MSNZ Certificate of Description

[crunch]

Hi All;

The H&C Commission had one of our regular meetings today in Wellington. As a result of that I would like to gather opinion and feedback in the one place on COD's. Specifically as a Q&A type of arrangement. So if you have any questions to ask us regarding the system, or comments you wish to make...fire away. I would prefer questions as then I know what answers you seek, or what problems you have that need attention.
Cheers
Raymond Bennett
Chairman Historic & Classic Commission
Vice-President
MSNZ

[ERC]

Happy New Year Crunch!

Q: Why not a slimmed down CoD, specifically for standard or virtually standard cars, rather than the full, expensive multi page CoD?

Why? Leave the full CoD for true competition cars or ones with a history needing additional provenance or those seeking Appendix/Schedule K.

[Allan]

I agree with that in principal ERC but but who decides where the line is drawn between the two.

[crunch]

Happy New Year Crunch!

Q: Why not a slimmed down CoD, specifically for standard or virtually standard cars, rather than the full, expensive multi page CoD?

Why? Leave the full CoD for true competition cars or ones with a history needing additional provenance or those seeking Appendix/Schedule K.

Same to you Ray, although the new year just reminds me I'm getting older! :confused:
Thanks for reminding me of that Ray, I know you have mentioned it to me before. One of the topics the Commission has discussed was COD Application forms tailored individually to T&C and K, which is what you are suggesting? A couple of options have been developed and are in the early stages, but what do you think would be the main points that would be required for a T&C CoD?

[Oldfart]

Have you had a look at the VCC type logbook? The application is still somewhat wordy, but the actual logbook is succinct and accepted widely.

[ERC]

Basically Crunch, if a car is running the standard engine on standard carbs with standard interior and trim, standard bodywork, rear axle, brakes and gearbox, then it is a no brainer. As just about all tend to swap wheels anyway, maybe just a clarification on T & C rules regarding wheels and tyres would be sufficient.

Equally, as Arthur has pointed out before, even with an existing CoD, if a driver decides to develop the car, then a simple declaration as to a limited number of changes should be considered, rather than having to apply for a (paid) modification each time.

I think you are well aware of my thoughts regarding T & C.

Let's see how the discussion goes...

[nzeder]

Ok I am relatively new to all this stuff and as I am in the middle of building a car with the aim of gaining Schedule K and ultimately FIA HTP I have read the docs over and over again to ensure I am doing the right thing - and I have not submitted a COD application before

So question are

1. What is wrong with the COD process as it stands today that it needs to be changes?
2. As MSNZ has a connection to the FIA I can only assume MSNZ has copies of all the FIA homologation papers. Is this the case?
3. If the COD process needs to be reviewed why? It is because some cars have COD for a given configuration that is actually outside of the rules the car is meant to represent? (examples below)

Example - Not trying to pick on a given model but these are just a good example of how thing have been miss interrupted over the years causing issue with the COD and T&C (in particular) process as I see it. Ford Escorts with Forest Flares (bubble arches) - The Forest Flares were only approved for Catergory A, Group 2 under FIA Appendix J for the given period. Group 2 is for "Special Touring Cars". The rules are such that these "Special Tourning Cars" were to be based on "Series Production Touring Cars" but allowed for special body work, alteration to drive train, brakes etc all that had to be approved by the FIA and shown that a given production requirement was to be met within a 12 month production time frame in this case 1000 identical cars in 12months. Now T&C states "Standard Series Production Body work" so Forest Flares are not "Standard Series Production Body work". So this leads me to believe under T&C Forest Flares are not legal. A Ford Escort with Forest Flares therefore need to conform to Schedule K to be legal.

I think there is a bit of copying going on - someone build a car outside of T&C and somehow gets a COD back a few years ago. Then a new guy wants to build a car look at the first one and thinks - that is cool I will build mine the same - now you have 2 cars out side of the rules, then another shows up etc.

I found on the internet a number of regs in different countries for their H&C rules and they have allowed mods for a given car under the rules - sure not all cars are listed but common cars have a sheet of paper that states what is allowed and what is not based on the rules and what has been proven to be used in period and what they therefore deem legal. Even the FIA have these model specific statements in Appendix K example Ford Escorts RS2000 = 13" rims but Ford Escort RS1600/1800 15" rims. So why can't there be a published list like this here in NZ? For a change in this spec sheet there must be good evidence backed up with real facts that cars ran in period with said specs. This would make building a car to the rules easier if there is a clear line in the sand so to speak.

If someone want to attempt to build a car outside of the rule or spec sheet then there should be a process of approval before $$ are invested in sourcing parts/undertaking the build/changes/alteration. Currently this is done after the fact - ie take me for example I am building my car to FIA Appendix J (other than safety items, ie cages, seats etc which under FIA/MSNZ is allowed and cages must conform to the current standards for new builds so don't have issues with that) I have spent years researching, collection information, purchasing parts catelogs, period books or books with period photos/info in them all to help me learn about how the car should be built. But I must build it first then apply for COD using this evidence I have collated over the years to prove this is how it was and how it should be.

Is this not backwards? Should I not state up front what I indeed to do show the evidence to MSNZ or H&C Commission - whoever has the say if yes legal or illegal try again? Before I start a build? Like I say as it stands today - you build a car then apply for the COD - backwards if you ask me. Sure it would make sense to have approval before $$ spent on purchasing parts etc If such a process does exist why don't we know about it? It is not well known or even documented in the MSNZ manual etc.


Now if someone was to follow me (they should not just copy see point above) do they also have to do all the research/collecting of books and other rare and hard to find info about the same make and model? If the evidence given is solid and proves that a make/model ran in that spec as one (not picking and choosing some items from Group 1 approval and some from Group 2 or even a Group 5 car that ran in period - ie you pick the spec aka RS2000 therefore 13" must be used you can't use 15" just because an Escort ran 15" rims that is true but not a RS2000 and the car is trying to represent an RS2000) then this approved spec should be available to others? I know others might see it differently - I spent X years doing all this research in my spare time....no one should just get that handed to them...fair enough I understand that - however if you have spent all that time and money to get a car correct then someone builds a car outside of the period spec and is allowed to run then you should have allowed that info to be shared (don't have to share the evidence just the approved spec sheet) and not complain about the other guy.

Just ideas all this above please tell me keep my trap shut or I am way of base with this train of thought.

So keeping this spec sheet in mind again given I have been talking about Ford Escorts here is an example of the SVRA spec sheet for Ford Escorts in PDF format. It is clear, easy to follow and point you to other specs should you choice follow that path aka FIA Group 2

[crunch]

Ok I am relatively new to all this stuff and as I am in the middle of building a car with the aim of gaining Schedule K and ultimately FIA HTP I have read the docs over and over again to ensure I am doing the right thing - and I have not submitted a COD application before

So question are

1. What is wrong with the COD process as it stands today that it needs to be changes?
2. As MSNZ has a connection to the FIA I can only assume MSNZ has copies of all the FIA homologation papers. Is this the case?
3. If the COD process needs to be reviewed why? It is because some cars have COD for a given configuration that is actually outside of the rules the car is meant to represent? (examples below)

Example - Not trying to pick on a given model but these are just a good example of how thing have been miss interrupted over the years causing issue with the COD and T&C (in particular) process as I see it. Ford Escorts with Forest Flares (bubble arches) - The Forest Flares were only approved for Catergory A, Group 2 under FIA Appendix J for the given period. Group 2 is for "Special Touring Cars". The rules are such that these "Special Tourning Cars" were to be based on "Series Production Touring Cars" but allowed for special body work, alteration to drive train, brakes etc all that had to be approved by the FIA and shown that a given production requirement was to be met within a 12 month production time frame in this case 1000 identical cars in 12months. Now T&C states "Standard Series Production Body work" so Forest Flares are not "Standard Series Production Body work". So this leads me to believe under T&C Forest Flares are not legal. A Ford Escort with Forest Flares therefore need to conform to Schedule K to be legal.

I think there is a bit of copying going on - someone build a car outside of T&C and somehow gets a COD back a few years ago. Then a new guy wants to build a car look at the first one and thinks - that is cool I will build mine the same - now you have 2 cars out side of the rules, then another shows up etc.

I found on the internet a number of regs in different countries for their H&C rules and they have allowed mods for a given car under the rules - sure not all cars are listed but common cars have a sheet of paper that states what is allowed and what is not based on the rules and what has been proven to be used in period and what they therefore deem legal. Even the FIA have these model specific statements in Appendix K example Ford Escorts RS2000 = 13" rims but Ford Escort RS1600/1800 15" rims. So why can't there be a published list like this here in NZ? For a change in this spec sheet there must be good evidence backed up with real facts that cars ran in period with said specs. This would make building a car to the rules easier if there is a clear line in the sand so to speak.

If someone want to attempt to build a car outside of the rule or spec sheet then there should be a process of approval before $$ are invested in sourcing parts/undertaking the build/changes/alteration. Currently this is done after the fact - ie take me for example I am building my car to FIA Appendix J (other than safety items, ie cages, seats etc which under FIA/MSNZ is allowed and cages must conform to the current standards for new builds so don't have issues with that) I have spent years researching, collection information, purchasing parts catelogs, period books or books with period photos/info in them all to help me learn about how the car should be built. But I must build it first then apply for COD using this evidence I have collated over the years to prove this is how it was and how it should be.

Is this not backwards? Should I not state up front what I indeed to do show the evidence to MSNZ or H&C Commission - whoever has the say if yes legal or illegal try again? Before I start a build? Like I say as it stands today - you build a car then apply for the COD - backwards if you ask me. Sure it would make sense to have approval before $$ spent on purchasing parts etc If such a process does exist why don't we know about it? It is not well known or even documented in the MSNZ manual etc.


Now if someone was to follow me (they should not just copy see point above) do they also have to do all the research/collecting of books and other rare and hard to find info about the same make and model? If the evidence given is solid and proves that a make/model ran in that spec as one (not picking and choosing some items from Group 1 approval and some from Group 2 or even a Group 5 car that ran in period - ie you pick the spec aka RS2000 therefore 13" must be used you can't use 15" just because an Escort ran 15" rims that is true but not a RS2000 and the car is trying to represent an RS2000) then this approved spec should be available to others? I know others might see it differently - I spent X years doing all this research in my spare time....no one should just get that handed to them...fair enough I understand that - however if you have spent all that time and money to get a car correct then someone builds a car outside of the period spec and is allowed to run then you should have allowed that info to be shared (don't have to share the evidence just the approved spec sheet) and not complain about the other guy.

Just ideas all this above please tell me keep my trap shut or I am way of base with this train of thought.

So keeping this spec sheet in mind again given I have been talking about Ford Escorts here is an example of the SVRA spec sheet for Ford Escorts in PDF format. It is clear, easy to follow and point you to other specs should you choice follow that path aka FIA Group 2


Hey,

No...please don't keep your trap shut. All good points and some good questions.
Can I ask where you sourced that document from? Sometimes we are given documents as proof that " a vehicle competed with this spoiler in Namibia in 1973" but there is no source noted for the document. So a lesson there is when you provide the document for history purposes, please make clear where it was sourced from.

You have picked the obvious example of a vehicle that has been misrepresented over the years for these types of certifications, including in New Zealand. In Europe, Ford Escorts are a nightmare when they are trying to tidy up their historic racing. FIA App J or Schedule K in NZ should be easy enough to complete and approve as the rules are fairly clear. The MSNZ office has in paper or electronic form all homologations for all vehicles that the FIA have ever issued. They are available (at a cost) and would probably be a good place to start.
T&C is a different beast all together. It was a Schedule designed to catch most-if-not-all-other-cars racing in H&C meetings in NZ in the 80's when the COD process started. And yes; it was copied off the VIC from VCC, but was felt that lacked detail. I think Ray mentioned an important point regarding wheel and tyre size being notated on the VIC, and we agree this is very important.

Another line of thinking you introduced was what do we do with COD's that have been issued incorrectly in the past? Indeed...what should the sport do? If it was solely to ensure the system is perfect, the sport should recall all those COD's, refund the application fee and start again. Is that practical?

I'm sure others have points to make from your post as it goes to the heart of what the system is for. If it is to be used in the future for race classifications and to provide an even-playing-field for competition, then what you have outlined are interwoven within this very fabric.
Thanks

[nzeder]

Sure I got the PDF from here

http://www.svra.com/make-model-regulations/

SVRA is Sportcar Vintage Racing Association of USA the only national organisation for Vintage Racing in America.

On their website they have the following statement under the rules/car info section.


"These rules are general in nature and may not apply to every car accepted by SVRA. It is not possible for SVRA to publish rules that accurately define the period authenticity for all eligible cars.

It is therefore the responsibility of each competitor to research the proper period specification for his car, and to present it as such. Supplemental Regulations (Spec Sheet) are published for most Makes & Models and they give specific details on permitted options and modifications. The (Spec Sheet) are to be used in conjunction with the General Rules and Regulations (GRR). When in conflict the (Spec Sheet) takes precedence. The Group Supplemental Regulations (GSR) for each Race Group contains details that apply to that group only and these should also be considered when preparing a car.

Proof of any unusual specification or configuration is the responsibility of the competitor. Updating or backdating within a recognized model (body type) production span is allowed as long as it does not conflict with the group eligibility time period. Continuation cars may be accepted, but they must be backdated to the eligibility period.
These are the resources and regulations that will help you prepare your car to compete with the SVRA:"

Then the sites lists the rules and resources/regulations and links to the make/model spec sheets.

To me this is great method of informing the competitors or those want to compete how a given car should be configured - it does not go into great detail of why these specs are listed on the make/model spec sheet - they are still allowing the competitors to do the research to back up their cars/builds but there is a clear line in the sand statement which is this one


When in conflict the (Spec Sheet) takes precedence

These spec sheet are compiled from know period specifications as raced in the USA under Production Car groups/rules back in the day + as shown in the Ford pdf above they also reference the FIA Groups for the given make/model.

[ERC]

At the risk of being a broken record, the need for substantial paperwork in support of an Appendix or Schedule K application is accepted. Equally, the existing CoD system for those cars is probably as robust as it needs to be.

The real question is then, apart from "K" cars;

Q: What is the real value of a CoD (not the perceived value of being able to compete elsewhere nor the level playing field mantra), given that two thirds of regular competitors in several established classes/series haven't even bought into the system?

Q: If those series are happy outside the CoD system or even outside T & C as it stands right now, even if only marginally, should those series change to be T & C compliant (eliminating a fair few cars), or, should the T & C rules better relate to the wishes of the competitors?

Q: If those series are outside the T & C regulations, does that then automatically mean that any car without a CoD, running in those series is of no concern whatever to the H & C Commission?

[nzeder]

Ray looking at your grids to be honest there are not too many cars that are outside of T&C anyway. I think you could safely say 99% of the AES grid are T&C compliant cars (a part from the use of Wilwoods - that is a matter of opinion it seems, to me if a car is to represent a 1973 config then Wilwood can't be fitted as they did not come to be until late 77 + most of the Wilwood fitted are 80+ designed so using different casting process/design elements - but if you played that card then 1-2% of cars that compete under T&C would be legal with all the others illegal)

In the Arrows grids the percentage goes up a fair bit but you can count all the cars on 2 or maybe just 1 hand.

Personally I like what SVRA and VARA in the USA have done - there are rules and car specs, you still have to prove the given mods but if there is any doubt the spec sheet trumps the parts in doubt. It is simple would be easy to admin and police - only time things would need a bit of effort is approving changes to the spec sheets - but if the info from all competitors on their changes outside of the spec sheets is collated by the same organisation aka MSNZ then if 3+ competitors show evidence that X part was used in period then this info can be used to update the spec sheets.

So to change the spec sheet aka blanket COD requires correct evidence if in doubt current spec sheet or top level rules apply - no arguments. It is then up to H&C Commission to Trust by Verify the evidence given before spec sheets are changed - if that means asking for more evidence to Verify correctly so be it other wise there is doubt = current spec sheet applies no questions.

Policing would be easy - random audits based on the spec sheets etc.

However all of this is ill-relevant if this is not what competitors want. Which is what the current COD process has shown if only 50% or less of the regular classic cars don't have them or have changed beyond what is listed in them. If people have not updated them then why? Is it the process and paperwork/costs involved?

So what is all the point then? In section 2 of the Appendix 6 of the MSNZ Manual states the following


The Historic and Classic Advisory Commission will provide:

(1) A framework of competition regulations for vehicles produced during the time period covered by the Commission’s brief being to:

(a) Provide to competitors and officials regulations that will be as clear and useable as practicable. They will provide stability in the regulations to allow competitors to build vehicles with the confidence that the vehicle, if built to comply with current regulations, will continue to comply in future years if it is not modified from its build specification.

(b) Endeavour to provide for vehicles to be able to retain as near as possible their original appearance, and where necessary retain the ability to be used as everyday cars.


I have highlighted one of the important bits of info in the rules.

So this is basically against what most competitors are doing right? People are improving their vehicles/changing them etc this is against what MSNZ and the H&C have stated in the rules above. So we have a major disconnect right there. People will always want to improve their cars, tweak this, that.

Either way there is a major disconnect between what is in the rules and what it seem competitors want or are doing - or is it just the fact that people have not read the rules? Having looked at other forums around the world we are not alone with these issues here in NZ.

[spinner32]

I think that you all are missing the point. What you all are saying is all very well if you are building a euro spec car. But what if the current owners of Miss Victorious, or the Algie Alfetta, or any other NZ built modified saloon wanted a COD, where do you find the spec sheet? How do you prove that the car has been returned to original specs?
I have a friend in this predicament. He built a RX3 for the SI Sports Saloon class around 1985. The car is still identical to the day he built it, but MSNZ has said that it is not eligible for a COD for some strange reason. If a car built 30 years ago, and hasn't been modified since isn't eligible for a COD, what NZ built modified saloon is?
And here in the SI, organisers are more worried about paying the bills than cars complying to rules, so accept anything that enters.

[Racer Rog]

As one who has been invited to sit on H & C Commission, and being at the last meeting where it was decided to front up on this forum, as we were having trouble getting our ideas and opinions published else where, it is very pleasing to see to dialogue that is springing forth ( or Fifth) I certainly welcome what is here so far, and nzeder has highlighted a lot of which has and is being discussed around the table, and if people took the same care attention to the detail that he is taking with his build, it would make the job of issuing a CoD easier, the line "not modified from its build specifications" is a good one, and creeping development is a concern to the Commission, and yes we are aware of vehicles out there that should not have a CoD, and should never have been issued with one in the first place, but its been done, lessons have been learned and the processes have evolved to try and stop it happening again. There have been some here that say development of race cars is a ongoing thing, but wait, we are racing cars of a period in time, and these cars are fixed in that period, and apart from safety equipment if its possible to fit, is where they shall remain, need big brakes, bullocks, race else where, what they had in the day did the job in the most part, so if it means you have to slow at 200 metres instead of the 50 metre board so be it, we are not racing for farms, or even a cow on a farm, so the mantra "As it was, so it shall be" should be adopted when doing a build do the research on what you intending to do, don't just rely on the word of someone else, the FIA web site has the Homologation papers for thousands of cars, even manufacturers catalogs can provide info.
These are some of my on opinions, but there would be some agreement at the table on some.
Roger

[nzeder]

I think that you all are missing the point. What you all are saying is all very well if you are building a euro spec car. But what if the current owners of Miss Victorious, or the Algie Alfetta, or any other NZ built modified saloon wanted a COD, where do you find the spec sheet? How do you prove that the car has been returned to original specs?
I have a friend in this predicament. He built a RX3 for the SI Sports Saloon class around 1985. The car is still identical to the day he built it, but MSNZ has said that it is not eligible for a COD for some strange reason. If a car built 30 years ago, and hasn't been modified since isn't eligible for a COD, what NZ built modified saloon is?
And here in the SI, organisers are more worried about paying the bills than cars complying to rules, so accept anything that enters.
True - you have to go back to the rules in which the car was built to in the day - now that is where you need MSNZ help. They should have an archive of the rules of the given class in which it ran. I think there are number of cars in this category, in shed around the country aka classless as it stands today.

[ERC]

Agree with Spinner32. The CoD system appears to be for straight forward cars, but dare I say it, effectively road or production cars or out and out single seaters.

Where the Commission has a major problem is with what to do with genuine older race cars or even cars built out of period bits and pieces.

We all abhor a modern sequential gearbox for example, as being well outside the spirit of the regs as pertaining to anything purporting to be a classic.

As noted in the other thread(s) there is a huge interest in older race saloons, but the CoD system doesn't really seem to cover modified saloons. You can however build a single seater out of period bits, but not a saloon, unless it was done in period, which seems either elitist, or at best, an anomoly.

I feel that maybe the commission needs to identify all the various groups of cars, then decide whether or not it wants to try and apply the CoD system to all groups, or whether there is a need for a separate body to deal with those of a more individualistic, less purist nature.

The truth is that a one size fits all approach, doesn't...

As Mike says, most of our cars probably do conform to T & C, but whilst organising clubs are willing to offer grids and whilst 95% of drivers are not going to venture outside their immediate area anyway, then a CoD is not seen as necessary by the majority.

If HRC suddenly shut the door on us, and TACCOC, then it might be a different story. But as we have a total of about 28 cars for what is the least popular weekend of the year at Taupo, (due to the timing, immediately before the Festival) then hopefully they won't shut the door on us.

[crunch]

I think that you all are missing the point. What you all are saying is all very well if you are building a euro spec car. But what if the current owners of Miss Victorious, or the Algie Alfetta, or any other NZ built modified saloon wanted a COD, where do you find the spec sheet? How do you prove that the car has been returned to original specs?
I have a friend in this predicament. He built a RX3 for the SI Sports Saloon class around 1985. The car is still identical to the day he built it, but MSNZ has said that it is not eligible for a COD for some strange reason. If a car built 30 years ago, and hasn't been modified since isn't eligible for a COD, what NZ built modified saloon is?
And here in the SI, organisers are more worried about paying the bills than cars complying to rules, so accept anything that enters.


Get him to ring me or PM me Spinner32.
He should have been given a reason why.
On the face of it; there is probably still a logbook in the system, and all he needs is proof it is the car.

[crunch]

Q: What is the real value of a CoD (not the perceived value of being able to compete elsewhere nor the level playing field mantra), given that two thirds of regular competitors in several established classes/series haven't even bought into the system?

Q: If those series are happy outside the CoD system or even outside T & C as it stands right now, even if only marginally, should those series change to be T & C compliant (eliminating a fair few cars), or, should the T & C rules better relate to the wishes of the competitors?

Q: If those series are outside the T & C regulations, does that then automatically mean that any car without a CoD, running in those series is of no concern whatever to the H & C Commission?

Good questions that would be good to see other people's thoughts. I can answer number 3 with a simple NO.

[Spgeti]

I think you guy's need to be commended come on to TRS to discuss this....weel done Crunch and Racer Rog.

For myself personally I want to see a level playing field so that I can race my Alfa 105 GTV anywhere in NZ and know that who I race with is period compliant.

Yes there will always be those that push the envelope but those within the system doing that are minimal.

Those series outside T&C who choose not to comply, that is there choice and for their members a risk that one day the door may close on them. That is the risk that they take.

[nzeder]

Q: What is the real value of a CoD (not the perceived value of being able to compete elsewhere nor the level playing field mantra), given that two thirds of regular competitors in several established classes/series haven't even bought into the system? Well the compete elsewhere does not wash - I say that as most Classic Meeting run with sup regs for given grids which usually are by invitation only - Even the FIA state that having a HTP does not guaranty acceptance or entry. Level playing field...that only applies if you are talking about same make/model cars - each car has it good/strong points and its weak points. So why else have a CoD - the only thing I can say to that is that point in time thing. This is how the car was built and the CoD is that point in time doc aka the reference to check the car for correctness against. So that is value - this car is what it say it is - if not then what??? Do we care??? The CoD as I see it the document that shows the car is period correct for the given era/period the car represents.


Q: If those series are happy outside the CoD system or even outside T & C as it stands right now, even if only marginally, should those series change to be T & C compliant (eliminating a fair few cars), or, should the T & C rules better relate to the wishes of the competitors? That is really good question. Should the cars fit the rules or the rules fit the cars? I think cars should fit the rules period. You don't go and play soccer and pickup the ball and run with it that is a different sport - the rules don't allow for it. So the rules don't fit a number of cars is that the rules fault?

I am playing the rules lawyer card here (I do love the cars that are outside of the rule they are well built and credit to the owners/fabricators/builders/Engineers etc). I have hard road to travel as most seem to not like the Datsun 240z/260z due to the Japanese thing so I know if I built a car outside of the rules there would be no grid for me to run in. So I want to ensure my car is compliant to the rules so if a grid denies me entry I know it is not due to non compliance it will be due to other reasons.

For most it would be minor changes fitting of original bumpers or steel body work (or get approval from H&C Commission to run alternate period correct material/replica parts if NLA, too rare to risk etc). It is those so far outside of the rules that will have issues - ie removal of replica Forest Flares from Escorts to comply with T&C rules. I think that is too big of an ask for some as it results in lots of changes, rims need to change, car needs to be painted again etc you are talking about $1000's worth of changes.

So now looking at the rules then what is the issue with the rules? Fitment of all external trim really?? Is that required?? In period most of the bright work was removed, manufactures even sold cars to the public minus trim for the purpose of racing the cars. Some of this trim is NLA we are talking classic cars here you can't go down the road and purchase replacements from the Ford dealer, or Austin dealer anymore you have to search the world for this stuff not just in NZ. So some of the T&C rules are bit crazy in that regard. So I think it is a bit of both needs to happen.

[ERC]

Fair points above. We no longer have cars on track that were regularly competing 20 years ago, as they are now too valuable to risk on the track (accidents will always happen). What we do NOT want in the classic area is any dilution of the very thing that sets us apart from modern racing - variety of make and model. If we insist on exceptionally tight rules (other than purist or K), then all that will happen long term, is that people will only be in a position to run very popular cars where the restoration or reproduction parts industry is vast and that by definition is only going to be popular makes and models previously produced in vast numbers.

One of the often overlooked points is the scarcity of original trim AND panels. NZeder is on the same hymn sheet as we are regarding trim. As long as the car is finished to a presentable standard, the absence of almost impossible to source trim is totally irrelevant.

The other issue of fibreglass panels whether they be arches or straight copies of originals, means that originals in good condition can be preserved - as they need to be.

As for rules, this is a red herring as the rules for sports that have a hundred year plus history are still changing and that includes major sports such as football, rugby and rugby league and even badminton. For those of us of a senior age, we remember when there was no such thing as substitutes in a soccer or rugby match. Those rules and several others have changed since I gave up playing soccer. There was a time when a soccer goalkeeper holding the ball, could be shoulder charged into the net. Why do the rules change?

Because very few rules are totally locked in concrete, as time marches on, the bigger picture is essential for the sport to survive. We are no different. (By that , I mean the ERC Series just as much as the T & C rules.) I understand some of the issues the commission has to deal with, but there comes a time when some tough decisions have to be made. By all means retain 100% pure cars as there will always be a place for them, but history will show quite clearly that the most interest is generated by the odd balls, the one offs, those where individuality came to the fore, not a load of identical clones.

Stamping out individuality is spitting into the face of the great Kiwi engineers of the past. Without it you wouldn't be raving about breadvan Anglias, Twin Cam A40's, the Lycoming special, the Zephyr Corvette, Morrari, Custaxie, V8 Starlets, rear engined V8 Marina. Alfetta and so on.

If this is far too complex for the Commission to cope with, then delegate, but the CoD system, or more correctly, the existing rules, are catering for a valid section of the fraternity but not all of it. If there are three or four different documents, so be it, but as alluded to above, possession of any piece of paper is worth diddly squat in an invitation series or an invitation meeting - and I have no problem with that at all.

[Spgeti]

I do agree with Ray and NZeder re exterior trim. Chrome work and bumpers are at times, dependent on the car, difficult to replace. Along with the rare cars which were plentiful once now are hardly ever seen.

[nzeder]

What we do NOT want in the classic area is any dilution of the very thing that sets us apart from modern racing - variety of make and model.So true - that is why I love classic racing - different makes/models from different countries all have a good blast on the track.

Rules do change seen the T&C rules change - once alternate materials were permitted if originals were rare/NLA then changed to read only factory spec body work...now changed again to allow alternate materials via approval from the H&C Commission. If someone is taking a long time to build a car like me (and it was 1/2 complete went I got it and that took 8 years to get to that point and I have had it for 2 years now) if I was going to T&C under those 2009-2012 era then I might have installed fiber glass panels only to come out the other side and find they were illegal....no legal again if approved via the Commission.

Update: Thinking about how the rules change over time this is why the CoD exist - is it not?

[crunch]

I do agree with Ray and NZeder re exterior trim. Chrome work and bumpers are at times, dependent on the car, difficult to replace. Along with the rare cars which were plentiful once now are hardly ever seen.


This is not a compulsory situation now.

[ERC]

Q: Can we classify "period modifications"?

Example - 1945 car, 1965 engine. By general agreement, that is then classified as a 1965 car, being the date of the latest major component. However, if we are running a series for pre 1977 cars, does 'period' then include items available pre 1977?

[RacerT]

Q: Can we classify "period modifications"?

Example - 1945 car, 1965 engine. By general agreement, that is then classified as a 1965 car, being the date of the latest major component. However, if we are running a series for pre 1977 cars, does 'period' then include items available pre 1977?

Hi ERC. the "period modification" pertains to the period of that particular car, not the T&C period end date. So a 1968 car can have proven "period modifications" applicable to 1968, not to the end of T & C group classification, which is ten years later at 31/12/1977.

[Kiwiboss]

This is just my quick take on all this!! We need to drop COD’s and T&C for modified Saloons, get rid of it completely. For anything that is a Saloon car it pretty much had a class or category to race in from 1960 upwards to 12/1977(FIA change in technology) in just about every country and mostly under FIA rules. Now different country’s ran their own class’s at the time, this mostly depended on their economies or import rules of each country!! after all from 1960 to 67 we had our fabulous All-Comers class then Group 2 FIA Saloons then group 5 and onwards and mostly they ran together as one class was phased out and the other bought in. For the real cars we need to recognise each of these, and the groups they ran in for “our own” country, not overseas as this is our own history! Remember im talking only the real cars here, EG: the real Fahey bread van Anglia should be recognised as the actual car and given the paperwork for the category it raced in at the time.

From here this is what we should do, all old original New Zealand race cars(not recent or other made up ones) no matter what should be categorized to the “actual” Motorsport NZ race series rules they ran in back in the day as I mention above, EG: A real “Shell Sport” Datsun that is rebuilt today should be restored accurately to that period and to those rules used with no modern parts fitted because after all “this is the real car”, now if someone built a Shell Sport car say 10 years later/or builds one today and fits modern parts then it is a “replica” and should not be recognised as real, it’s really just a club car. BUT, if he rebuilt it 100% to the old Shell Sport rules and is accurate in every way it should be categorized as a Schedule K car and carry the necessary paperwork to say so even though it isn’t a real car that raced in the day. The real cars should be Logbook to show that they are infact the REAL ones.

OK, that’s sort of covered the real and schedule K cars. For person wanting to build an old car today every single vehicle(mostly) needs its own rules and class to fit into as done overseas and should only be given a “logbook” to race when its passed tech inspection for each class its built for. Now, I know Ray(ERC)(god bless him) will come back to me and say what about a “Izetta thingame bob” that raced in Russia in 1961 because I want to build one, well I say sorry as there is enough makes and models or mainstream cars to satisfy most all and not every car can be catered for, it’s just the way life is. The aussies solved this by saying it must have raced in Australian only back in period, maybe we can use the same but as raced in NZ, Australia, USA, England period?

Now some of you will go holy shit but it is easy as the Aussies have done this for 30 years, Historic Saloons Group Na, Nb, Nc, SC(Sports cars) a & b and so on based on engine capacity and year, this way one can choose his weapon of choice, look up the rules(as the Aussies do on the CAMS historic and Classic website) go ahead and build an old race car using those rules, same as SVRA and VARA in the USA as Nezder has mentioned, and then you know you will be up against similar cars and not later built hot-rod type vehicles with modern components fitted and other cheater type cars because to start with they won’t get a category Logbook hence can’t race, problem solved.

Now this is just a broad prospective what I mention above and I could go on for ever and in great detail but I have to earn a living(don’t yar hate that) but this will require lots of behind the scenes work and won’t be perfect!! but we can learn by what the Aussies and other countries have done and make it better, why reinvent the wheel? EG: if one particular car you can’t get certain parts a rule can be made to as for its replacement for that “one” vehicle, can’t get original bumpers for a 1961 Mini we can allow fibreglass for instance). But if you all just want keep racing against over modified or cheater vehicles(EG: Escorts with YB engines or even just Forrest flares) then don’t whinge to the organisers or the commission if YOU won’t put your hand up and help or do something about it, put your ideas up here on the forum and lobby the shit out the H&C commission for instance(there you go Crunch, more work, LOL) and last of all none of this will work unless there are MSNZ H&C tech inspectors at events to keep check of the fleet, that’s important.

Also I don’t buy into the “I can’t afford this or that” as people will spend what they value to themselves so choose your weapon of choice, don’t choose an odd ball car that you can’t get parts for and turn around to the commission and argue for a rule change because you can’t get this or that or its too expensive, that’s only thinking about yourself. I’ve seen cars hand built from a “skid-mark” at untold expense because that’s what the owner wanted to do so anything can be done, evaluate your own financial position first and use common sense please.

Dale Mathers

[Oldfart]

"Period modifications" is such an open term, unless defined. Interpretations are like opinions, everyone has one and will argue endlessly about what it means (usually for their own ends).
Dale has very valid discussion in post #26.
In my opinion there are a lot of things that need to be nailed down, cars claiming to represent something should do so, warts and all. An example; If the brakes are inadequate compared to cars they wish to run with, well guess what, that is what the driver coped with "in the day". I do not believe upgrading brakes to be a safety issue, it is a performance modification allowing you to go deeper before braking, ergo faster lap times. If you get fade, tough, that's how it was. Suck it up.
How does this relate to log book or whatever documents the car has/needs? It is declared, and checked from time to time at an audit.

[Jac Mac]

Im gonna have to make an appointment with my doctor ( I hate that ), WHY, because I actually agree with 99% of what Dale has suggested.
Seriously the idea of having scruitineers/inspectors on the ground who actually really check stuff, both from a safety & eligibility point of view is long overdue, rather than do it on a MSNZ steward/fines etc basis, how about a 'scaled pink sticker' type setup with limited time to correct issues.

[paul lancaster]

Hi All;

The H&C Commission had one of our regular meetings today in Wellington. As a result of that I would like to gather opinion and feedback in the one place on COD's. Specifically as a Q&A type of arrangement. So if you have any questions to ask us regarding the system, or comments you wish to make...fire away. I would prefer questions as then I know what answers you seek, or what problems you have that need attention.
Cheers
Raymond Bennett
Chairman Historic & Classic Commission
Vice-President
MSNZ

Hi ray, I have tried to get and paid for, I might add, a c.o.d for a classic ff, there is alot of stuff, e.g block no, head, tyres, etc, also a section on history.as this car won the 1988 goldstar hillclimb championship, and is quoted in the manz book of winners, I thought that would have been suffice, but no more papers sent back to the point I have given up.too much crap involved, and anyways I guarantee half the ffs I have raced against arent your standard 711m crossflow engine, so what exactly is the point of a c.o.d?

[Frosty5]

Im gonna have to make an appointment with my doctor ( I hate that ), WHY, because I actually agree with 99% of what Dale has suggested.
Seriously the idea of having scruitineers/inspectors on the ground who actually really check stuff, both from a safety & eligibility point of view is long overdue, rather than do it on a MSNZ steward/fines etc basis, how about a 'scaled pink sticker' type setup with limited time to correct issues.

And that's precisely why HMC have 2 Auditors. JacMac, have refrained from making a Dr's appointment as what Dale has posted is the fundamental basis for HMC.
Cheers Dave Graham

[Ross Hollings]

WOW, would love to get back into the sport but after reading the above its enough to put you off.Spend time building up a car to your best knowledge and then have it rejected [!!!!!!!], why would you bother,then after you have saved up and bought a racecar to have it knocked back for some simple thing like brakes. Once raced a Bugeye Sprite fitted with a supercharger and running MG Midget disc brakes on the front........now it seems it would spend its time in the paddock arguing with officials.Where has the simple racing gone,wasent it the idea just to go out and enjoy the racing,winning although nice was not the that important.It seems to me that a small band of wantabe racers have spoilt it for others.A lot of these types are newbies and never did any motorsport back in the dim darks and now want to prove they are faster than the original owners of the cars they have recreated and over improved.

[Frosty5]

WOW, would love to get back into the sport but after reading the above its enough to put you off.Spend time building up a car to your best knowledge and then have it rejected [!!!!!!!], why would you bother,then after you have saved up and bought a racecar to have it knocked back for some simple thing like brakes. Once raced a Bugeye Sprite fitted with a supercharger and running MG Midget disc brakes on the front........now it seems it would spend its time in the paddock arguing with officials.Where has the simple racing gone,wasent it the idea just to go out and enjoy the racing,winning although nice was not the that important.It seems to me that a small band of wantabe racers have spoilt it for others.A lot of these types are newbies and never did any motorsport back in the dim darks and now want to prove they are faster than the original owners of the cars they have recreated and over improved.

Ross, you hit the nail fair and square on the head!!!

[Andrew Metford]

Firstly I’ll say I’m not terribly up with the play with intricacies of COD’s etc, as they were just starting to come in when I stopped racing. My brother has one for his car though.

I did started applying for one, but they told me I couldn’t have this part and that part, and some other things would need changing before they would give me a COD because some parts weren’t available in the year of my car ( despite them being in the Factory racing parts book ! ). The guy I bought the car from had raced it this way for a number of seasons, and I had also raced it for a season in the same spec, so to be told all of a sudden I have to change this that and the other in order to get a piece of paper that half the organisers say is optional anyway, seemed to be to be a huge waste of time and money for me. I didn’t bother changing anything, didn’t get a COD, and continued racing for a year before I went overseas.

I can semi understand what it’s trying to achieve, but I also feel it is a local version of an FIA Certificate. An NZ COD wouldn’t be recognized outside of NZ, but an FIA certificate will get me into all sorts of events the world over if I wanted to go that route. So when I can race here without a COD, why would I bother getting one? My car is not to FIA spec, because FIA spec is virtually stock standard and renders the car a mobile chicane for NZ domestic H&C racing, but it is built in the spirit of H&C racing ( no sequential / EFI / Wilwoods etc ) using period available parts, so unless it becomes worth while ( ie I can’t race anywhere without it ) I won’t be getting a COD. The next thing is if I do get a COD and then want to change something, and lets face it who doesn’t tune and tweak their race car over the years, the COD will be void and I’ll have to cough up more dollars for a change / amendment etc.

The race orgainsers by and large have cars in the correct groups according to car spec, most people know and are open about how far they have “hot-rodded” their car and know which groups will and won’t accept them, and as it has nothing to do with safety ( it’s not a logbook to be signed off every 3 meetings ), to me it seems to be a lot of work and money for basically no benefit.

Nzeder makes a very good point about the process of building your car, then applying for a COD and getting turned down because it doesn’t meet the rules. I agree that there should be an easily accessible spec list for each car that you can build your car to, and know that if you build it to the letter you’ll get the COD, but if you stray from it expect problems. As I understand it FIA Homologation papers aren’t cheap ( from memory when I looked into it years ago ) so maybe something else needs to be organized to get the specs to people building cars, or it could be included in the cost of the COD. You pay a fee and get the COD application and build papers for XYZ car, then you build your car to the specs, get it signed off by a MNZ approved inspector as being to the spec, then the COD gets issued and away you go. If you don’t like the specs or want to build something better / faster / different, then do you take your chances that the race organisers will continue to say the COD is optional?

There are the standard 10 – 15 cars ( saloons and GT’s ) you would consider if you want to have a decent go at H&C racing – Escorts / Capris / Alfas / MGB’s / Mini’s / Jaguars / Mustangs / Camaros / Falcons / BMW/s you get the idea. As it stands, they are all built a little differently, yet they all achieve roughly the same lap times but they achieve it in different ways. If everybody is forced to build their cars to the letter in order to get a COD, then it’s going to get boring watching 15 identical Escorts circulating at the front, then 5 Capris, then a gap back to 10 Alfa’s, and finally 8 MGB’s bringing up the rear, where no one can out brake or out accelerate anyone because they’re all the same. It’ll be as much fun as watching HQ’s / Suzuki Swifts / you other favourite one make series.

Here’s another one for you to consider. This article has just popped up on a forum I frequent http://www.britishracecar.com/DavidRussellWilks-MG-MGB.htm This car has an FIA certificate because it has to in order to run in the Ecurie GTS series ( series is for pre 66 FIA cert’ed cars ). So it would be fair for one would assume it is to the letter of the FIA book 100% in order to get that FIA certificate, much the same as if a car has an NZ COD, you could pretty fairly expect it to conform 100% to that set of rules ie this is how it was / would have been built back in 1965 ( or whatever year ). Now look at the car, it is immaculate!!!!!! BUT, not correct. The car has an FIA certificate certifying it as a 1965 car, yet it has 1966 onwards doors / door handles / door locks and catches ( they are push button handles and antiburst catches, 1965 should have pull handle and no antiburst catches ), an alternator ( available October 1967 onwards, should have a generator ), electronic ignition ( electronic not available in MGB until mid – late 1970’s, should be points ), a 4 synchromesh gearbox ( available October 1967 onwards, should be 3 synchromesh and non synchro first gear gearbox ), spin-on oil filter ( available October 1967 onwards, should be a cartridge filter ), gear reduction starter motor ( never available on MGB ), silicon radiator and oil cooler hoses ( never available on MGB ), Parabolic leaf springs ( never available ), and the bodyshell is a BMH repro based on a 1974 model with an pre 1968 transmission tunnel grafted in which means the engine bay sheetmetal is wrong for a 1965 model.

FIA is supposed to be the strictest as far as car spec goes, they are the world governing body, an MGB ( for example ) with an FIA certificate will sell for a fair bit more than one without the certificate because the certificate means ( supposedly ) that you are getting something built to XYZ rules and passed as being true and correct, and you know you can take it to Classic Le Mans, Goodwood, Retromobile etc etc. Most of the mods on the car you could argue don't give it a performance advantage, but the whole idea of an FIA certificate ( and a COD as I understand it ) is that the car represents a particular period in time, and this car doesn't because it has later, and aftermarket, bits on it. If the Black MGB is what people are getting away with at high profile FIA events in the UK and Europe, please forgive me for thinking we’re not going to get far with COD’s here.

I’m an MGB anorak, so that was a very easy car for me to pick to bits, but I’m sure Dale can do it for Mustangs, and others can do it for cars they are familiar with.

For me, the classic scene in NZ ( Auckland at least anyway ) and the way the cars are built and run is not out of control or over the top. There is the odd car that I think shouldn’t be allowed to run at H&C meetings because it is nothing like a classic any more ( the Metalman Escort ), but overall I don’t see too much wrong with what we have, and I don’t really see how COD’s is going to improve the racing of the standard / quality / presentation of the cars. I’d rather see nice cars racing closely and fairly ( no bashing and barging ) and know that some of them are not 100% period, than see a grid of cars tootling around unable to pass anyone because they’re all identical but they all meet the rules 100%. When the grandstands are overflowing with spectators paying $50 a head to watch, then we can start getting a bit more picky about the spec of the cars, but until then we’re only racing for the fun of it, and the winner of the best series gets a chocolate fish!! Good on ‘ya Ray, keep up the good work!! :)

PS: I can’t wait to come back home for good and start racing again.

[928]

WOW, would love to get back into the sport but after reading the above its enough to put you off.Spend time building up a car to your best knowledge and then have it rejected [!!!!!!!], why would you bother,then after you have saved up and bought a racecar to have it knocked back for some simple thing like brakes. Once raced a Bugeye Sprite fitted with a supercharger and running MG Midget disc brakes on the front........now it seems it would spend its time in the paddock arguing with officials.Where has the simple racing gone,wasent it the idea just to go out and enjoy the racing,winning although nice was not the that important.It seems to me that a small band of wantabe racers have spoilt it for others.A lot of these types are newbies and never did any motorsport back in the dim darks and now want to prove they are faster than the original owners of the cars they have recreated and over improved.
Oh how true.
Just go and race.
The big money bunch will get fedup without competition. let the real racing start.

[nzeder]

I’m an MGB anorakMuch like am the Datsun Z anorak of NZ ;)

Having read today's posts over a late lunch I think JAFA has summed it all up nicely - we can all bang on for ages about this and that, but we need this or that - and as pointed out even the FIA get it wrong - I have heard of another similar issue but with a limited formula type car that has HTP for 1968 when the car in question was not designed until 1969 - how does that happen.

I also agree with Dale that NZ Specials and NZ racing history needs to represented, so there needs to be a way of recognizing the real car from a later recreation (even if 100% accurate) - if the real car is dead - it is dead Jim so no car should lay claim to the original ID even if made from some of the original parts - look at it this way if you had a factory works MGB with all the special works parts if the special body was destroyed (assuming the body was special with different gauge sheet metal as some manufactured did) if you install all the remaining parts into a new/replacement standard shell could you still call it a Works MGB? No - it is not as it was, it is different, close by not as it was.

Slight thread hi-jack here but I need to rant a little about this as it is bit of pet peeve .......
Why do so many keep banging on the about Saloons when the FIA never refer to the production based cars as Saloons - they are in their terms are "Series-Production Touring Cars", "Special Touring Cars" aka the modified Series-Production Touring Cars", "Series-Production Grand Tourning Cars" and "Special Grand Touring Cars"

The term Saloon automatically excludes so many cars from a grid that were including in period on track all over the world, Ferrari's, MG Midget, Lotus, Datsun Z and 2000 Roadster, Austin Healeys, Bugeye Sprites, Triumphs TR4,5,6 and 7, Corvettes all great cars in the their own right. They raced in the 60 and 70 - even 80's on the same tracks and grids as the Saloons (maybe in a different category/class but the same grid).

If people want to play the "as it was, as it should be" card then don't exclude great cars from a grid of 70's cars because they are not Saloons.

From the research I have done (quickly in the last 10 minutes) even the NZ Sport Sedans rules were loosely based on the FIA Group 5 rules which, in fact the earlier version of Group 5, were for two seater cars only.

Right rant over back on track

Yes I am a newbee and never did any racing in the 70's (the era that I am interested in) and I agree there is a lot work that needs to be done before a car is "fit for the rules" aka mine is 2 years and counting + waiting for me

1. Save the $$ to purchase parts
2. Slack owner going to the track to watch others race and not be at home working on his own car in the weekend.

I don't want to win races - ok not win the race but the race within a race - you know have a good dice with others in different makes/models then have a good laugh/chat after the race with the guys you were dicing with

I just want to race a classic car not a modern car. And classic racing has these rules - so follow them I must. I did not set them, I just read the rules in which a car must run - right or wrong. Rules will cause issues and there will always be a difference of opinions.

[Kiwiboss]

WOW, would love to get back into the sport but after reading the above its enough to put you off.Spend time building up a car to your best knowledge and then have it rejected [!!!!!!!], why would you bother,then after you have saved up and bought a racecar to have it knocked back for some simple thing like brakes. Once raced a Bugeye Sprite fitted with a supercharger and running MG Midget disc brakes on the front........now it seems it would spend its time in the paddock arguing with officials.Where has the simple racing gone,wasent it the idea just to go out and enjoy the racing,winning although nice was not the that important.It seems to me that a small band of wantabe racers have spoilt it for others.A lot of these types are newbies and never did any motorsport back in the dim darks and now want to prove they are faster than the original owners of the cars they have recreated and over improved.

What do you mean "put you off" Ross? this is exactly the idea of this forum posting, "sorting out historic saloon car issues"(Touring Cars Nezder) if you spent time and money building a car to the said rules as i mention in post 26, ask questions, have tech guys check if your unsure, your car won't be rejected, how can it be? and it certainly wont be at the track!! and if you "bought" a race car surely you'd check what class it fits first before you handed over any dosh, wouldn't you? hell i would.

You see, it is simple and there's no arguing with officials if your vehicle is built historically correct to class rules and that is pretty simple to me but i can see that your supercharged Bugeye Sprite running MG disc is EXACTLY the problem we have "its a cheater car" and because you thought it was OK to build it to benefit from the added technology(as Oldfart mentions in post 27) you've just forced others to do the same and this is exactly the current problem we have with NZ old car racing(i hate the word Classic as everything is a classic these days, i call it Historic or old car), the next guy will then build a Rover V8 powered Bugeye Sprite with bigger mono block brakes so he can beat you as he see's you doing just that and on and on it goes around in a vicious circle until those with the proper cars stay away and the field eventually explodes, or as happens in most case's you just get "out spent" by those that are prepared to do what it takes.

So all this is nothing to do with a small band of wanta be racers or those from the dim dark ages of motorsport, there is currently a HUGE world wide interest in old car(Historic or Vintage for the Yanks) racing because most see it as an affordable sport and hobby and even young people are intested and one can do it at a leisure, and you don't have to be a professional racer!! you see "Historic" motorsport should be no different than someone playing golf or going fishing this weekend but unfortunately we do need rules on vehicle eligibility which we currently do have under T&C and Schedule K its just a bit difficult to understand, and nothing is enforced or checked at this level which is what must change.

Jacmac, maaaate i had to go to the Doc today as well, damn fell outta my chair after reading your post, put me bloody back out, LOL!! but no, seriously were all human and i enjoy difference of opinion and the cheerful banter, it goes to show we're generally all on the same wave lenght and are trying to achieve a better level in our choosen hobby, long may it continue.

Gerald, yeah 800HP figgen in my dreams!!!!! those Aussie just didn't like that i had a handle on them, LOL

Dale M

[nzeder]

Question for the H&C commission members given that is what this thread is about.

Is it possible for a single car to have 2 CoDs?

Example car is setup to run x brakes and x parts for under schedule k grids. Then another CoD with y brakes and y parts for a t&c grid.

[Racer Rog]

Paul ring me about that, I don't think that this has past our eyes, I would have noticed it, and don't remember it being turned down.
Roger

[Racer Rog]

Question for the H&C commission members given that is what this thread is about.

Is it possible for a single car to have 2 CoDs?

Example car is setup to run x brakes and x parts for under schedule k grids. Then another CoD with y brakes and y parts for a t&c grid.

No, and why would you bother, What happens in real life is that often both will run in the same grid, its a numbers game, you have to have so many in each grid, but the CoD reflects what that car is, or you could go to a HTP if you really want to hit the high notes.
Roger

[Ross Hollings]

Kiwiboss,sorry dont know who you actually are but would like to reply to your reply. At the time the little Sprite was raced with a group of people who did not much care about COD compliance,as long as you turned up and had a good time and the car is within the period so to speak,a chocolate fish was the prize and that might be for last place ! I consider that the parts on the car were for my enjoyment and others,when the bonnet was lifted and folks saw a shorrock supercharger [including fellow competitors]they were more interested in seeing the technology used than have it sitting in a box on the shelf.The discs brakes were from a car 1 year difference to the last build date of the Sprite.Hell, I only raced it a couple of times for fun !!
Maybe we should take note of the growing trend of VCC racing,they have a range of cars in various forms ie the Gypsy Riley and numerous austin sevens,bucklers etc running a range of different engines etc to my knowledge they just have a good time and certainly provide entertainment to the crowd.
Ross H

[Oldfart]

Kiwiboss,sorry dont know who you actually are but would like to reply to your reply. At the time the little Sprite was raced with a group of people who did not much care about COD compliance,as long as you turned up and had a good time and the car is within the period so to speak,a chocolate fish was the prize and that might be for last place ! I consider that the parts on the car were for my enjoyment and others,when the bonnet was lifted and folks saw a shorrock supercharger [including fellow competitors]they were more interested in seeing the technology used than have it sitting in a box on the shelf.The discs brakes were from a car 1 year difference to the last build date of the Sprite.Hell, I only raced it a couple of times for fun !!
Maybe we should take note of the growing trend of VCC racing,they have a range of cars in various forms ie the Gypsy Riley and numerous austin sevens,bucklers etc running a range of different engines etc to my knowledge they just have a good time and certainly provide entertainment to the crowd.
Ross H
Ross you are correct about the VCC field having a good time and huge variety, but they don't even get scrutineered (yes ALL cars are scrutineered, not just audit levels) unless they have a VIC (vehicle identity card) and log book, both issued by VCC at NO cost(!), let alone take part.

[crunch]

Ross you are correct about the VCC field having a good time and huge variety, but they don't even get scrutineered (yes ALL cars are scrutineered, not just audit levels) unless they have a VIC (vehicle identity card) and log book, both issued by VCC at NO cost(!), let alone take part.

Are you sure it is no cost? I only ask as the past President of the VCC has told me different.

[crunch]

Kiwiboss,sorry dont know who you actually are but would like to reply to your reply. At the time the little Sprite was raced with a group of people who did not much care about COD compliance,as long as you turned up and had a good time and the car is within the period so to speak,a chocolate fish was the prize and that might be for last place ! I consider that the parts on the car were for my enjoyment and others,when the bonnet was lifted and folks saw a shorrock supercharger [including fellow competitors]they were more interested in seeing the technology used than have it sitting in a box on the shelf.The discs brakes were from a car 1 year difference to the last build date of the Sprite.Hell, I only raced it a couple of times for fun !!
Maybe we should take note of the growing trend of VCC racing,they have a range of cars in various forms ie the Gypsy Riley and numerous austin sevens,bucklers etc running a range of different engines etc to my knowledge they just have a good time and certainly provide entertainment to the crowd.
Ross H

Totally take your point Ross. And it is a good one. We all do this for fun. I'm sure all the HMC field do this for fun as well...we just have different takes on fun. What you describe reminds me of the good old days of Clubmans racing...and therein lies the rub. What defines the difference between a good old club car and a classic? I know what an Historic car is...

[Oldfart]

Are you sure it is no cost? I only ask as the past President of the VCC has told me different.
Depends whether you are a member. I have just sent off 2 VIC applications and that is what I have to pay, zip, nada, nothing.
The Log book is $10.22 (sorry I missed that huge cost)

[Racer Rog]

The VCC system vehicle identity is quite different to that of a MSNZ CoD and as the H & C Commission has found is quite wanting in terms of what is and what isn't pre 1960, and while they will give a VIC to later dated cars, they can not run in MSNZ events. They were made a offer from MSNZ on this issue over a year ago, but have yet to reply.
IN terms of dating, what the CoD is trying to establish, is the year of representation, not the year the vehicle was made, Nigel Russell made a very good presentation of this at the last AGCM in Wellington if anybody can remember back that far, so he pop up here and explain it again using his vast tech skills on the computer, as the example he used is close to my heart.
Roger

[Oldfart]

Roger, without defending (or offending) either system, the views which are being represented on this thread seem to me to be generally that the MSNZ system is found wanting, at least by those giving their views. There is no question that the systems are different. That does not mean that either does not meet the needs of their members, nor does it mean that either totally meets the needs.
You do need to be careful in using the term "pre 1960" as the agreement is for CIRCUIT events pre 31 December 1960, which more accurately would be "pre 1961". The VCC card is for all dating of VCC eligible vehicles (30 year rule) not just to suit circuit events. In reality the vast majority of VCC cards would be issued for other than speed events.

[Racer Rog]

Yes you are correct in the date, I was assuming that most would know that the actual date is 31-12-1960, but should have made it a little clearer, and it is true that they are different. and that you can run vehicles in certain events that date later than that, but not in circuit racing.
The feed back we are getting from this thread is great, but the point I was making was that in IMHO the CoD that MSNZ issues, to vehicles is a more robust system than that used by the VCC, not perfect, but more robust and I think we are coming to grips with it, and what is being expressed here is being taken onboard, but we would still like to hear from a greater number of people, on any issues that effect H & C Racing under MSNZ.
Roger

[ERC]

Phew!

Some great stuff there, but having just returned from Taupo, with 188 competitors, a fair bit of drama but some great racing, only a quick skim through.

In the words of the commentator "How on earth can you make one make scratch races sound interesting, when quite plainly, they are only of interest to the drivers?"

JAFA has it nailed (Dale!). Groups of five or six Escorts/MGBs/Capris in a procession and only a handful of makes models represented is the fastest way to kill the very appeal of classics.

Telling drivers they should dump their rare/old/interesting cars may appeal to you but certainly not the majority of spectators. You did expect a response Dale! I have huge respect for what you are trying to achieve, but non of the strict COD rules series have yet taken off and until they do, turning up with just 4 cars at a meeting, doesn't really set an example that proves that the other non-COD series wish to emulate.

I don't disagree with dumping CoD's if and where and when they are not required, but whilst we may pay a degree of lip service to the very letter of the T & C rules and with the option of CoD's, where we recognise the inherent failings of the system, we are going to be having this same old discussion until such times as guys with unusual and rare cars, mildly modified if need be, are denied the opportunity to run.

It will be a sad day indeed when and if that ever happens. If the purist meeting organisers want to limit their entries to CoD only cars there is absolutely nothing to stop them - right now. The (Ferrari) Festival is an invitation event as are one or two of TACCOC meetings and the successes or otherwise are judged on the obvious evidence - support.

A Sprite with a Shorrock supercharger is welcome to enter our series and I have already provisionally accepted the ex-Naidu MGB - why? Because they are not yet another pair of Ford Escorts!

[Oldfart]

I am left to wonder how a car with a "robust" CoD which dates it as representing the "period 1958" can have a 4.2 litre Jag motor. And before anyone leaps in, this is far from an isolated case. VCC branches have refused entry because we are told we must be squeaky clean on our agreement with Motorsport (pre 61) yet this car (and others) have these clearly incorrect dating from Motorsport CoD. Yes, they are issued on information given, but surely there is sufficient knowledge of engine introduction dates?
I am sorry if this has offended the owners of these vehicles, it is not intentional, but real cases are needed to point out shortcomings, and of course there are instances of incorrect VCC cards. (Again based on dubious information provided).

[ERC]

There are many anomalies Oldfart, both on refusals and acceptances. Most of us with a passing knowledge over the last few years know of many.

The Riley Moth is possibly the best possible advert in recent times as to why the VCC have got things more right than wrong.

It wasn't built in period; it is a machine in the grand traditions of Kiwi ingenuity (a modern day Lycoming?); it is a huge crowd favourite - and I love it to bits!

VCC meetings are still showing diversity whether period or not so quite why MSNZ can't accept the same philosophy I really don't know.

CoD's do have a place, just not for all cars, regardless.

[nzeder]

As someone getting a car ready for the track all of this does play a lot on my mind and what I am doing with the direction of the build.

I have said it before so I was say it again. I will get a CoD and only because of what has already been stated. If the time comes and cars are turned away due to non CoD or denied for not conforming to T&C I don't want to be the guy who has a car in the shed that can't race. That is the sole reason I will do this.

Crunch did say is it classics or clubmans? Well back in the 90's when I last had a racecar on the track in a racing meeting it was clubmans aka Auckland car club events that I mainly entered my Datsun 240z in. I had lots of fun by was completely out classed by V8 power muscle cars as I had 6 cylinders I was not allowed to play with the 4 cylinder cars even though they were lapping more around my times.

So I want to run in a grid that has 2 things.

1. Car of similar era and a good mix of makes and models.
2. Most importantly cars that will not lap me on lap 6 of an 8 lap race like Phil Schubert and Dean Perkins used to.

This time around I want to race in a grid of cars that is closer in laptimes or has good handicap setup to even out any performance different (be that performance be car, with or without CoD, driving skill) and have a good driving standard.

[nzeder]

Personally; I think that comment has a lot of merit. It probably all started when the COD was initially given to every car that was around when the system started! So the system was flawed right from the start. Gone is any meaningful sense of the word Throughbred from our sport.
I did try to bring H&C more into line with the CAMS model about 6 years ago, but was met with a lynch mob at an Auckland meeting who wanted to string me up by the proverbials for daring to suggest it.

Tuesday will be interesting...
Right thought see if we can keep this stuff going over here this time.

As discussed here and other post there appears to be bit of concern about the COD process - some related to the statement above I guess - with cars in the start of the COD system all getting one. One of the issues I see it is some have cars that have COD that today would not get one or at least have a B or C version at best. Then there is the talk about series like ERC who don't enforce a COD. We also go back to when TACCOC insisted on cars entering a meeting/meetings to have a COD or non entry was the result.

So why is the system not working for Production based Classics? How can it be resolved? What is the way forward?

[crunch]

Right thought see if we can keep this stuff going over here this time.

As discussed here and other post there appears to be bit of concern about the COD process - some related to the statement above I guess - with cars in the start of the COD system all getting one. One of the issues I see it is some have cars that have COD that today would not get one or at least have a B or C version at best. Then there is the talk about series like ERC who don't enforce a COD. We also go back to when TACCOC insisted on cars entering a meeting/meetings to have a COD or non entry was the result.

So why is the system not working for Production based Classics? How can it be resolved? What is the way forward?

It should.
If your car fits either Schedule K or T&C rules, then you get a COD.
Otherwise I'm not sure what you mean?:confused:

[nzeder]

Crunch,

I guess I thought I would try and keep the discussion going on here - I understand the rules, I get that, I don't personally see what the issues is with the COD process or the Schedule T&C or K rules.

Anyone building a car should read and understand the rules. You could say with NZ focus on Saloon cars I have chosen the incorrect car to race here in NZ as the grid selection is small.

Just from the posts in other threads and this one it seems people are building outside of the rules or modifying existing cars outside of the rules. The question is why is this the case? Why are people stepping outside the rules when building or racing a saloon/sport&gt car here in NZ and why don't some competitors get COD's or update their COD's after changes are made.

As you have stated back in that meeting a few years back, if not it is clubman racer.

I am trying to understand what is the big issue with all this? I can understand both side of the argument too. NZ motor racing history is full of cars that are one of specials/one of kind modified in the Kiwi way. I don't need to list the cars I am talking about most know them well - but they are very unique but we were not alone in doing that just that we allowed it to carry on for longer before the rules changed.

[ERC]

Some interesting discussion today at the Auckland meeting. I'll let the commission members respond!

Although not a formal vote, most were very supportive of Crunch being up front on here and it was obvious that this forum performs a very valuable service, by promoting open discussion which is essential. It's a pity that there aren't even more contributors so that we get a better representation as to what drivers and supporters want.

[Alan Hyndman]

Crunch,

I guess I thought I would try and keep the discussion going on here - I understand the rules, I get that, I don't personally see what the issues is with the COD process or the Schedule T&C or K rules.

Anyone building a car should read and understand the rules. You could say with NZ focus on Saloon cars I have chosen the incorrect car to race here in NZ as the grid selection is small.

Just from the posts in other threads and this one it seems people are building outside of the rules or modifying existing cars outside of the rules. The question is why is this the case? Why are people stepping outside the rules when building or racing a saloon/sport> car here in NZ and why don't some competitors get COD's or update their COD's after changes are made.

As you have stated back in that meeting a few years back, if not it is clubman racer.

I am trying to understand what is the big issue with all this? I can understand both side of the argument too. NZ motor racing history is full of cars that are one of specials/one of kind modified in the Kiwi way. I don't need to list the cars I am talking about most know them well - but they are very unique but we were not alone in doing that just that we allowed it to carry on for longer before the rules changed.

Hi Mike,

If I can just touch on a couple of points in post #54, one reason people don't read and understand the rules is because they don't know where to find them. It's fine for we competition licence holders to pick up a copy of the MotorSport Manual or dredge through www.motorsport.org.nz to find the online version but you would be amazed at the people who want to build cars that are not in MSNZ affiliated clubs and have no idea what the rules are or how to find them. Case in point is this 240Z that's been on TradeMe for a while, built for the owner and called "a true classic race car". Yeah, sorry, not with that engine!
www.trademe.co.nz/motors/specialist-cars/competition-cars/auction-671646056.htm

So if a professional race car builder (actually, I'm assuming that's what Herbert Fabrications are) can't build a car to the rules how can we expect a guy doing it himself to do so? Hmm, probably just got myself in a heap of trouble here so I'll add it's possible the owner didn't tell the builder he wanted the car to conform to Schedule T&C (or Schedule K). Either way, Joe Public now looks at this car on TradeMe and concludes that slapping an engine from the 1980s/1990s into a car from the early 1970s is acceptable for classic racing.

Regarding why people don't get CODs or don't update them (and speaking from Wellington), I know of at least one competitor who doesn't want to get a COD as he is perpetually modifying his car and considers having to update a COD every year (or every time he races) an unnecessary and ultimately sizeable expense. Sure, he's not had the car out for a few years now, but the point is that he's probably not the only person who thinks this way. Certainly while there are events run that don't require a COD then some competitors will not be inclined to hand over their money for a document that gives them no advantage.

A point that I (as an event organiser) feel can't be stressed enough, is that there just isn't a big enough pool of cars in NZ to be that choosey if you want an event to be economically viable. A catch 22 situation I know, as we all want more 100% legal cars at events but they tend to be slower than the cars built outside the rules - but if you turn away the cars just outside the rules you might not have enough entries to hold a meeting.

I don't have an answer for this but one point that was mentioned to me once was, insurance companies will seize on any reason not to pay out on a claim. If a car at a classic event causes so much damage that an insurance claim is triggered and that car turns out to be outside T&C (or K) rules, will the insurance company refuse to pay out? Similarly, if the police attend a classic/historic motorsport event accident and their investigations uncover that a car involved was modified outside the rules (e.g. Nissan RB30 engine with twincam head off an RB26, installed in a 240Z) then do they have an avenue for charging the driver, the eligibility officer(s) or the Clerk of the Course? If so, would this encourage better compliance? Okay, maybe I do have an answer.

Cheers,
Alan Hyndman.

[Paul Wilkinson]

Just a note that Mark Herbert does fantastic work and obviously builds what his customers ask and pay for! If you want something built to a strict set of rules - done! If you want to follow your own direction/vision - he'll make that happen for you too. I had a fair bit of fabrication done by Herbert Fabrication some years ago now and it was never short of superb, putting paint on it always made me a bit sad, truth be told!

If you follow the insurance company chain of thought, you probably also run into liability issues for organisers, despite waivers etc. Not a nice route to go down!

[AMCO72]

That Datsun is one sharp looking car. I doubt you could build it for the asking price. Wonder why the owner wants to sell........perhaps no class to race in.......although I'm sure there is, but not at the Festival............perhaps Sports Sedans LOL.

Seems a shame to turn a rare car like that into a 'hotrod', but as Paul says, if that is what you want, you can have it, and to hell with the purists.

[John McKechnie]

Gerald- owner is already running his other car in Historic Sports Sedans March 29-30

[ERC]

Good post Alan. That particular Z (now on TM) is a superb car and as you suggest, probably what was asked for. The current owner also has a Capri Perana (as do several other drivers!) and ran the Z in our series at the first round of the season when I was still overseas, but driven by his son.

On my return, when going through the results, it was blatantly obvious even to me, that the car was way too fast compared to any other car in the grid and I was alerted by the other drivers that the engine was outside our rules, so the owner was told that he couldn't run it again. He accepted that with good grace.

The insurance issue is an interesting one but going back to the Queenstown fatalities, it was a big wake up call for event organisers and also series organisers. If the CoD is mandatory at an event and stated in the ASRs, then no car can run without one.

If as in our series, a CoD is stated in the rules as optional and a race promoter accepts our group running to our rules, then it shouldn't be an issue.

You are correct about the minefield of building cars within the rules (not just MSNZ or T & C rules) as many workshops are totally unaware of the rules regarding cars on several levels, particularly in the case of a car that is either freshly imported or de-registered and is to be built as a road legal, but modified road car and is also to be used in competition.

Some workshops (as I have found out to my cost) can end up costing the customer many thousands of dollars extra, due to their ignorance of the various sets of rules.

The CoD rules have also changed over the years and at the meeting yesterday, more than one person was caught out by referring to a printed manual that had been superseded - and this was in a room of club representatives/experts!

My personal view is that the CoD should be a 3 or even 4 tiered system.

1) Complete as per the current document/procedure for cars deemed to be genuinely historic and needing to conform to a specific period of time or a set of rules in force at that time, with evidence supplied by the applicant. This documentation is part of the history and provenance of the vehicle and one would think that no changes to that car would ever be allowed. For this document, the price of application and processing is on the high side but as the car is potentially worth good money, that shouldn't be a problem.

2) Similar to the above but for a car built to Appendix K or Schedule K, in other words, a Cortina converted to a Lotus Cortina or a Mini converted to a Mini Cooper S or a faithful replica or recreation of a specific historic car that no longer exists.

3) A classic car that is outside the above criteria but has been modified with period modifications that presumably conforms to the T & C rules of the time. This is a dodgy one as the T & C Rules are not universally accepted and is still a sticking point. The application forms and documentation need to cover Alan's point as mentioned above and as raised at previous meetings, that a car may be progressively modified even within the rules and should not need to keep being resubmitted.

4) A totally standard production car running the original engine, gearbox, wheels, brakes, interior, but maybe with the replacement of the driver's seat, seat belts and maybe basic roll over protection that does not mean the headlining is removed. All this level needs is a simple one page declaration with just 4 pics. a) front three-quarter b) Rear three-quarter, c) engine/under bonnet d) interior. Countersigned by either a scrutineer, marque expert or series co-ordinator. Simple and cheap and would probably get a lot more people on board and into the system.

[nzeder]

With my car I first thought as ERC group does not require a CoD I thought I would not bother getting one. However as the car is getting closer to completion I will be applying for a CoD + with more period documentation that I have sourced I am leaning more K spec.

The rules do change I have seen that from my Datsun 240z back in the mid 90's to now. Rules even change during builds/rebuilds (no need to go into that).

Alan you raise points that as a competitor I did not even consider - the insurance/indemnity that might apply when racing a car and if a car is outside of the rules how that might effect these under a MSNZ permit.

Ray I like your suggestion of a tiered system as one system does not fit all it seems hence this thread on the CoD's. We need a system that can ID those genuine historic vehicles. We need a system that shows a car is built to x spec/rules ie K based - standard production cars can fit under K as usually those cars would have been FIA approved under group 1 or 3 (not sure on the later FIA rules I have only focused on the era/period I am interested in 70's stuff) some cars don't fit aka Marcos as they were not homologated in period - so how does one fit those in a CoD.

#3 in ERC post is an interesting one and how the rules in T&C have changed over the years might be to blame for some of the cars that are outside of the rules today - however I guess if a car was built to T&C in 1993 and if it a CoD for this build and not modified outside of the 1993 rules then there would not be an issue. However as the rules have changed a car built to 1993 rules might well be outside of the T&C rules today in 2014.

The CoD process does require proof and in my line of work we use a saying

"Trust but verify"

So you trust the info you have been given after it has been verified - if no info is given or it can't be verified as true then you go back to the lowest common denominator ie standard car spec.

Having not applied for a CoD in the past is their a process where the applicant might be requested for more info/proof before the CoD is granted or does it just come back as non compliant A and just a B?

[Bryan]

2) Similar to the above but for a car built to Appendix K or Schedule K, in other words, a Cortina converted to a Lotus Cortina or a Mini converted to a Mini Cooper S or a faithful replica or recreation of a specific historic car that no longer exists.

3) A classic car that is outside the above criteria but has been modified with period modifications that presumably conforms to the T & C rules of the time. This is a dodgy one as the T & C Rules are not universally accepted and is still a sticking point. The application forms and documentation need to cover Alan's point as mentioned above and as raised at previous meetings, that a car may be progressively modified even within the rules and should not need to keep being resubmitted.

4) A totally standard production car running the original engine, gearbox, wheels, brakes, interior, but maybe with the replacement of the driver's seat, seat belts and maybe basic roll over protection that does not mean the headlining is removed. All this level needs is a simple one page declaration with just 4 pics. a) front three-quarter b) Rear three-quarter, c) engine/under bonnet d) interior. Countersigned by either a scrutineer, marque expert or series co-ordinator. Simple and cheap and would probably get a lot more people on board and into the system.

Ray, I've been out of the sport for quite a while, and my experience was mainly as a club racer in the '80s, so predating CoDs.

With respect to the tiers in your suggestion (which I like), how should a "replica" be treated where the builder has used parts and modifications that are period, but weren't provably used all together in period. The examples I have in mind are where companies assembled specific cars in different markets, using locally manufactured components in some markets, but also had available "factory" performance upgrades in the "home" market. A few examples I can think of :-
- Escort RS2000 had a Borg Warner axle in Australia and South Africa, and a LSD in South Africa (rare, so not the best example:eek:)
- FIAT 125 and 131 (NZ and SA unique versions, plus FIA homolated Euro versions)
- Morris Marina - Australia had OHC engines and bigger brakes, but UK had BL Special Tuning upgrades (incl. 4 link rear and turret kit), FIA homologated for 1300 or 1800 OHV. BL ST also made a pair of V8s for the World Cup marathon.

So, the restored Heatway Marina (Jim Richards) would be a Tier 1 Historic. A "faithful" replica of the V8 World Cup Marina would be Tier 2. A "best of breed" Marina, using the Aussie front end/brakes and reproduction ST mods, would be Tier 3. A standard TC Coupe in Tier 4.

Would that be how you see the tier structure working?

[ERC]

Yes Bryan, that is a pretty good take on it.

Not being a Capri specialist but looking at the differences between the various cars now purporting to be Perana's, I do wonder if some have ever done any research! Having said that, if they are basically in road trim as opposed to race trim and are road legal like Neil Tolich's car, I'm the last person to nit-pick. I they are thinly disguised racers, then now that we have an Historic Sports Sedan's grid, if they choose to run there and are accepted, then there will be no argument from me as it will boost that grid.

In my 4 classifications, I deliberately left out cars with period engine transplants, whether they be Triumph Stags with Rover V8s, Morris Minors with Fiat Twin cams or Austin A40's powered by Ford engines. Assuming all engines are period engines, and the cars built without reference to a specific historic car (and ignoring my personal interest!), you can't under the current T & C regulations run such a car, but you can construct a single-seater out of periods parts.

As T & C doesn't cover such cars, then no CoD is possible which effectively renders them non-classic, even though they may contain more genuine period parts than many of those allowed to race.

[nzeder]

Valid point Ray - someone could not have a car with a CoD if they chose to build a Vauxhall Viva with a BDA or even a Ford V8 all 1970's period correct but as no one did it - it can't be done today if the rules deny it. However like you say under Schedule CR which is for single seater/open wheeled cars you can use a period chassis and say a Nissan L18 engine if all 1970's tech - as a retrospective build - it could have happened so it can today.

Production based cars/classes have not space for that kind of carry on it seems.

[Carlo]

http://www.motorsport.org.nz/sites/default/files/motorsport/manual/Live%2035%20App%206.09%20Sch%20RH_1.pdf

Has anyone looked at the revised Schedule RH for Historic Rally Cars, might just fit the bill for a number of other classes / vehicle types. Maybe it is just the dates on this that need to be adjusted for some race categories. No sense re-inventing the wheel if you don't need to

[RogerH]

….However like you say under Schedule CR which is for single seater/open wheeled cars you can use a period chassis and say a Nissan L18 engine if all 1970's tech - as a retrospective build - it could have happened so it can today.…….

Sch CR relates to either a car that replicates a car that participated in period (a replica) or is similar to a car that competed in period (a retrospective special). I would think that a Sch CR single seater would find it very difficult to find a MSNZ historic/classic grid to join in the North Island. In the South Island things are a bit different and quite a few single seaters competing in historic/classic events are CR cars.
In the end it comes down to event organisers catering for these cars - if they don't, then the cars become effectively redundant with diminished value.