The sport loses one of the great ones.
Reprinted from the Unlimited NewsJournal, June 2023
Only a small handful of people are among those who have had a transcendent influence on the sport of unlimited hydroplane racing. Gar Wood would certainly be a member of that elite group, as would Bill Muncey, Ted Jones, and Bernie Little. Another in that category is Jim Lucero, who not only served as the crew chief for many of the top race teams during the 1970s, ‘80s, and into the mid-’90s—Pay ‘n Pak, Atlas Van Lines, Miller American, Winston Eagle—but also was at the center of such innovations as wings, cabover hulls, enclosed cockpits, and turbine power.
 |
| Jim Lucero |
Jim Lucero passed away at a hospital in Federal Way, Washington, on April 29. Born in Bremerton, Washington, on May 29, 1945, he was a month shy of his 78th birthday. Though he is best known for his career in boat racing, he was so much more than that. He loved his family deeply and left behind his wife, Judy, and two daughters, Jennifer and Kristine.
But it was his involvement with the fastest of race boats that we now honor. During his career in unlimited hydroplane racing, Lucero was credited with 69 race victories, including 10 Gold Cups, and led his race teams to eight national championships. He was inducted into the Hydroplane Hall of Fame in 1980.
The Unlimited NewsJournal interviewed Lucero many times, both in a formal question-and-answer format and to get background for various purposes over the years. The first of those formal interviews came in 1974, when Lucero was only 27 years old. While much of his success in the sport had yet to happen, he was already standing at the pinnacle of success when he sat down with Dave Speer and Bill Osborne of the NewsJournal staff. This interview was first published in the November and December 1974 issues of this publication.
 |
Jim Lucero’s first involvement with Unlimited racing came
on the crew of Notre Dame. |
UNJ: What was your first Unlimited thing?
Lucero: It was strictly an accidental thing. I happened to be working nights and the Notre Dame crew needed part time help to wash engine parts. I thought it looked like a fun deal. I started working for them when Rex Manchester was driving.
Had you ever done any limited racing?
Never. Never even been to a limited race. I was an avid fan of the Unlimiteds for years, although I was beginning to lose a little interest by that time.
Was the Notre Dame camp typical of Notre Dame camps? A loose camp?
The first year I was with them was when Rex was driving, and it wasn’t. Rex was the boss, and it was very obvious he was the boss. He had all the say-so and everything and it showed in the way the boat ran. That boat probably ran as well as any Notre Dame ever did, I think, because we all knew where we stood.
When you look back on that first experience with the Notre Dame, what did you get out of it? Did ideas start formulating?
Yes. Very definitely. Particularly on the hulls. At that time we had crashed a few boats and it was clearly obvious that there was a lot of work to be done. My Notre Dame experience taught me more about engines and being careful about general maintenance than anything else. I really didn’t get into the design aspects of boats until I started working on the Smirnoff.
 |
| Tony Bugeja Collection |
So, that was your next stop? Working with Lee Schoenith on his radical new hull in 1968.
I worked on the boat for a year in all, and I guess I was the crew chief. At least that’s what I was called sometimes. Until it came to the decision-making part, and Lee made the decisions, which were usually wrong.
So, when you were with the Smirnoff, you started getting involved with the hull set-up?
I was hired primarily as an engine guy because they had just switched over to Merlins. But, I worked very closely with Dick Brantsner, who designed the Smirnoff, and learned a lot about just basic hull design. Brantsner is the guy who built the fuel-injected Allison for Gale the year before. He’s been involved in I don’t know how many things. Presently, he works as director of research and development for Lionel trains.
So, it was an entire new team?
Right. In fact that was the year Dean Chenoweth was a rookie. Freddy Dube did the constructing on it. Brantsner didn’t have too much to say about how the boat was constructed, which was unfortunate because the boat probably would’ve turned out a lot lighter if he had. But it was Dick’s design—no question about it.
Was it just overbuilt? Maybe it was in reaction to the new idea, the wind-tunnel shape, the pickle-fork, and all that?
Well, it was over reaction. See, the year before [actually in 1966] the old Smirnoff had dumped and Chuck Thompson was killed in it, and it had really worked over their heads. They felt the construction was too light and went way the other way until it was so heavy that you could drop it off the Empire State Building and it wouldn’t come unstuck.
What kind of things was Brantsner trying to do with the boat? What did it do?
He was trying to make the boat aerodynamically stable. Unfortunately, it was too stable. So stable it wouldn’t get free. It just wouldn’t break loose from the water and go fast. Mechanically the boat ran well, but whenever we ran into any slop, the boat would fall into the holes because it didn’t have enough aerodynamic support. After a while we decided to close off the aerodynamic venting and get the thing to cushion itself on the water. We got it to stabilize a bit. From there we tried other things.
 |
Lucero’s next stop was with Bob Fendler’s race team and
the U-19 Atlas
Van Lines. |
That obviously took you one step further.
From there I went to work for Bob Fendler on the Atlas U-19. And that boat had some very definite handling problems. Fortunately, I got a chance to learn and try some of my ideas on the boat. The boat was horrendously bad on the straightaway. God, it was 13 years old or so. It could not run over 130 mph without being dangerous. We got the boat to run 165–170, maybe, in the straight. And do it very nicely.
How did you accomplish that?
We made sponson changes. We also made some propeller changes. We worked on that area quite hard.
Then you stuck it out with Fendler a while longer?
Yeah, I stayed with him during the winter. Then at the end of that season we decided to build a new boat and go to automotive power. Building the new boat was probably a smart idea, but going to the auto power was probably a horrible mistake. That was the U-29.
 |
Fendler’s team introduced a new Atlas Van Lines in 1970
that was
powered by twin Chrysler Hemi engines. |
A lot of people share the common conception that the hull was designed and built by Fred Wickens.
No. It definitely was not. Dick Brantsner and I designed it. Primarily, I did. In fact we designed it at the Lionel factory at Hillside, New Jersey. Actually, the crew, the U-29 crew, built the boat. Fred was down there every day, right in there with us, and he advised us on a lot of things because he had more experience than all of us putting together in building boats. So, he was invaluable in that respect.
What were the things you were trying to make happen that weren’t happening on the other boats?
We were trying to improve the turning capabilities of the boat. The name of the game in boat racing, as in any other kind of racing, is to make up the time in the slowest part of the course. And, it was obvious the boats were really pigs around the turns. And, I mean really pigs. The boats that were running fast—like the Bardahl or Miss Budweiser—were doing good in the turns. But the others were just horrible.
Technically, or design-wise, how did you try to execute this idea?
Basically, we tried to move the aerodynamic center of lift closer to the center of gravity, which meant moving the break in the bottom further back. And, we used wide sponsons. We didn’t move the center of gravity too far back, it was back about 25 inches or so, maybe 30. That proved to be too far back, although the boat turned well. The engines [twin Chrysler Hemis] were a disaster. I think we made three races before I quit.
Now, own up to this: Who decided to put the engines in?
Well, I was a good part of it. Myself and Keith Newton. They looked like they could cut the program, and we decided that was the thing to do. They looked like the wave of the future
The engines just couldn’t last.
Oh yeah. We couldn’t make an engine last more than a few laps. We were working on such a limited budget that we couldn’t do the right things. Chryslers are not cheap. That’s what bit us basically. And, we were trying to do everything ourselves. Heck, we built the boat, built the trailer, and did all the engine work ourselves. It was just too much. There was too much pressure. Towards the end we were working 24-hour shots, three or four times a week, and the whole thing dissolved.
In terms of the boat’s potential, you were not unhappy?
In fact, I was very pleased with it. It had some problems on the straightaway. It was pretty goosey, but I think that could’ve been cured pretty easily. But it turned excellently. It was probably the best turning boat on the circuit, I think. We couldn’t turn over 120 on the straights and we were still turning 95 to 100 laps.
 |
When Lucero joined the Pay ‘n Pak crew in 1970, his first assignment
was to
oversee the operation for Pay ’n Pak ‘Lil Buzzard. |
What was the next step?
I went to work with Pay ‘n Pak.
What first drew you to the team? Was it that you felt that maybe you were going to get another chance to express ideas? Was it that you felt Dave Heerensperger would be committed to spending the money to do the job?
OK. There were several things. One, was that there were several close friends of mine—Dwight Thorne, Dixon Smith, David Smith—working on the boat. People that I respected a lot. That was a great starting point. Also, it was obvious that Dave was willing to spend the money to make the boats right. That takes the financial pressure off of you, and I don’t care how you look at it, that’s a gigantic amount of pressure on a guy. If you’re conscientious at all you’re going to be looking at that to make sure you’re doing the right thing for the guy you’re working for. If he can’t afford to spend a thousand dollars for a particular thing, you’ll try to find some other way around it.
Would it be fair to say that was really the first time you didn’t feel that type of pressure?
Oh no. I didn’t feel the pressure with the Notre Dame. There was money to burn. But there was a distinct lack of talent and organization on that thing, too.
When you first went with Pak, what was your responsibility?
We were running both boats at that time. The Chrysler-powered boat and ‘Lil Buzzard. Dwight Thorne was kind of overall crew chief, and I was given the responsibility to sort of chief the Buzzard. It didn’t work out that way because we were all pretty much equals on the boat. Everybody had his area of responsibility.
Since it was a conventional-type hull, not innovative in any way, you were in sense taking a step backward?
Yes. Very definitely. It was obvious to me the Chrysler boat had, at least the hull had, considerably more potential than the ‘Lil Buzzard did. The ‘Lil Buzzard ran well, in fact it ran much better than it had any right to. In fact, that hull won one race that year and should’ve won a couple more. When Tommy [Fults] got killed in it, the boat was riding better than it had ever ridden before—but it was a very fluke deal.
Was the Buzzard pretty well set up when you got to it?
Oh no. No, it was a very bad-riding hull. We did a lot of things to it, and we talked a lot about it. I was working with very capable people, and I just couldn’t say “this and that” will work and we’d do it. We had to talk about it, and I had to prove myself right, or at least convince them that’s what should be done.
Try to give me an idea of the thought process involved in setting up a hull. Is it a matter of little steps? What is it?
You have to observe the boat. It’s really a trial and error deal. You set the boat up initially thinking that, well, these things should be right. But, it’s like test flying an airplane. There’s going to be little things that come up that you just don’t have any way of knowing about until you run. In boats it’s even worse because there is less science involved. Less known about what things really should be.
The people must play an important role, as well?
Very definitely. There’s a real problem in boat racing. Well, there’s a distinct lack of the kind of people in boat racing that have the capability to do what needs to be done to make the boats right. Just because it doesn’t pay well enough. It’s obvious that an aerodynamic or hydrodynamic engineer isn’t going to work for peanuts. I just happen to be lucky enough to have come up with, through trial and error, some things that will help the boat. But, that’s the only reason. It isn’t because I’m so much smarter than anyone else I’ve been reasonably successful.
 |
Pride of Pay ‘n Pak appeared in 1970
as a cabover powered by
twin Chrysler Hemi engines. |
While you worked on the ‘Lil Buzzard, did you have anything to do with the cabover hull?
I tried to stay completely away from that when I first went to work for Dave. I thought that I should stay away from it because it was Ron Jones’s thing. He did design it and I felt he wanted to work it out his way. He and I had some different ideas on things. Also, it was a Chrysler project—it was his design and he knew more about it than I did.
What did you feel he was trying to do with the boat? How did that work into your ideas for the boat?
Well, he and I were basically trying to achieve the same goals: Make the boat turn well. But we were going about it differently. We had different cures in mind. I like to work with the sponsons a lot because I feel there’s a lot to be improved there. They did a lot of work with props because Ron feels there’s a lot to be improved there. And he’s right. I felt there was too much weight on the propeller for the way the boat was reacting—there may have been, there may not have been. I don’t know.
With the cabover Pay ‘n Pak, was the center of balance back like the boats now, or had Ron gone that far?
It started out way back and then it moved forward. The longer we had the boat the farther the c.g. moved forward.
How did you become crew chief? And, how do you go about convincing somebody to turn their boat around so drastically?
Well, I was basically the only one left, kind of. But before that, David had offered me the job. After Seattle, we decided to give the Chryslers one more chance—which was San Diego. They did a good job for us, but they were horribly expensive and, for us, very maintenance high. Instead of spending time working out the boat, we were spending time trying to keep the engines running. So, at that time we decided, well we’ve got all these Merlins, we know they can run reliably, and we know they make a lot of horsepower. We decided to switch it to Merlin power at that point in time. And, the way the boat was set-up, we could not possibly put a Rolls in the boat and keep the engine in the front.
 |
During the offseason, Lucero was
instrumental in converting the boat to
Merlin power with the driver behind the engine. |
The engines dictated the change more than the change dictated the engine.
Yes. Although, that’s the way I wanted it, anyway. So, it was very fortunate that it worked out that way
You don’t care where the cockpit is as long as the boat goes?
Not really. I feel it is somewhat safer to be in the back than in the front. The driver takes more of a beating. But to me, I don’t care. It’s not worth it to end up losing a driver by having him sit in the front. If the boat noses in, he’ll be pitched out instead of going down with the boat. If he feels comfortable in the front, we’ll put him there. The visibility is great up there. But, then again, George [Henley] hasn’t complained about visibility in our boat.
After the ’73 Gold Cup, was there a feeling that you wished you hadn’t sold the boat to Budweiser?
Oh, no. There were three different ways to look at it. One, we got a very fair price for the old boat. In fact, a darn high price. Granted it was an excellent-running boat. And, we also felt we could build something faster, and I think we pretty well proved that. I think that Bernie Little would’ve quit the sport if he hadn’t gotten a competitive-running hull, and I don’t think the sport can afford to lose him. He’s a colorful guy.
 |
Jim Lucero is perhaps best known for his role creating the
“Winged Wonder” Pay ‘n Pak in 1973. Photo by Randy Hall. |
When it came time for the new boat, who was the person to say what it would look like? What was Heerensperger’s role in the design? What did you say?
I’d say Dixon and myself because that’s all there was then. We knew what we wanted—a boat that ran like the old one but was 800 pounds lighter. That’s where the honeycomb stuff came up. Dave gave us a very free hand.
Whose idea was that?
Dixon’s and myself. We did all the research, talked with the Hexcel people, came up with the design specs for what we needed—the whole works. Fortunately, it worked. Generally speaking, we all worked together enough to know that when we want to do something we’d better have a good reason for it.
What was Ron Jones’s reaction when you went to him with this idea?
Well, I’d say he was less than enthusiastic about it. Ron is an independent guy and he’s got a lot of pride. It was basically his own design—basically the same thing as the old boat. People don’t like other people coming into their field of expertise and telling them what to do.
The shell was his design, but did the sponsons bear any resemblance?
No. They were pretty different. We’ve got some different ideas about how a hull should be set up. The old boat was set up my way and it worked successfully. So I naturally thought justified in calling the shots on the new hull.
Did he try to talk you into full length air traps?
Oh, we talked about it. I think the discussion went something like, “Do you want full air traps?” I said, “No.” He said, “OK.”
What about the wing?
I think the wing is an excellent safety device, but I don’t think it is absolutely necessary to the performance of the boat. As is evidenced by the Budweiser, and that boat runs pretty well without one. We can make minor changes in its performance by tuning the wing some. In fact, Dave Heerensperger had as much to do with that as anybody. He insisted on having a wing on the boat.
Is that right?
David was thinking of it from a publicity standpoint.
 |
| Lucero with Pay ‘n Pak driver George Henley. |
Is there anything the present U-1 cannot do that you wish it could do?
I think that the boat isn’t quite as efficient in the straightaways as it should be. It’s pretty good in the turns, in fact probably better than anything else running right now. But I think we can improve the straightaway characteristics. By the way, on the wing, every time I turn around, I read some article that the Craig Breedlove Speed Team, whatever the heck that is, designed the wing. I’ve never met Craig Breedlove. He didn’t have an ounce of anything to do with this boat. I’d like to dispel that right now.
What are you doing to a Rolls now, that you weren’t doing in 1970?
Today we try to take it easier on the engine. We try to make the boat work better so that the engine doesn’t have to work so hard. That’s why we sold the old boat. We knew it took a lot of horsepower to push it. They’ll probably get upset with me saying it, but the boat has never gone as fast since we sold it. We can make the new boat go that fast and kind of stroke it.
Have you reached that point where it is harder to get more out of your engines? Now, is it going to be a further perfecting of the hull?
No. I think we can get more horsepower, and the way to do that is the way the Allison guys are doing it—take the load off the engine. It’s just a question of going about things in the right manner. This year we haven’t needed it but in the future we may.
If you were to go to turbocharging, would you go to an Allison?
If we were to, and right now we don’t have any plans to, we’d turbo a Merlin because it would be economically unfeasible for us to turbo an Allison. We’ve got a lot of Merlins left. We know what we can do with them. We feel we can make them competitive. To sell them wouldn’t make good business sense.
If you were given a free hand to design and build a new boat, what would you come up with?
About six months ago I had it pretty well formulated in my mind what I’d want to do. But after watching the new Jones boats, I’m not so sure. I think it would be somewhat along the lines of this boat. We’d make some structural changes because the honeycomb has worked out very well in some areas and in other areas it hasn’t worked out well at all.
Who selects your drivers?
David and I. The number one criterion is what kind of job they do out on the race course. But no matter how good a job they do on the course, if he presents a bad image for the company we can’t afford to hire him. We’ll sit down and talk about potential drivers, who’s available and who would do the best job for us.
You’ve often been critical of many drivers.
Well, one area where there is room for improvement is driving. I think there are too many drivers that are just seat-of-the-pants guys who don’t relate worth a damn to the crew. They come in and say the boat is “yacking,” or something like that. What the hell is a “yack”? Too many don’t approach their driving in a professional manner. To me, if a driver isn’t doing his thing on the course, he ought to be doing it on the beach—watching other drivers, mapping strategy, improving their skills. They feel that once they get the ride that all they need to do is jump in the boat and drive it. And that stinks. There’s too many of those guys around.
George is pretty good about this, isn’t he?
Yes. He thinks a lot about what’s going on out there. Early in the season George had some troubles with the boat. He’ll admit this. He was either going into the turn too fast, too slow, or in the wrong lane. We were able to help him by showing him video tape of what was going on. I don’t know of anyone else who does this. When everything is right, I want him to go out there and drive the hell out of it. He thinks a lot about what’s going on. What he’s going to do. Many camps seem totally, or at least borderline, disorganized and they never get the same combination twice while testing.
Do you feel a lot of that going around?
Oh yes. Most of that stems from inexperience. I was the same way when I started boat racing, and I hope I’m not that way now. People just don’t have the background to do the things they need to do—and I don’t know where they can get it readily. We try to come up with accurate data on what we’ve done in the past, and why, so that we can judge for the future.
What about the sport itself?
We need to work harder to put on a good show. I can remember, a ways back, thinking this sport had about a year and a half to go because there were only six or eight boats, but God, about three races this year we’ve had 15 boats. That’s not bad. I don’t know if we can handle any more. We need more competitive boats, but I think that’ll come. Next year I look for probably seven competitive boats, whereas this year there’s been basically four, off and on.
How many races a year is too many?
I think that 10 races is plenty. I’d like to see 10 races with a little more prize money. And be more selective about the places to run. I don’t think driving across country is a big deal. It’s a little hard on the crews, but we can bear it. The most important thing is to get quality race sites. Detroit has had boat races for years and years and years, but I still think it is a crappy place to race. I don’t care what they say about Sand Point, there’s no way Sand Point can even come close to Detroit. On a good day Detroit is horrible.
What about the people that run the sport?
I’d like to see improvement made as far as technical and safety committees go. I don’t feel that the people in those areas are qualified from a practical point of view—to do the job they are doing. I think the sport has made a good move in hiring professionals to promote the sport. I would like to see them work harder at promoting the race sites. Not just getting a site, but helping people at the race to put it on. Muncey did an excellent job at San Diego—at least I assume he had a lot to do with it. And Gene Whipp did a bitching job at Dayton. We need more of that. I think we also need better press relations.
Maybe we’ll see a change soon?
I doubt it. The owners are a pretty tough group. All those guys, Lee and Bernie, and David. It would be pretty hard for anybody to tell those three, hey, this is the way it is going to be. Period! I don’t know if there’s anybody who can do that. Personally, I would like to see the format so that the winner of the final heat was the winner of the race. That’s easy for the fans to understand. I don’t know of a single type of race that isn’t that way.
Yet the Fan Plan, the way it worked this year, has been less than ideal.
Right. But I think you’ll find that the top running boats, no matter who they are, go out to win. Perhaps the answer is an elapsed-time thing? Look at what some of the other sports are doing. And make the qualifying mean something. That used to be a big deal. Now it’s nothing.
What about next year? What about your future?
As far as I can see I’ll be working for Pay ‘n Pak for a good long time. They’re good people to work for. I don’t anticipate any changes. If we do build another hull, it isn’t going to be an over-the-winter project because I want ample time to test.
What motivates you? What makes Jim Lucero tick?
I dig boat racing. I like to compete. I think this is one reason David and I get along so well—because he loves to compete. The whole company is like that. I like the people, too. I’ve found that I can compete well and satisfy my desire. On the other hand, the way I look at it, I’m earning my living doing this stuff and if I come up with something that gives our operation an advantage, there’s no way I’m going to let it leak out. That’s not the name of the game. The name of the game is for Pay ‘n Pak to win—not Budweiser or somebody else.
