Romeo was before its decline set in the decade after the model’s production.

If Only: The Abarth T140

The more I learn about Carlo Abarth, the more I wish I had had the opportunity to work for him.  He was I believe an especially notable example of the sort of distinctive personality one could encounter in a leader/senior management role in the automotive industry around the middle of the 20^th Century.  Their behaviour and outlook was such that in today’s social culture they probably would not retain their position for very long.  Such people had singular vision/belief, tremendous drive and no inhibitions about using their personality to manage and direct subordinates.  

  

In anecdotes from people who worked for him, Abarth himself is often referred to as someone who expected nothing less than their 100% dedication to the task, was very averse to ‘buttering them up,’ but who showed that he did in fact notice excellence by, for instance, handing over an envelope of bank notes!  By his own vision and dynamism he created a superb line of performance cars, the racing versions of which were highly successful, to the extent that they secured World Championships for six years in succession in the 1960s.  These achievements bolstered Abarth’s self-confidence whilst at the same time instilling in the Corso Marche factory workforce a pride in and dedication to his company.  These two factors are particularly relevant to the beginnings of a project designated ‘T140,’ which should have evolved into Abarth’s crowning glory.  Such a project – the creation of a 6 litre, V12-engine  and sports racing prototype car to compete with Ferrari, Porsche and Ford – needed to be originated and developed in a milieu of secrecy for which the automotive industry has never been well known.  And yet the obedient, proud and earnest workforce ensured with its discretion that both the engine and the body/chassis design were well advanced before anyone outside the Corso Marche factory gained any knowledge of the T140 before Spring 1967. 

The project had been announced internally by Carlo in July 1965.  The initial objective was competitiveness in the proposed new championship for Group 7 cars, the Can-Am Challenge Cup.  A joint initiative by the Sports Car Club of America and the Canadian Automobile Sports Club, the championship was due to be launched in September 1966 at Mont-Tremblant.  Abarth believed that the series, with its Johnsons Wax sponsorship, would offer a high profile marketing opportunity for his products.  However, with Group 7 being virtually a Formula Libre, he would need to create a new, much larger Abarth engine – designated ‘Tipo 240’ - to compete with the expected proliferation of ‘Big Block’ Chevrolet-engined cars contesting the races.

Responsibility for the engine’s design was delegated to Luciano Fochi.  Fochi – whose brother, Nino, was in charge of production at Abarth – had distinguished himself at Alfa Romeo, Maserati, Ferrari and Bugatti prior to joining Abarth in 1958.  In August the following year, Fochi persuaded Gianfranco Bossu, with whom he had worked at Bugatti, to move to Corso Marche, where they again collaborated with great expertise in the development of engines.  Recently, Gianfranco has kindly shared with me his recollections of the T140 project. 

By December 1966 a prototype engine with wet sump had been assembled.  The key features were: 120°, 5982 cc, V12,  SOHC, 24 valve, twin spark ignition, four Weber 40 LDA3C carburettors.  Bore was 92 mm and the stroke 75 mm.  The engine’s construction has previously been described as ‘modular’ in that the block and camshafts were composed of two joined component ‘halves.’  This was not of particular significance as these sub-components were newly created items and not derived from pre-existing, smaller capacity units.  However, the principle was noteworthy as applied also to the crankshaft, since it was at its centre joint – where power was taken off – that a major problem was discovered as soon as test running got underway.  The crankshaft is seen in Gianfranco’s contemporary sketch below:

 

Courtesy of Gianfranco Bossu

The arrangement is not exceptional, especially for a crankshaft of considerable length – that of the Porsche Type 912 Flat 12 917 engine, for instance, is similarly configured.  However, it was initially a weak point, giving rise to crack failures on the Tipo 240 engine.  Gianfranco remembers that the problem was solved by increasing the rigidity of the bearing supports with additional ribs and revised specification bearings.  At this stage the engine was found to be generating over 550 bhp.  With further development, including revision of the lubrication system resulting in the adoption of a dry sump in Quarter 1, 1967, 567 bhp was seen on the dynamometer; (Sample dyno graphs are seen below, with Power represented by the trace second from bottom, and Torque below that.)  With the project still in its early stages, it would have been reasonable to assume that higher output could be achieved with various upgrades, the application of fuel injection, for example.  Potential competitiveness can be judged by considering the performance of the Sixties large capacity racing power plants of Ford, Ferrari and Porsche.  The 7.0 V8 installed in the Mk.II version of the Ford GT40 developed 485 bhp; Ferrari’s mid-decade 330 P4s featured a 3 valve V12 which could give 450 bhp, while the later 512’s 5.0 V12 was good for 550 bhp; the Porsche 917 4.5 flat 12 had 520 - 580 bhp.  A disadvantage for the T240 was its weight, at 254.6 kgs (dry), whereas the 917, without the burden of a fluid cooling system, was 240.4 kgs.  It has been said that the prototype Tipo 240 engine was tested in a Lola T70 chassis, but no data exists to indicate just how well it performed on-track.

 

Courtesy of Gianfranco Bossu

But, of course, the potential of the T140 to take on that Big Three would depend also on the quality and capability of the chassis, which was designed by Antonio Tomaini.  Previously at Moretti, Tomaini had joined Abarth in 1962 to work in the design department.  However, before long Tomaini was also very active out and about at circuits, supporting the works team’s efforts, especially in terms of acquiring and evaluating feedback from the drivers.  For the T140, Tomaini set about designing a chassis in a format which would enable both an endurance racing coupe version and a Can-Am open car to be created with relative ease.  The timescale of the project did not allow the development of either the chassis or the bodywork to progress to any advanced stage, the latter being represented only by a wooden 1:1 model.  The origin of the style of the car can be seen in the contemporary OT Sport Spiders, which were Abarth’s first glass fibre-bodied products, and the 1600 OT Sport coupe.  The subsequent 2000 SE010 also provides a clear indication of how a finalised T140 would have looked.  The full size model was rendered by Sergio Seccatore who had arrived at Corso Marche in June 1966.  He recalls its initial presentation in his book, co-authored with Luca Gastaldi, Abarth Memories:

The wooden model was taken to the workshop, right beneath the technical office, and Colucci brought Abarth to see it.  Abarth looked at it but couldn’t understand the line of the car because the cuts for the doors, bonnet, lights hadn’t been made.  It was a beautiful piece of wood, a single shell.  So, Colucci called me to paint the model red.  I went to the storeroom but there wasn’t any red paint, so they gave me some iron rust preventer.  When the car was finished, Abarth came back and wanted to see the cuts for the doors, bonnet, lights, sockets and air vents, windshield.  I masked everything to paint the various parts with matt black paint.  I copied the headlights of the Ford GT40 and had the rear lights of the Alfa Romeo Giulia painted on the back.  I made holes for the headlights and started to mount one.  Abarth arrived at that moment.  He liked those solutions but when he picked up the light from the Giulia, he said it was too heavy and I had to find some others.  That one had a Zamak base and I had to find others in plastic.  So I went out on the street, to look at the cars parked there, hoping for inspiration.  I saw a Fiat 124 saloon: the rear lights were more or less the same shape and I had those purchased.  I completed the model.

Tomaini followed the conventions of the era in the construction of the chassis – mainly a tubular structure with aluminium and fibreglass panelling.  Some previous reviews of the T140 have cast doubt on how competitive it might have been, not only by way of engine performance, but also in terms of weight.  However, Abarth was quite adept at producing lithe prototype racing cars – the 2000 SE010 of 1968, for example, weighing in at just 480 kgs, to which the basic frame contributed a tiny 39 kgs.  For comparison, consider the contemporary Porsche 907, for which a kerb weight of 600 kgs has been quoted.  Tomaini and a design drawing of the T140 are shown below:

 

The mid-Sixties saw a considerable shake-up in the competitive hierarchy of endurance sports car racing.  Particular focus was increased on the Le Mans 24 Hours race and the determination of Henry Ford II to avenge, on-track, Ferrari’s rebuttal of a Dearborn take-over.  This gave rise to the GT40, a car which certainly delivered on Henry’s ambition, since it was driven to victory at Le Mans for 4 successive seasons, 1966-69.  The first two of those wins were achieved with the use of a 7 litre V8 engine.  For the governing body, the FIA, this caused concern – how could a good number of competitive entries be sustained if the performance benchmark was set by such a large capacity engine, especially, given the Paris-based FIA’s natural European-orientation – the continent’s automotive industry at that time being mainly engaged in projects with engines half that sort of size.  As a solution, and without preamble or consultation, on 12^th June 1967, the day after the second Ford victory by A J Foyt and Dan Gurney in a Mk.4 GT40, the FIA announced that for 1968 new ‘classes’ would apply for endurance racing, as defined by Appendix J to the International Sporting Code: Category A, production cars, Group 4 Sports cars; Category B, Group 6 Prototype sportscars.  For homologation, a manufacturer would have to produce at least 50 cars for Group 4 eligibility and engine capacity had to be less than 5 litres.  A 3 litre capacity limit applied for Group 6.  With a subsequent revision of the homologation requirement to 25 units, both Porsche and Ferrari would develop, respectively, the 917 and 512 models which provided some spectacular racing in 1970-71.

For Abarth, however, the announcement was wholly negative.  It was immediately concluded that the company did not have the financial strength and physical capacity to build and sell fifty T140s.  Equally, the continuance of the project to result merely in the construction of a very few examples to contest the Can-Am could not be justified on a cost/benefit analysis basis.  Sergio Seccatore’s recollection was that very soon after the FIA’s announcement, ‘We piled everything in a corner of the workshop and the story of the T140 ended like that.’  However disappointing that might be from my perspective, it’s quite possible that many at Corso Marche at the time breathed a sigh of relief.  It is said, for instance, that Carlo’s then manager of the mechanical chassis and bodywork department, Mario Colucci, was doubtful that the car could be built at a competitive weight.  Apparently, he also thought that the reported engine output values were somewhat exaggerated.  As with technical matters, such as the relative merits of a mid-chassis location for an engine against those applying to a rear-of-axle mounting, Colucci often acted as a foil to Carlo Abarth’s thinking, and he probably thought it prudent generally to counteract Carlo’s inherent optimism.  Though that optimism flowed from Carlo’s confidence built on a proven record of commercial and racing successes, it can equally be said that Colucci was well qualified to judge the specifics of chassis weight, he having designed the first tubular frame used by Abarth, for the 750 Sport, soon after he joined from Alfa Romeo in 1960.

Though the original project scope had included the manufacture of sufficient components to assemble two prototype engines, only a single unit has been seen in recent times.  This had been acquired by Engelbert Moll, former Abarth works driver (1963) and was a significant item in the collection of Abarth products held at his premises in Solothurn, Switzerland.  The Tipo 240 engine was the subject of much interest when displayed with other cars and engines from Moll’s collection at the Retromobile show in Paris, 2018, as seen in the photograph below.  I have been told by Tony Berni, global authority on Abarth and proprietor of Berni Motori, Maleo, Italy, that in the autumn of 2022, Moll sold his entire collection and it is now relocated in Japan.

 

As for the car, there is better news to report.  A BMW M73-engined replica was built by Hansi Marz in association with Udo Siekmann of Scuderia Gemini Corse and run at the Berni Motori track day held at Autodromo di Varano de’ Melegari in June 2017.  The car can be seen on the circuit here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzKN0_ep5Gk.  It also featured in a Petrolicious article https://petrolicious.com/articles/the-abarth-historic-track-day-showcases-the-best-of-the-beloved-brand-from-bologna which included the photograph seen below:

 

It is quite commonplace to read critical comment about both the decision to embark upon the T140 project and the subsequent abrupt cancellation.  But it is not hard to see that the situation came about because both Abarth and the FIA planned and operated at the time with unusually well preserved secrecy.  What is less well known is that Abarth was not the only marque in that era which started a highly ambitious sport prototype project which came to nothing.  This was the aspiration of Dr Alfredo Belponer.  In the early Sixties he determined to create a new scuderia to support the activities of amateur racing drivers in and around his hometown of Brescia.  Establishment – and formal recognition – of Scuderia Brescia Corse became possible in late 1964 when Carlo Abarth agreed to support the team’s registration with the sporting authorities.  The Scuderia was soon successful, primarily in sports car events, and by 1967 was running a GT40 at Le Mans.  But Belponer had the ambition and wealth to go further, and he asked Bertone to create a Group 6 prototype.  The Carrozzeria obliged with a design named ‘Panther’ and it was unveiled in Turin and Geneva in Spring 1968.  More information about the Panther is available; here: https://supercarnostalgia.com/blog/bertone-panther

 

Scuderia Brescia Corse intended to order several Panthers and use them in an extensive international endurance racing campaign.  However, what Bertone could not do was produce suitable motive power for the car.  Belponer entered into discussions with BRM, seeking a supply of the Bourne-made F1 3.0 V12s, modified with durability rather than peak power, in mind.  When negotiations stumbled, he switched his quest to Maserati, but there too, no deal could be finalised.  As a result, just as with the T140, after much earnest effort, considerable expenditure and enthusiastic activity, the project just quietly expired.  The Panther is seen below:

 

I can’t help but wonder – how well would a Panther have gone with a short stroke, 5.0 Tipo 240 engine behind the driver’s seat!