Why were there multiple lamps on the rear of brass era racers?

[kfle]

Here is a picture of the rear of a 1911 Cole racer and it has 4 kerosene lamps.  I have also seen a few other period photos of racers and they show multiple lamps on the rear of the car.  Why did they have these multiple lamps on the rear of the cars even if the racer didnt have head lamps?

 

I am thinking safety with all of the dust in the air.  I have seen several restored or recreation brass era racing cars at shows lately and I don't see them having the lamps on the back as they typically just put a spare tire there.  

[1912Staver]

That's a new one to me. Very few early races took place at night . At racing speeds , on a typical course of the day I am sure a tail light would have an extremely short life span. Some sort of torture test ?

[Terry Bond]

Think about it - kicking up dust, blowing smoke and slinging oil were typical of these cars. The lighting at tracks wasn't good either. If you couldn't see the car in front of you it was a recipe for disaster.  In 1903 the infamous Paris to Madrid tace was halted because of the large number of serious accidents as cars slowed for turns, although some missed turns entirely and plowed through crowds of spectators.  Once the cars reached the city limits of Psris there were no more street lights, as poor as they were anyway.  A long period without rain quickly turned the route into a virtual dust-bowl.  The lead cars were better off but those caught in the mess following them had no way of knowing what dangers were in their path.  The result was one disaster after another.  One small tail lamp did little to warn the driver's behind.  Some cars had none at all.

 

Although those kerosene lamps did little to enhance safety, adding a few extras was at least a feel-good safety factor for some teams. 

 

Terry

Edited July 24 by Terry Bond (see edit history)

[ABear]

The lamps in the pix have two lenses, assuming one as red and one as clear.. See close up I have attached.

 

Could have been there for multiple reasons, lamps could be removed and placed on road some distance behind the disabled vehicle to warn others. Could have also doubled as a "trouble light" with the clear lens towards dark.

[Terry Bond]

The lights are really just standard tail lamps of the era. The larger clear lens was to illuminate the license plate. The red lens was to warn approaching vehicles there was a car ahead.  Sidelamps with  bail handle were more suitable to illuminate something like a tire being repaired along the roadside, or even to light your path should you need to walk to get gas or even back home when the car broke down.  They did sometimes serve multiple purposes. These on a race car though were just to warn others of a car ahead.

Terry

[JV Puleo]

Terry is spot on. Dust was a huge problem...even for cars on regular roads. In a race it was often fatal. Anything that would let a trailing car know you were there was a plus.

[keiser31]

Given the breakdown rate of those racecars, I would want as many taillights as possible.

Edited July 24 by keiser31 (see edit history)

[wayne sheldon]

So much history!

A good internet friend several years ago while researching Ford's model K history, found numerous articles published in 1907 stating that in the USA, the most popular style race was 24 hours on an oval track! Many such races were run around the country that year as well as years before and after. Exact rules varied over relief drivers and/or cars, but someone and something was being run almost the entire 24 hours! So, yes, they did race at night!

By the way, the model K Ford won fully its share of those races. Largely ignored by historians (many that liked to say the model K was a failure as a car when in fact by era standards it was one of the most successful of all automobiles of that era), in the years before the model T, Ford won a higher percentage of the races they entered than almost any other automaker of that era! Their total number of wins wasn't all that high, but they entered a small fraction of the number of races to begin with.

 

Why so many tail lamps? Visibility is certainly a major reason one way or another. "Another" way, is that between the curious ways of wind, and vibration, oil tail lamps weren't all that reliable. If twists in the wind at the back of a speeding car blowing out flames wasn't enough? Shaking and vibration could rattle the font and/or bowl loose and drop it onto the road behind! Either way, one may start out with four or five tail lamps lit on the back, and be grateful to have even one of them still lit twenty minutes later. And if one is driving? One likely will not know when one of the lamps, maybe even the last one, goes out. 

I imagine that a racing team's pit crew (on oval tracks) might flag their drivers in sometimes just to relight the tail lamps (may or may not have even been in the rules?). That could result in nearly another mile lost for the final count. Those 24 hour oval track races were who covered the most miles in the 24 hours, as measured by the number of laps completed. Even thirty seconds to slow down, enter the pits, relight the lamp(s), and then speed up back onto the track could cost nearly a mile! A bunch of lamps could mean fewer delays.

 

As for headlamps on those track races? I have read enough era articles and seen enough era photos of these races to know that some cars did not have headlamps on them (at least some of the time?), and some cars did have headlamps at least some of the time. It may have varied track to track or even race to race. I know at least some of the tracks were lit at night enough to stay on the track, and hopefully see and avoid other cars. However, the dust kicked up by cars could easily obscure that car enough that headlamps or track lights might not be enough! A lit tail lamp could give that needed one more second to avoid a collision. And again having read several era articles, collisions did happen, not always, but often enough.

 

Wonderful photos of those Cole racing cars!

[hook]

Most of those Neverouts were so bright that you needed to strike a match to see if they were lit!

[Steve Moskowitz]

This is a first for me, never seen any race car with a lamp set up remotely like this one.  Pretty cool but not sure I want the back end of my car lit up with kerosene lamps...if ever a fire suppression system would have been in order!!  Yikes. This may be one of the best (worst) safety items ever construed!  

[TAKerry]

Terry with all due respect, and I sincerely mean that knowing your knowledge on the history of the automobile. Your post seems completely plausible but is there any written fact or history to prove it? Likewise with Wayne, the first part of yours regarding the Ford seems to be written from articles with real figures attached but the second part seems more like conjecture. I can see these 'tail lights' as a safety device but in a timed endurance race it seems hard to believe that there would be that much importance placed upon them to stop a lap just to re-light them? I guess what I am asking 'is there any established/written proof of why these were there?' as opposed to an educated guess.

[Terry Bond]

Seriously doubt you'll ever uncover any written "proof." 

 

Today most of us think of racing as a well organized event held at a dedicated facility when in its early days, events were often held on city streets, country roads or even horse tracks that were unpaved. Remember that even the Indianapolis Speedway was not initially paved. 

 

IIt was often up to individual race teams to design and implement whatever innovations might help keep their cars going and improve the chance of winning. These are the innovations that helped push development of the automobile.

 

Don't assume just because the Cole team chose to use those lamps on that car at that event the idea became commonplace.  

 

If you doubt the explanations provided feel free to do your own research and share your findings with us.  Anxious to learn from what you discover.  Is it possible those were not lamps at all but were filled with lead to help add weight to the rear of the car?  

 

Terry 

Edited July 25 by Terry Bond (see edit history)

[hook]

44 minutes ago, Steve Moskowitz said:

This is a first for me, never seen any race car with a lamp set up remotely like this one.  Pretty cool but not sure I want the back end of my car lit up with kerosene lamps...if ever a fire suppression system would have been in order!!  Yikes. This may be one of the best (worst) safety items ever construed!  

Steve, you must remember that fire wasn't a problem for the driver. Without safety belts he had already left the scene of the crash before the fire started!!!

[1912Staver]

I expect many of those 24 hour events were reliability runs rather than what we think of as races.

[hook]

One other thought. They didn't trailer those cars to the track. They either had a garage at the track, or they drove them. So, just maybe they left them attached when they got to the track. Or, since their working on it, maybe they just haven't taken them off yet in their prep. It may have had temporary headlights too.

[Steve Moskowitz]

41 minutes ago, hook said:

Steve, you must remember that fire wasn't a problem for the driver. Without safety belts he had already left the scene of the crash before the fire started!!!

Hook I am just thinking of flammables in the back of a car could get the car on fire from even other things than a crash. Lots of vibration., possible hot exhaust, board tracks, etc.  I'd hate to be in a car that the rear end is catching on fire and maybe it would take too long to notice.   Tons of early drivers perished in their cars by fire despite the lack of seatbelts during crashes.  I do think you make an excellent post about towing to the track or driving....you might be on to something with that thought.  

[ABear]

16 hours ago, Terry Bond said:

The lights are really just standard tail lamps of the era. The larger clear lens was to illuminate the license plate. The red lens was to warn approaching vehicles there was a car ahead.

While you are correct that the lights are "tail lights" and that they do have a clear lens which would typically be used to illuminate a license plate, they still can be used for "other purposes" even though they do not have a "bail".

 

16 hours ago, Terry Bond said:

Sidelamps with  bail handle were more suitable to illuminate something like a tire being repaired along the roadside, or even to light your path should you need to walk to get gas or even back home when the car broke down.

While "sidelights" with a bail may be a bit more "universal" for multi use, don't discount the idea that even a tail light can be repurposed and used for other purposes like a side light. The E&J tail light I have does shine a fair amount of light through the clear lens (which in the case of my E&J, the clear lens is a Fresnel magnifying type, not a piece of clear glass) and if you were stranded somewhere can be still used to light your way as you walk. You wouldn't have a bail handle so you could simply hold the bottom of the oil pot with your hand..

 

Most oil pots even with a rounded ball shape typically still had a flat spot on the bottom which allows one to set the oil pot down to fill and when assembled the lamp will stay upright when lit.

 

Once again, not as ideal but when you are stranded in the middle of nowhere, any light would be very welcome as back then they didn't have "Iphones" to use as a flashlight.

 

Most tail lights were often very plain painted steel, unadorned and less expensive than most sidelights making them a cheap and easy item to use in case of loss or damage to the lights. Most sidelights were often more ornate and decorated with a lot of brass..

[hook]

10 minutes ago, Steve Moskowitz said:

Hook I am just thinking of flammables in the back of a car could get the car on fire from even other things than a crash. Lots of vibration., possible hot exhaust, board tracks, etc.  I'd hate to be in a car that the rear end is catching on fire and maybe it would take too long to notice.   Tons of early drivers perished in their cars by fire despite the lack of seatbelts during crashes.  I do think you make an excellent post about towing to the track or driving....you might be on to something with that thought.  

Oh, come on Steve, I was being facetious. However, concerning the use for getting to the track I believe is reasonable. On the dirt track there would be so much of a cloud of dust behind the car, the lights would be useless anyway and I seriously doubt they were lit.

[ABear]

46 minutes ago, hook said:

Oh, come on Steve, I was being facetious. However, concerning the use for getting to the track I believe is reasonable. On the dirt track there would be so much of a cloud of dust behind the car, the lights would be useless anyway and I seriously doubt they were lit.

Not every race in the early 1900's was done within the confinements of a defined round or oval dirt "track" as we know it like today's dirt track racing.

 

Many races back then were more like "endurance" type road races, and "roads" were a rather subjective name for anywhere there is a wagon trail.. As endurance races, they could be several hrs or even weeks of driving between towns and cities often with layover stops.