Repowered Classics

[ERC]

I think is a subject that hopefully will elicit a total mix of views and a lively response.

I'll kick off and set the scene as I see it and I'll see what happens.

Using a Ford Escort as a good example, it is one where the level of purity can go from one extreme to the other.

1) Schedule K/Appendix K - pure cars as they were, 100% period, probably with a provenance (Race or Rally). Probably with extensive documentation and maybe even a race or rally history. In truth, probably worth good money.

2) A T & C Escort with period modifications or a replica built at any time, and covered by current T & C rules. In other words, someone can drop a period twin cam into a basic shell, adorn it with appropriate badges.

At this point, the Commission are happy enough, as the rules are clear cut and no one is ever really going to object too much (though I am not so sure owners of genuine AC Cobras vs Cobra replicas would see it that way...)

We then come to the repower issues which is less clear cut and is what needs a full discussion.

3) Ford Escort powered by a modern Ford (Zetec?) engine, but to a casual observer, a lookalike.

4) Ford Escort powerd by a period Ford V8, built in period and therefore with a local history.

5) As above, Ford Escort powered by a period Ford V8, but built last year.

6) Ford Escort powerd by the Ford Essex V6 ie a period engine from the same basic make but not a model that was ever produced. (Some Ford anorak will tell me that they did, but for the purposes of this thread, assume that they didn't, but could have done!)

7) Ford Escort powered by a period (ie pre 1980 or whatever) Rover V8, Fiat Twin Cam, Mazda Rotary, period Toyota/Ford 5 speed gearbox and all period parts, but not a specific model that was built in period, but could have been.

8) Ford Escort powered by a modern Nissan, Lexus, Honda engine with sequential gearbox and a load of modern goodies.

I think that from that list, you can see that the commission are faced with philosophical problems that then impact on drivers/car builders.

Having built a car that falls basically into category 6 above, supported by the marque club I might add, it is now in no man's land.

Looks like a classic, built from classic bits, but obviously not a classic. Period special? Maybe. Hot Rod? Not in my eyes, but certainly in the eyes of others. Wasn't built in period so no history, can't do it now.

No way is it a "Club Car" banished to go out mixing it with modern Subarus, Evos and Hondas. It looks wrong there, feels wrong and to me, is wrong, but that is where many see it sitting. The fact that an original 1950's classic bodyshell is now almost irreplacable (trims certainly are), means that it shouldn't really be on the track with the modern biff and bash brigade either.

This site is full of cars from the past (here and the UK) that were one offs and always proved popular. Build one now, and you are in no mans land as the NZ scene seems to be getting too bland. Far easier to go out and build yet another boring Escort or Falcodore or stuff a Ford V8 into a Capri and call it a Perana.

I'll throw it open as I know it is a can of worms, (or is it?) so let me just add, that if a race/rally meeting organiser or series committtee or marque club accepts a car, should that be the end of it, or not? Should it still be accorded some form of classic status under CR for example or a separate category created? RS Retro Saloon?

Sits back and waits for the fur to fly...

[Oldfart]

ERC PM sent

[Carlo]

Add to the list Schedule RH which allows for some non performance changes of product to be used. As an example any live rear axle assembly (usually Hi Lux) as a direct subsitute for an Atlas assembly. The Hi lux one can be purchased complete with a LSD for around $250 whilst the Atlas assembly which came out of the Capri needs around $1500 as a start figure just for the LSD unit. There is no performance gain from the Hi Lux one and it all looks the same when it is set up and in the car but it is readliy available and inexpensive.

Perhaps the sticking point is that NZ works to a period ending 31 December 1986 whilst Europe and Australia work to a period ending 31 December 1981. For what it is worth, many of the UK competitors that I am associated with think that except for the date, NZ is on the correct track with the schedule as opposed to Africa and some countries in Europe where they allow things like cannister shock absorbers to be fitted. The UK/Europe date is set to pre 4WD introduction such as the Quattro into world rallying while the NZ date is set to the pre Group B introduction date.

[ERC]

ERC PM sent
Responded!

[jim short]

Ray thats the way it was once ,when racing was exciting cars passing not follow the leader with parity this and parity that today,I think the greenies are to blame,some time back I asked Eric Mal. why dont we cut all that scrub back between the pits and the track ,we used to see the cars come over Rothmans once a pon a time ,not that long ago hell no we cant do that its for the envirment,.Excuse me asking why do we all need to know such and such sent a PM????

[ERC]

Can we please keep to the topic?

[thunder427]

ERC... I have removed offending reply to Jim's statement,will not trouble 'your' thread again !!!.....sadley thats a promise....thunder427/MJ:rolleyes::(:p:mad::confused:

[ERC]

thunder427, on topic posts are always welcomed on any thread by any poster! Too often, threads are totally derailed and hijacked, so if you have an observation about the base topic, I and many others would be keen to read it as that is what shapes our opinions and also the way forwards. Your original post was totally valid - but maybe on the safety thread instead of one about cars with non original engines?

Within our own series, we have had queries raised about "fake" Lotus Cortina engines for example, using modern components and this is seen as needing open discussion, when cars such as Jo' Hill's Triumph Herald Coupe V8 are specifically excluded from the Commission's rulings, as there is no category for them.

[RogerH]

I suppose Ray it is all a matter of degree and when it crosses the line that turns a car from a "classic" into a look-alike "hot-rod" with non-period and possible different marque components. Everyone will have a different opinion on where that cross over line is but the current position under the MSNZ regulations seems to be relatively restrictive in that it tries to preserve the integrity of the format of a period configuration. It allows "modification" that enables the likes of an Escort 1100 to be changed into a Twin Cam but it should be in the configuration of a period Twin Cam. Where it starts to get grey is when that so-called period Twin Cam starts to gain performance "improvements" that never existed in period.
The next step is the re-power you talk about and all the other like changes that go along with the re-power. I think there is a distinction between a re-power that recreates a period configuration (the Escort 1100 into Twin Cam example) and something that never happened in period. There is nothing to stop people doing these more radical modifications but the problem for them is finding a home to race their cars.
I haven't a problem with genuine period "hot rod" cars being classified as classics (as long as they are the real car and are fundamentally in period configuration) but I think it is pushing the classic boundary to use the existence of these genuine cars as the reason or excuse to build up any mixture of past, period and modern components and then try and pass it off as a classic car.
I know what your response is going to be and agree that a number of current cars with CODs are not that far from what has been described above.

[ERC]

For me Roger, the point where it fails to be a classic is where the major components (engine, gearbox etc) are modern, as opposed to a car built out of period parts, that may or may not have been built in period.

One commission member has quoted an example of an Austin Seven repowered by a pre 1980's rotary engine. On the one hand, it is all period parts but against that is the somewhat vague "Spirit of the Regulations".

As you are aware, our series does allow repowers to run, but under somewhat stricter and more specific rules than for ordinary cars (they have to be currently road registered as opposed to just to "WoF standard"). We don't allow modern engines but it hasn't stopped us being approached by Triumph 2.5PI Nissan, Reliant Scimitar Holden etc which have been refused!

We would not allow the Austin 7/Rotary either (Japanese engine...), but we do allow Jo's Herald (Rover engine). The drivers have the final say anyway, as over 15% protesting a car eliminates it from the series and we have a strict maximum of 5 repowered cars per season. Significantly, we have never reached that limit so rather than being overrun by "Hot Rods" as some doomsayers predicted, we have been overrun by "Peranas" instead! When we had one (Neil Tolich) it was fine, but now we have about 5 or 6. Most of the others would have cost the builders a lot less than I have forked out for my car too and their parts are more readily available.

I totally accept that there is a degree of classic boundary pushing involved and unless robust rules are in place, it could be a disaster, but the final say has to be "who is going to let them run?" Appendix K & Schedule K have not seen a massive increase in dragging cars out of sheds and less than 7% of our 111 cars have a K CoD. That is the reality. The other reality surrounding classic racing is not the cars but driving standards.

We are lucky in that overall, driving standards are pretty good, given the level at which we compete and the sheer numbers on the track. At Sunday's meeting, I think we had 30 cars in each of our two grids and to the best of my knowledge, the racing was extremely close but no panel damage was reported to me. In recent times, most panel damage has involved very pure cars where the drivers have deep enough pockets to pay for their own damage but sadly, can inflict considerable damage on those less able to pay, so I don't accept the oft toted argument that those running "hot rods" won't respect the purer cars. The reverse is often the case.

I am interested in the views of others, as so far, I seem to be fighting a lonely battle to get some sort of acceptance that my car and others like it are currently in a no mans land and do fit at a classic meeting and need to be classified accordingly.

[jim short]

Ray at the moment I have a 1972 Alfa Berlina with a worn motor,plus I have a good spare 3.5 Rover mtr. for my Spyder that will prob. never be used what would I be able to run a V8 Alfa in ?please note V8 Alfas have been about for quite some time, just food for thought..

[ERC]

Jim, we would consider that as acceptable provided it was 100% road legal. The LVVTA hoops, whatever their shortcomings, do at least ensure that transplants are up to an acceptable safety standard.

As far as we are concerned, period engine plus period bodyshell equates to what could have run in period. The fact that it didn't is not something we are concerned about - but others are. Whether anyone else would let you run would be entirely up to them.

If I resigned from running our series (it will have to happen one day) then there is nothing stopping the successor(s) from changing the series rules and banning everything except Schedule K. I have no problem whatever with that, as any series is only going to survive if there are enough drivers supporting it and race organisers are happy to invite them.

[jim short]

Ray this is the type of car that is missing today,thanks to TCCOC ,but thank God they were not around when all those hybrid cars were built, each one of them Coppens Mk 2,Chev coupes.to many to list, and fifty years on still talked about.Road legal is no problem and to changing the rules whats new?

[928]

I wonder if a seies called "allcomers" has any place today?
928

[Racer Rog]

928, there is already a class for these cars, they are called club cars!
Roger
I wonder if a seies called "allcomers" has any place today?
928

[RogerH]

Ray this is the type of car that is missing today,thanks to TCCOC ,but thank God they were not around when all those hybrid cars were built, each one of them Coppens Mk 2,Chev coupes.to many to list, and fifty years on still talked about.Road legal is no problem and to changing the rules whats new?

Hey Jim don't blame TACCOC that these types of cars didn't and don't have a home. TACCOC catered for a particular type of car and it was their prerogative as a club to decide what type of cars they allowed. TACCOC didn't force people to come and race in their events. You may not have liked the decision that TACCOC made but I assume that any club or organisation can make rules and regulations that are supported by the majority of the club's members.
If there is anything to blame it was the fact that there apparently weren't any other "classic" clubs that catered for these types of cars either. The same applies today - apart from the odd one in Ray's series the only home for them, as Racer Rog says, is non-classic clubmans.

[ERC]

We were part of all TACCOC meetings for many years without problems - generally. They had the right then and have the right now to accept or decline any race entry as does any other club/promoter.

Four or five years ago, following a conference vote I believe, to make CoD's compulsory for classic meetings, TACCOC had the good grace to ring me at the beginning of the season, to say that as from the beginning of the following season, CoD's were compulsory.

At that point, we simply stated that as a Series, we were not prepared to make CoD's compulsory. TACCOC had previously stated that they would not accept certain cars we allowed, including Jo Hill's Triumph and Rogan Hampson's Ohlsen Cobra. At that point we effectively pulled out of TACCOC meetings, though there was no problem in them accepting cars that conformed. You either invite a Series or you do not. What you cannot do is invite an established series - then try and tell them which cars can and can't run.

I have absolutely no problem with that. In more recent times, they have put on events (including Sundays') for BMWs and ERC cars and that is also fine. They don't have to like the cars as they are simply acting as promoters.

When/if there is a demand for repowered cars and there are enough to form a grid, we'll do just that, but at the moment, we'll accept them within our existing groups as there are spaces on the grid and because we want to encourage them. Whilst I agree, motorsport was more colourful in the past and we are doing our bit to make it more varied, it is totally wrong to blame TACCOC for any perceived action that is contrary to their beliefs.

We don't accept modern Japanese cars because we are primarily a series for European Cars and there is already a place for Japanese Classics. Modern Jappas run at Club meetings.

Where I differ from TACCOC and many others as stated before, is that I believe a period repower belongs at a classic meeting. Many do not, hence this thread. Fortunately we do have a series in which they can run - for now, but they are not accepted as T & C conforming cars and would not qualify for a CoD even if they wanted one.

[jim short]

We were part of all TACCOC meetings for many years without problems - generally. They had the right then and have the right now to accept or decline any race entry as does any other club/promoter.

Four or five years ago, following a conference vote I believe, to make CoD's compulsory for classic meetings, TACCOC had the good grace to ring me at the beginning of the season, to say that as from the beginning of the following season, CoD's were compulsory.

At that point, we simply stated that as a Series, we were not prepared to make CoD's compulsory. TACCOC had previously stated that they would not accept certain cars we allowed, including Jo Hill's Triumph and Rogan Hampson's Ohlsen Cobra. At that point we effectively pulled out of TACCOC meetings, though there was no problem in them accepting cars that conformed. You either invite a Series or you do not. What you cannot do is invite an established series - then try and tell them which cars can and can't run.

I have absolutely no problem with that. In more recent times, they have put on events (including Sundays') for BMWs and ERC cars and that is also fine. They don't have to like the cars as they are simply acting as promoters.

When/if there is a demand for repowered cars and there are enough to form a grid, we'll do just that, but at the moment, we'll accept them within our existing groups as there are spaces on the grid and because we want to encourage them. Whilst I agree, motorsport was more colourful in the past and we are doing our bit to make it more varied, it is totally wrong to blame TACCOC for any perceived action that is contrary to their beliefs.

We don't accept modern Japanese cars because we are primarily a series for European Cars and there is already a place for Japanese Classics. Modern Jappas run at Club meetings.

Where I differ from TACCOC and many others as stated before, is that I believe a period repower belongs at a classic meeting. Many do not, hence this thread. Fortunately we do have a series in which they can run - for now, but they are not accepted as T & C conforming cars and would not qualify for a CoD even if they wanted one.

So can that Alfa of Peter Sunberg run,,the aero Riley the Ferrari GTO thats just been built.The Cobra was built with Shelbys help and so on????

[ERC]

The Alfa & Riley are running under VCC. The Ohlsen Cobra runs with us anyway. If Mr H were to bring along the 'GTO', it is a Ferrari powered car and is no more of a problem to me, than make believe Lotus Cortinas, Peranas or Mini Cooper S.

If they wanted to run with us, then I'd be more than happy to consider them. I generally look for reasons to include rather than exclude cars. The Riley is a magnificent creation and appears to be acccepted by VCC who seem to have a philosophy similar to my own. I doubt the H & C Commission would accept it, as it wasn't built in period, hence this thread...

[jim short]

The Alfa & Riley are running under VCC. The Ohlsen Cobra runs with us anyway. If Mr H were to bring along the 'GTO', it is a Ferrari powered car and is no more of a problem to me, than make believe Lotus Cortinas, Peranas or Mini Cooper S.

If they wanted to run with us, then I'd be more than happy to consider them. I generally look for reasons to include rather than exclude cars. The Riley is a magnificent creation and appears to be acccepted by VCC who seem to have a philosophy similar to my own. I doubt the H & C Commission would accept it, as it wasn't built in period, hence this thread...

Sorry Ray can they run at a TACCOC meeting is what I meant??

[Russ Noble]

Where I differ from TACCOC and many others as stated before, is that I believe a period repower belongs at a classic meeting. Many do not, hence this thread. Fortunately we do have a series in which they can run - for now, but they are not accepted as T & C conforming cars and would not qualify for a CoD even if they wanted one.

Not under T&C but isn't that what CR is for? Most of these cars with period parts can get a CoD under Sched. CR.

[RogerH]

Sorry Ray can they run at a TACCOC meeting is what I meant??

TACCOC doesn't cater for cars like the Alfa and the Riley so they would race in VCC events (which accept recreations and replicas). The replica Cobra has not been accepted in TACCOC events as it was a newly created replica car built in more recent times - it was not an actual period car that was subsequently modified. The 250GTO hasn't come up for consideration yet but would possibly be accepted on the basis that it is an actual period car using all marque components and is effectively how a GTO was built in period by essentially modifying a 250GT SWB - in that respect it may be similar to the Escort 1100 turned into an Escort Twin Cam or perhaps a standard Jaguar E Type turned into a "works" lightweight racer.

[RogerH]

Not under T&C but isn't that what CR is for? Most of these cars with period parts can get a CoD under Sched. CR.

That's correct Russ - they can get a COD under CR - but the problem is that not many classic events (at least in the upper North Island) cater for CR cars so they find it difficult to find places to compete.

[ERC]

Isn't CR only for single seaters? There is no category that caters for saloons created out of period parts, which is why T & C doesn't cover them and even though the commission has debated my car, so far, it hasn't accepted that it comes under their jurisdiction.

The fact that many accepted cars run quite happily with modern components and acres of Kevlar appears to be OK, yet one built out of 100% period parts isn't, is difficult to accept.

As I said before, I try to find reasons to get a car onto the grid, not exclude it. To paraphrase, isn't one of MSNZ's objectives also to get cars out there?

I have just had a quick look through my categorised photographs to see what I already had under replica's and recreations. I note Jaguar C & D types, XJ13, Aston Martin sports racing, Lotus 11 & 7, Cobras galore - and there are hundreds of cars out there.

Yet, if I offered a grid to replicas and recreations and even repowers, at a race meeting, I guarantee there wouldn't be enough to make it viable and that is one of the reasons for my pragmatism. Why deny these cars grid space? If there are too many and they start to swamp existing, genuine (sic) cars, and push them off the grid, only then it is time to create a class for them.

The other aspect is that a D Type Jaguar replica may well have been built yesterday but can still be the most valuable car on the grid and one where the owner fears panel damage just as much (or more) than drivers of run of the mill machinery.

If we need a category for cars built out of period parts then we need to say so, but so far this thread has not given the Commission any support for such a category, so at this point, I remain a lone voice! Such is life... It doesn't alter my stance as there has not been major opposition against it either. I don't expect TACCOC as a club to support it, as it is totally against their philisophy, yet there are past TACCOC board members who appreciate such cars.

The MGCC were approached very early on in the piece with a request from me that if there was opposition from the club from what I was proposing, then I'd not submit any articles about the build. What I in fact got back from MGCC was massive support, encouragement and interest, locally and internationally. So the marque club accepts a repower (people have been doing their own MGB - V8 conversions for years, so why not a saloon?) but the MSNZ structure does not.

If anyone should be throwing their arms in the air, it should be the MGCC. What they see is an old bodyshell saved from the crusher (which is where it was destined - and at times, I wish it had gone there...) rather than the bastardisation of an old saloon with no real worth anyway.

It is all a matter of perception. There is no right and wrong about this, but it can be controlled if the desire is there, with a workable framework of rules.

[crunch]

Hi Ray

It's an interesting and sometimes frustrating question. Simplistically it comes back to a question I ask at every H&C meeting at Conference;...what is a classic? We all know what a Historic car is, but then the definitions get a bit blurry...

At the moment Schedule CR does not cater for saloons and the Commission are currently examining ways to introduce that it can. But we are finding many loopholes that are sometimes hard to fill.

For me personally; I think there could be a place for repowered cars as you describe, the seemingly simple answer is where do they fit in the classification. At times the simple is not so simple....

I am interested to see more discussion on this as it gives us an idea of what we are actually trying to deal with.

[jim short]

Isn't CR only for single seaters? There is no category that caters for saloons created out of period parts, which is why T & C doesn't cover them and even though the commission has debated my car, so far, it hasn't accepted that it comes under their jurisdiction.

The fact that many accepted cars run quite happily with modern components and acres of Kevlar appears to be OK, yet one built out of 100% period parts isn't, is difficult to accept.

As I said before, I try to find reasons to get a car onto the grid, not exclude it. To paraphrase, isn't one of MSNZ's objectives also to get cars out there?

I have just had a quick look through my categorised photographs to see what I already had under replica's and recreations. I note Jaguar C & D types, XJ13, Aston Martin sports racing, Lotus 11 & 7, Cobras galore - and there are hundreds of cars out there.

Yet, if I offered a grid to replicas and recreations and even repowers, at a race meting, I guarantee there wouldn't be enough to make it viable and that is one of the reasons for my pragmatism. Why deny these cars grid space? If there are too many and they start to swamp existing, genuine (sic) cars, and push them off the grid, only then it is time to create a class for them.

The other aspect is that a D Type Jaguar replica may well have been built yesterday but can still be the most valuable car on the grid and one where the owner fears panel damage just as much (or more) than drivers of run of the mill machinery.

If we need a category for cars built out of period parts then we need to say so, but so far this thread has not given the Commission any support for such a category, so at this point, I remain a lone voice! Such is life... It doesn't alter my stance as there has not been major opposition against it either. I don't expect TACCOC as a club to support it, as it is totally against their philisophy, yet there are past TACCOC board members who appreciate such cars.

The MGCC were approached very early on in the piece with a request from me that if there was opposition from the club from what I was proposing, then I'd not submit any articles about the build. What I in fact got back from MGCC was massive support, encouragement and interest, locally and internationally. So the marque club accepts a repower (people have been doing their own MGB - V8 conversions for years, so why not a saloon?) but the MSNZ structure does not.

If anyone should be throwing their arms in the air, it should be the MGCC. What they see is an old bodyshell saved from the crusher (which is where it was destined - and at times, I wish it had gone there...) rather than the bastardisation of an old saloon with no real worth anyway.

It is all a matter of perception. There is no right and wrong about this, but it can be controlled if the desire is there, with a workable framework of rules.

Ray you are not the only one,I was a member of TACCOC from the start,the first five years they were without doubt the club to be with ,then with replicas starting to seen those in control took a dislike ,now not wanting to get into another debate as to how its ended up thirtyfive years later ,what person who claims to be a car lover would not let that Alfa and Riley ect run,then explane how the Lycoming{a home built special} can run, at the same time there ,the bona fide ones with modern internals fitted are ok At the Ardmore reunion at Puke 1983/4 a Lotus Cortina driven by two of NZs top drivers laped at 1.24.Five app. yrs later its doing 1.16 How many race meetings do TACCOC put on in a year now days,or is it more important as to what place we were seen out enjoying ourselves on Sat. night???

[ERC]

My car is now 9 seconds faster at Pukekohe than when I started with it in 1991 and the car is still standard. The engine has never been modified and even after its 1993 engine rebuild, lap times were no different. The improvement in lap times is down almost entirely due to tyres and a slight change to track surface in places. Driver improvement I would put at no more than 1 or 2 seconds.

This is almost exactly the same as the improvement in lap times for the winning Lotus Cortina from my first Pukekohe race in 1985 (with an Allegro Equipe...) at 1:20, now doing 1:13s. If they had lopped 4 seconds off their lap times from the 1983 reunion meeting to 1985, then I suggest that was also due to tyres.

Your on-going beef with TACCOC needs its own thread Jim. Start one.

[Carlo]

In my mind there is a difference between a Historic and a Classic car. As an example a 1938 Ford V8 Coupe as an origonal car is a Historic car and a 1938 Ford V8 Coupe with chopped top, guards removed and a thumping great OHV V8 sitting in the engine bay is a classic car. Both are special cars worthy of recognition

A Historic replica is one that replicates the origonal car and built to the regulations which applied during that period.

A Classic replica is one that could have been built by to the regulations which applied during that period. As an example it could be an OSCA class or S.I Sports and Specials class vehicle, the car it replicates never existed but it could have for the car replicates the regulations and not the vehicle of the period.

A straight out Classic car could be anything for "Classic" is in the eye of the beholder.

In general terms what I am now seeing around the traps is a car that is built to resemble by appearance as a historic car but is now fitted out with a lot of late model parts, equipment and technology and described by all and sundry as a classic car.

In rallying both historic and classic run together in the regional type events and side by side in both the NZRC and the Silver Fern without any difficulty and from what I have experienced in South Island historic/classic racing again they appear to have no difficulty running together there either.

Just maybe the real issue/s are with the mindset of some people organising some events and the fact that in the begining we used the terminology "Classic" in the wrong context when in truth we probably meant "Historic"

[RogerH]

Isn't CR only for single seaters?

Schedule CR caters for single seaters AND two seater sports racing cars AND some saloons.

Under Period Grouping CR One it covers the single seaters and sports racing cars with a period classification up to 31 December 1960.

Under Period Grouping CR Two it covers the single seaters and sports racing cars with a period classification post 31 December 1960.

In the period up to MSNZ Manual 34 there was another CR group being CR Three which covered replica saloons up to 31 December 1977. I would think that replica saloons which were constructed and approved within the CR regulations prior to the removal of the CR Three Group in Manual 35 would maintain that approval as it could not be retrospectively withdrawn.

[crunch]

Once a COD is issued, it cannot be withdrawn unless an audit shows that the vehicle is not what is described in the COD.

[jim short]

Ray I have no beef with TACCOC or anyone ,I have had my say and that is it,as to the time from 1 26[ not 24] Angus Hyslop, as good a driver as any was at the wheel this was before, the improvments to the track changed,, was put down to Randell I will now sit on the fence with my car loving mates

[Racer Rog]

No
Roger

[ERC]

In the period up to MSNZ Manual 34 there was a another CR group being CR Three which covered replica saloons up to 31 December 1977. I would think that replica saloons which were constructed and approved within the CR regulations prior to the removal of the CR Three Group in Manual 35 would maintain that approval as it could not be retrospectively withdrawn.

Exactly. So unless it is a replica saloon, a period saloon has never been covered? This raises another question. Would anyone really be happy with 3 replica Corvette Zephyrs on the grid or even Algie Alfas? Is there any limit or control of replicas of unique cars? Is it limited to NZ cars? Could we build our own Baby Bertha or John Pope Aston/Firenza?

On another tack, Triumph Stags were notoriously fragile initially, so there were many Rover V8 conversions - note, conversions, not a distinct model offered for sale like the Perana. Does that make a Rover V8 engined Stag acceptable because it was offered in period?

We know there were works 4WD Zephyrs, V6 "Savage" Cortinas and even a 4WD Mini (and we do know where that is!) plus V8 Marina, and probably a works V8 Triumph 2500 and who knows what else in period. Jack Knight 5 speed gearboxes and Arden cross flow heads, Derrington cross flow heads (as per Jimmy's Wolseley and also the Magnette I believe). So we allow modified period saloons and re-creations so it seems an omission to leave out repowered period saloons!

PS: Got my logbook today but at the moment, I have no intention of seriously racing the car anyway, but I'd like the option - ready for when I can't get out of the Marcos unaided!

[Bruce Sollitt]

Once a COD is issued, it cannot be withdrawn unless an audit shows that the vehicle is not what is described in the COD.Crunch, how does this relate to the replication of similar cars when a COD has been incorrectly issued? I'm thinking specifically of the Escort with the YB Cosworth engine. Which of the 3 following statements would reflect policy?
1. We'll limit the mistake to one car.
2. We must allow replications of this model whenever produced.
3. We must allow all similar deviations across all makes & models .i.e. KE25 Corolla can run 3SGE.

[crunch]

Crunch, how does this relate to the replication of similar cars when a COD has been incorrectly issued? I'm thinking specifically of the Escort with the YB Cosworth engine. Which of the 3 following statements would reflect policy?
1. We'll limit the mistake to one car.
2. We must allow replications of this model whenever produced.
3. We must allow all similar deviations across all makes & models .i.e. KE25 Corolla can run 3SGE.

There are probably quite a few cars out there with COD's that maybe should never had got them. Of course; you try to limit the mistakes.
However the car you refer to (and I think Carlo was in on the discussion at the time) had an owner that provided written material such as magazine articles to show that in 1982 the Mark 2 Escort was tested with the engine that ended up in the Sierra Cosworth. Therefore a period modification. If you have a problem with that; and I know you have asked me and I have explained this in the past; please take it up with the Rally Commission Chairman

[RogerH]

There are probably quite a few cars out there with COD's that maybe should never had got them. Of course; you try to limit the mistakes.
However the car you refer to (and I think Carlo was in on the discussion at the time) had an owner that provided written material such as magazine articles to show that in 1982 the Mark 2 Escort was tested with the engine that ended up in the Sierra Cosworth. Therefore a period modification. If you have a problem with that; and I know you have asked me and I have explained this in the past; please take it up with the Rally Commission Chairman

Under T&C regulations you can get approval if you comply with the fundamental T&C requirements and can supply documentary evidence that the "modification" concerned was used or available in period. It sometimes takes a lot of research but it is surprising what happened to various cars in period. The catch is that you need to comply with the basic T&C rules first.

[crunch]

Under T&C regulations you can get approval if you comply with the fundamental T&C requirements and can supply documentary evidence that the "modification" concerned was used or available in period. It sometimes takes a lot of research but it is surprising what happened to various cars in period. The catch is that you need to comply with the basic T&C rules first.
This particular car was Schedule RH, but the same philosophy applies.

[crunch]

Back to repowering of classic cars,
What would be good lines-in-the-sand if this is to go further.
For instance Ray mentions he thinks his car is a classic, not an old clubcar. I am not disagreeing (or agreeing).How can we define the difference? I hasten to add I am not picking on anyone, it's jus that Ray's comment got me thinking.

Someone used the example of a rotary powered Austin could be possible, but I'm sure all sane thinkers amoungst us cringe at that thought, so how could this be quantified?

Already a lot of aspects of H&C motorsport are subjective, and traditionally may always have been. This unfortunately causes blurred lines.
Interesting eh?

[escorthvn]

Crunch, how does this relate to the replication of similar cars when a COD has been incorrectly issued? I'm thinking specifically of the Escort with the YB Cosworth engine. Which of the 3 following statements would reflect policy?
1. We'll limit the mistake to one car.
2. We must allow replications of this model whenever produced.
3. We must allow all similar deviations across all makes & models .i.e. KE25 Corolla can run 3SGE.

Hi all, I have been watching this posting with interest as I own a Mk2 Escort with a YB Cosworth. My understanding is that the YB was not designed until about 1983/84 but Ford built engines in 1973/74 period with 16 valve heads based on the pinto cortina 2 litre block. I was in England in 2007 and took many photos of this car with a 16 valve 2 litre cortina engine. I have many detailed photos of the casting nos. and engine nos. on this engine. RS2000 Mk1 Escorts were homologated with a 16 valve 2 litre engine. Looking at the homologation papers the photos of the head look very similar to a YB head. My understanding is that these heads are Holbay heads.
Pete

[Carlo]

Hi all, I have been watching this posting with interest as I own a Mk2 Escort with a YB Cosworth. My understanding is that the YB was not designed until about 1983/84 but Ford built engines in 1973/74 period with 16 valve heads based on the pinto cortina 2 litre block. I was in England in 2007 and took many photos of this car with a 16 valve 2 litre cortina engine. I have many detailed photos of the casting nos. and engine nos. on this engine. RS2000 Mk1 Escorts were homologated with a 16 valve 2 litre engine. Looking at the homologation papers the photos of the head look very similar to a YB head. My understanding is that these heads are Holbay heads.
Pete

The Holbay head is homologated for the RS2000 as a Group 2 option, Homologation paper #5566 amendment 5/5V dated 1/9/74. These heads are no longer being produced and in the UK thay have allowed the Warrior head which is a copy of the Holbay version, to be fitted as a replacement option.

My information is that the YB head as we know it now is not the head that was produced as the initial Cosworth Head for the Pinto / Cosworth block pre early / mid 1987

And yes Crunch, I did question as to how that particular car the Bruce refers to came to have a COD and the response was that it was believed that someone was racing one in that configaration in the UK around 1985/86.

[Racer Rog]

You are quite correct here Holbay developed these and they were quite successful, but they are very different from a YB, which were developed well after the MK1 and Mk11 Escorts used by date.
Roger




Hi all, I have been watching this posting with interest as I own a Mk2 Escort with a YB Cosworth. My understanding is that the YB was not designed until about 1983/84 but Ford built engines in 1973/74 period with 16 valve heads based on the pinto cortina 2 litre block. I was in England in 2007 and took many photos of this car with a 16 valve 2 litre cortina engine. I have many detailed photos of the casting nos. and engine nos. on this engine. RS2000 Mk1 Escorts were homologated with a 16 valve 2 litre engine. Looking at the homologation papers the photos of the head look very similar to a YB head. My understanding is that these heads are Holbay heads.
Pete

[ERC]

Take this as a scenario - which just happens to be fairly near to the truth!

1) A standard 1970's Rover 3500S P6 has a CoD as it conforms in all respects.

2) A standard 1956 MG Magnette has a CoD as it conforms in all respects.

3) The engine in the Magnette fails and the body of the P6 is wrecked in an accident, but combining the two into one car doesn't qualify for CoD or acceptance as a Classic, regardless of the DNA.

However, combining a Mazda Rotary with an Austin Seven using the same analogy could also apply, but if no one would let it run, (or maybe someone would let it run!) then the driver/constructor is out in the cold.

Combining a Gyspy Moth aeroplane engine with a sports Riley however, excites us all and yet when you examine it, it is merely our own perception and philosophy and dare I say it, personal prejudice, that accepts one but not the other.

No one has yet given me a REASON for not accepting a period repowered car into the classic fold. The only statement that has been put up so far is that "it wasn't built in period". That is not, in my humble opinion, a valid reason. It is a personal opinion only. No one has yet come up with a genuine reason as to why it shouldn't run.

Even if the ERC Series and/or the MGCC Series were the only events that accepted the car, that would be my problem, no one elses. Certainly not the commission's problem as to where cars may run, as further down the line, rules are already in place to prevent a Rotary Austin 7 running with us. It is up to meeting organisers/promoters to choose to invite Series cars, or, they have an open grid where they decide who can and can't run. If organisers accepted the Rotary Austin, then they would have to accept any potential backlash from other competitors. Not the Commissions' problem.

I wouldn't expect a repower to be allowed into the current HD Festival meeting for example, as that meeting is currently aimed fairly and squarely at conforming cars, the closer to Schedule K the better. If however, the dollar counts, so instead of inviting the BMW E30s for example, who may not make up a full grid, that grid was offered to the ERC Series (which is highly unlikely!) who might fill the grid, then the organisers would have to accept the series eligibility rules, so it is all self policing at meeting level.

Having a car scrutineered to Schedule A rather than AA doesn't appear to be a major problem, given that scrutineers are there for safety reasons not eligibility reasons anyway. We won't broach the vexed problems of roll cages today though...

[Bruce Sollitt]

There are probably quite a few cars out there with COD's that maybe should never had got them. Of course; you try to limit the mistakes. The question, Crunch, was quite straight forward ... and relevant ... and nothing to do with the Rally Commission Chairman. Historic & Classic rally cars are COD'd against Schedule RH which is your purview.

A "period modification" as defined in RH requires manufacturers homologation. This was not the case with the YB powered Escort and the COD was incorrectly issued. We have all accepted that the mistake was made, the car exists and that is history.

The question remains whether that has set precedent for future applications and whether that precedent is limited to exact replications of this particular COD or other makes and models similarly modified.

I have particular interest in the answer as I am presently looking to import a car for the 2014 Silver Fern. Given your revelation, that there may be "quite a few cars with COD's that should never have got them", others may be similarly interested in the answer.

[RogerH]

The question, Crunch, was quite straight forward ... and relevant ... and nothing to do with the Rally Commission Chairman. Historic & Classic rally cars are COD'd against Schedule RH which is your purview.

A "period modification" as defined in RH requires manufacturers homologation. This was not the case with the YB powered Escort and the COD was incorrectly issued. We have all accepted that the mistake was made, the car exists and that is history.

The question remains whether that has set precedent for future applications and whether that precedent is limited to exact replications of this particular COD or other makes and models similarly modified.

I have particular interest in the answer as I am presently looking to import a car for the 2014 Silver Fern. Given your revelation, that there may be "quite a few cars with COD's that should never have got them", others may be similarly interested in the answer.

Although I am not conversant with this particular car, I think I read in an earlier post by Crunch that indicated that the owner had come up with documentation that an Escort ran with this engine/head in period. If this documentation was incorrect then the basis on which the COD was issued was also incorrect and I would have thought the COD could be accordingly withdrawn. You certainly don't want to perpetuate something that is not correct.

[Bruce Sollitt]

I agree Roger. Although Crunch has also stated that, once issued, a COD cannot be rescinded. Which was the comment that prompted the enquiry as, if a precedent is established, it opens significant floodgates.

[RogerH]

I agree Roger. Although Crunch has also stated that, once issued, a COD cannot be rescinded. Which was the comment that prompted the enquiry as, if a precedent is established, it opens significant floodgates.

You can't have a situation where a COD has been issued in error and despite that it can't be rescinded. A COD is applied for by an applicant who provides information in support of the application to a vetting group. The COD is approved or decline on the basis of the information provided. If it is subsequently found the information provided is wrong (either by error or deliberately) then the basis of issue is flawed and it should be reassessed with the correct information. If this results in the COD being withdrawn then I would think the applicant has no come-back against MSNZ.
It seems totally illogical that an applicant can put in a COD application saying his car has X gearbox (which complies) when all along it had a Y gearbox that didn't comply and then demand the COD stands despite the clear error. It should make no difference whether the "error" was deliberate or a genuine mistake.

[Bruce Sollitt]

The issue, in this particular case, is not the accuracy of the information provided by the applicant, but rather the wrongful interpretation of it's relevance as assessed by the COD issuer.
Now, I absolutely agree. The COD ought be revoked.
However 5 years have passed and the car has changed hands, at least once but possibly more, with the COD no doubt forming a sizeable part of it's value. Perhaps the window of opportunity has gone?
In which case, where does it leave the rest of us?

[ERC]

However 5 years have passed and the car has changed hands, at least once but possibly more, with the COD no doubt forming a sizeable part of it's value.
I am not sure that on its own, a CoD for the majority of cars, adds significantly to the value. In the early years particularly, there were extremes. Some were denied for petty reasons and others slipped through the net. Over the years, the jury is well and truly out as to the real value of the whole CoD system. I also doubt that the average auditor is going to establish or determine the accuracy of the CoD as it stands now, just with a cursory inspection. If the auditor is a marque expert, it is highly unlikely that they are experts on all other marques.

For a genuine single seater or sports racer with history, maybe even a saloon with history, the CoD establishes a degree of provenance, but on its own, doesn't.

For a run of the mill production car such as a VW Golf, or an MGB, I doubt the CoD adds any value at all and is seen by many as no more than a flurry of red tape/paperwork and extra cost, for no real benefit. Once a cage is welded into a classic saloon or GT, the dash modified or rear seat modifed to accommodate it, it is permanently damaged and devalued anyway.

There have been many such cars offered on TradeMe and generally, they fetch a much lower price than an unmolested standard car, even though the owner has spent a thousand or two on safety equipment.

A V8 stuffed into an Escort is obviously not pure, but at least there is no finger pointing and bonnet lifting, which is not always the case with cars presented as standard or period.

At the risk of repeating myself yet again there is no level playing field in classics anyway other than maybe the BMW E30s, which is a control series, so any cars in our series with 300cc or 500cc more than declared, are handicapped according to track performance anyway. They kid no one and therefore there is virtually no finger pointing.

[RogerH]

I'm not too sure that documentation like a COD (and a MSNZ log book) doesn't add value in certain circumstances. Not too long ago an un-named high profile person with an un-named car that was an excellent replica of the real thing applied for a log book with a chassis reference belonging to the real car. It was probable that this would have got through the system and a log book would have been issued giving the car an identity which would have been accepted overseas. Fortunately people knowledgeable with respect to this marque got involved and it was eventually issued with a log book that recorded it was not the real thing. Likewise a COD can be used as a "seal of approval" that the car is acceptable for racing in NZ - and this can have a value, especially when there are cars around that for whatever reason are "orphans".

With respect to the matter of cars over the capacity declared, the first question is why didn't they declare the correct capacity? If they have told porkies about capacity what other components aren't true to the declaration? For example, T&C have provision for overcapacity (Groups 1 and 2 provide for a 12.5% increase and Groups 3 and 4 allow a 0.060" overbore). These increases were meant to allow for a re-bore on tired engines but increasingly new engines are built to the increased capacity. I suppose it gets to a position of where you draw the line - today an extra 500cc is OK, tomorrow a sequential gearbox is OK because it looks like a standard gear lever, the next time it may be a supercharger that was never there and then dread of dreads it could be one of Ray's engine transplants :rolleyes: Eventually you haven't got a classic or historic car anymore, just something that use to be one.

[crunch]

Bruce
I am told that the information supplied by the owner of the car at the time was correct. There was no interpretation as it was in black & white.
I am also informed this was the second Schedule RH COD issued. Apparently two or three (1st Silver Fern?) years ago when someone raised this whole thing, it was reviewed again and found to be correct.

Any further issues you have with this subject should be addressed to Mike at the MSNZ office.

[ERC]

With respect to the matter of cars over the capacity declared, the first question is why didn't they declare the correct capacity? If they have told porkies about capacity what other components aren't true to the declaration?

These increases were meant to allow for a re-bore on tired engines but increasingly new engines are built to the increased capacity. I suppose it gets to a position of where you draw the line - today an extra 500cc is OK, tomorrow a sequential gearbox is OK because it looks like a standard gear lever, the next time it may be a supercharger that was never there and then dread of dreads it could be one of Ray's engine transplants :rolleyes:

I think Roger that your points are 100% valid - for an historic race car. A FF or FJ with an increased capacity is obviously a major issue, but with Ford Escorts (aren't they just a brilliant example!!!) in race or rally spec, they can be anything from a cooking 1100cc to 2000cc and way beyond, in all states of tune and head configuration. As they are likely to be sharing the same gravel or tarmac at the same time, it all becomes rather academic.

The idea of sequential gearboxes which I presume were not a period option is a red herring, but superchargers have been bolted on to all manner of cars for 100 years as period options. Under the old book, we had the classic case of "a car must have a cylinder head of the original material". For a BMC B series engine, this was a cast iron siamesed port. On the next page "period modifcations are allowed" so we also had cars with alloy cross flow heads etc.

None of this however answers the repower issue with period parts... I think Crunch is as keen as anyone for this to be discussed openly but apart from a bit of hijacking and a couple of posters, any form of useful discussion for guidance so far, has been a bit thin.

Maybe most people either don't have an opinion or don't care so it does make it difficult to establish a way forward.

[Bruce Sollitt]

There was no interpretation as it was in black & white.
You are correct Crunch. The issue is black & white.

Was the Escort homologated with the YB engine? No, it was not. Therefore it is not compliant and should never have been issued a COD.

I am sorry Ray if you think I have hijacked the thread. That was not the intention.

This is a thread about repowered classics and my question is essentially - if the officialdom knowingly (or otherwise) allow the certification of a non compliant car, what impact does that have on others when they are making buying decisions, in respect of such cars?

The question could have and should have been answered when it was raised two pages ago. Crunch's inability and/or unwillingness to acknowledge the issue and answer the question is disappointing yet, sadly, not at all surprising.

[ERC]

No one in their right mind would race the nose heavy Volve B30 engined car, when the better balanced B20 engined car was more suited to track work, so homologation in period is yet another red herring. That effectively rules mine out as getting an FIA Appendix K label, even though it is standard in all except wheels and brakes, because they weren't homologated for racing in period.

Homologation is not the current issue here. Fitting period parts is. So does that include fitting a period engine or not? Is an engine a part of the package?

[Paul Wilkinson]

I have no knowledge of classic racing but I won't let that stop me from having an opinion! :p

Absolutely yes, cars modified with period parts should have a place in classic racing, how un-Kiwi to think otherwise! We need all types of racing. We need the purists who require homologation before the cover can be changed on the fuse-box - these 'stock' cars are our history, we need to see them and they need to have a class that allows them to be competitive and race with like-minded people. We also need the people that put a period blower on a BDA and cram it in the back of their Hillman imp, who doesn't appreciate looking at a well engineered, tastefully modified race-car? Who doesn't like seeing a Hillman Imp nipping at the heels of a Porsche or maybe showing it a clean pair of heels...? Most of us love the old Sports Sedans/OSCA car, aren't period-mod cars a bridge between that class and the 'pure' classics?

How about a class where period-mods are allowed as long as all the components were available within a set time of the car's manufacture? I'm sure we'd see some great cars put together, maybe some old Sports Sedans modified and brought back into the fold? For the less modified or less highly tuned cars, how about a power to weight ratio rule that would allow them to run in a wider field of classics but not single-marque races? Once the power to weight ratio is broken they go and play with the highly modified cars.

I've only got an old S4 Lotus 7. Nothing anyone would get worked up about if I modified and a type of car subject to a lot of in-period modification. I'd like to think that if I decided to put a 70's-spec rotary in the car, there would be somewhere 'classic' to play. I also think that if I was to put a latest-spec rotary with electronic everything and twin-turbos that I should be out in the cold, running with modern racecars.

Anyway, just an opinion from someone who doesn't know much!

[ERC]

Exactly the sort of response I was hoping for. Thanks Paul.

[RacerT]

Historic and Classic racing regulation is something the Australians do so much better than us in New Zealand, which is surprising for the offspring of prostitutes and murders. CAM's have a very strong will to preserve older vehicles as they were and to resist change very strongly - probably the strongest in the world in that regard. Is this correct course of action? You would have to think so, because this is the mandate given to their commission and to the NZ Historic and Classic Commission. In a pure sense the cars should be as they were. If it's an E Type Jag, then it is as original as it can be, taking into account some changes in tyre technology etc.

Taking Pauls account above of how much fun it would be to see an Imp beating a Porsche, if the imp was powered by Lotus Twin Cam and the Porsche by a Chev small block, would any of it have much relevance? Sure it would be exciting and may have been possible in period, but it is of novelty value only, as its not a Hilman Imp racing a Porsche.

Unlike Australia, the NZ scene especially up north is dominated by classic and historic race series. In Australia if your are an 'O' class sportscar, then that is what you race in all over Australia and you know that there are stringent rules that you will race under and every car will comply, be it Perth or Sydney. It is not possible to get NZ to line up with this thinking, so the different series will prevail.

We have a set of regulations in the MSNZ book for Historic and Classic racing that form a framework for H&C racing in NZ, along with the COD system to verify that competing vehicles do in fact meet these regulations. This is workable except for the number of series that spring up not quite adhering to the H&C rules. Just lately we have had the new MX5 series start up with its own set of rules that don't compley with the manual. Why? These cars could have just as easily adhered to the Historic and Classic racing existing rules and ensured an easy absorbtion in the future - now they won't. Same thing with the BMW E30 class, old enough for H&C,but misses out by running a single seat and allowing the glove box to be removed. Why are there four Muscle Car groups? Surely some common ground could be found?

Anyway, I digress from the thread. Ray, the possible modified in period cars could be run as a series if you could get enough of them, but would be outside the MSNZ rules. You would probaly find race meeting promoters that would run a grid of these cars for the novelty value. The concept does appeal to some people who dream of moving outside of the existing boundaries of what Historic and Classic racing is about, just as OSCA does in the South Island. The cars that were modified this way in period, with V8's in Escorts and Cortina's are real Sch K cars and another lot of modern 'recreations' could devalue the original cars.

Putting modern gear in old cars makes them a great club car, but it is not for Historic and Classic racing. Imagine the dissappointment of an old guy wondering up to an MG Magnette and saying to his grandson, "this were great old cars son. I remember taking your grandmother for her first date!" Then "Aaaaah what have they done to the engine, the whole cars wrong, oh my heart!"

[RogerH]

Historic and Classic racing regulation is something the Australians do so much better than us in New Zealand, which is surprising for the offspring of prostitutes and murders. CAM's have a very strong will to preserve older vehicles as they were and to resist change very strongly - probably the strongest in the world in that regard. Is this correct course of action? You would have to think so, because this is the mandate given to their commission and to the NZ Historic and Classic Commission. In a pure sense the cars should be as they were. If it's an E Type Jag, then it is as original as it can be, taking into account some changes in tyre technology etc.

Taking Pauls account above of how much fun it would be to see an Imp beating a Porsche, if the imp was powered by Lotus Twin Cam and the Porsche by a Chev small block, would any of it have much relevance? Sure it would be exciting and may have been possible in period, but it is of novelty value only, as its not a Hilman Imp racing a Porsche.

Unlike Australia, the NZ scene especially up north is dominated by classic and historic race series. In Australia if your are an 'O' class sportscar, then that is what you race in all over Australia and you know that there are stringent rules that you will race under and every car will comply, be it Perth or Sydney. It is not possible to get NZ to line up with this thinking, so the different series will prevail.

We have a set of regulations in the MSNZ book for Historic and Classic racing that form a framework for H&C racing in NZ, along with the COD system to verify that competing vehicles do in fact meet these regulations. This is workable except for the number of series that spring up not quite adhering to the H&C rules. Just lately we have had the new MX5 series start up with its own set of rules that don't compley with the manual. Why? These cars could have just as easily adhered to the Historic and Classic racing existing rules and ensured an easy absorbtion in the future - now they won't. Same thing with the BMW E30 class, old enough for H&C,but misses out by running a single seat and allowing the glove box to be removed. Why are there four Muscle Car groups? Surely some common ground could be found?

Anyway, I digress from the thread. Ray, the possible modified in period cars could be run as a series if you could get enough of them, but would be outside the MSNZ rules. You would probaly find race meeting promoters that would run a grid of these cars for the novelty value. The concept does appeal to some people who dream of moving outside of the existing boundaries of what Historic and Classic racing is about, just as OSCA does in the South Island. The cars that were modified this way in period, with V8's in Escorts and Cortina's are real Sch K cars and another lot of modern 'recreations' could devalue the original cars.

Putting modern gear in old cars makes them a great club car, but it is not for Historic and Classic racing. Imagine the dissappointment of an old guy wondering up to an MG Magnette and saying to his grandson, "this were great old cars son. I remember taking your grandmother for her first date!" Then "Aaaaah what have they done to the engine, the whole cars wrong, oh my heart!"

Totally agree with this synopsis - keep historic and classic cars as just that - cars that represent "standard" cars of the period with modifications allowed under current regulations. This doesn't mean that there should be no home for re-powered or out of period modified "classics". Although in my mind they can never be a genuine historic or classic car they could find a home somewhere if enough get built and someone puts on events for them. It is probably unlikely that they could race in classic meetings like the upcoming Festival but some clubs could put on a grid for them in their clubmans type meetings?

[AMCO72]

Ah, and here is the problem. These guys WANT to race with the Classic/Historic brigade, not with some ordinary club meet. There is a perception that the Historic/Classic scene is 'a bit special', like the Denny festival. Not only do these guys want to RACE, they want to be SEEN to race. Mixing and mingling with the 'enthusiasts' at these special meetings carries a bit of cudos, does it not. No club meet that I have ever been to has this feeling of style. Well how can it with a bunch of Evos, Hondas and Toyotas......good as they are for what they are doing.
Time and again on this thread it has been questioned 'where do these guys race'......there are meetings, but the owners arent interested because the admiring public are not there, drooling over there babies.
A different era I'm afraid. Look at the average age of the Classic brigade......oldish!!!!!

Now, as for bolting a supercharger on.....go for it. Note Supercharger NOT Turbo charger. Superchargers have been around since 'Auntie fell off the Tram'. Unfortunately they got a bit of bad press in the old days, as we didnt fully understand what was going on in the combustion chamber......compression ratios. I had Shorrock super charger on my MG TC for a while, and even with the terrible petrol around at the time certainly gave the rather pedestrial TC a bit of get up and go. The TC had as standard a rather low CR so it didnt seem to worry it unduly......and had a lovely sound.
Woops strayed a bit Ray....sorry

[Racer Rog]

I could not agree more, in fact there is a group, including one from the VCC, that have been charged by the H & C Commission to look at the CAMS regulations in Historic racing and try and tie them up with our T & C, to give it more strength, unfortunately another couple of minor events has slowed this down a bit ( Xmas and the Governace review ) but its hoped that this will be back on track very soon, personally, I think if MSNZ had followed this plan, and I hate to note that I think the Aussies got it right, I don't think we would be having a lot of the debates we are now.
Roger

Historic and Classic racing regulation is something the Australians do so much better than us in New Zealand, which is surprising for the offspring of prostitutes and murders. CAM's have a very strong will to preserve older vehicles as they were and to resist change very strongly - probably the strongest in the world in that regard. Is this correct course of action? You would have to think so, because this is the mandate given to their commission and to the NZ Historic and Classic Commission. In a pure sense the cars should be as they were. If it's an E Type Jag, then it is as original as it can be, taking into account some changes in tyre technology etc.

Taking Pauls account above of how much fun it would be to see an Imp beating a Porsche, if the imp was powered by Lotus Twin Cam and the Porsche by a Chev small block, would any of it have much relevance? Sure it would be exciting and may have been possible in period, but it is of novelty value only, as its not a Hilman Imp racing a Porsche.

Unlike Australia, the NZ scene especially up north is dominated by classic and historic race series. In Australia if your are an 'O' class sportscar, then that is what you race in all over Australia and you know that there are stringent rules that you will race under and every car will comply, be it Perth or Sydney. It is not possible to get NZ to line up with this thinking, so the different series will prevail.

We have a set of regulations in the MSNZ book for Historic and Classic racing that form a framework for H&C racing in NZ, along with the COD system to verify that competing vehicles do in fact meet these regulations. This is workable except for the number of series that spring up not quite adhering to the H&C rules. Just lately we have had the new MX5 series start up with its own set of rules that don't compley with the manual. Why? These cars could have just as easily adhered to the Historic and Classic racing existing rules and ensured an easy absorbtion in the future - now they won't. Same thing with the BMW E30 class, old enough for H&C,but misses out by running a single seat and allowing the glove box to be removed. Why are there four Muscle Car groups? Surely some common ground could be found?

Anyway, I digress from the thread. Ray, the possible modified in period cars could be run as a series if you could get enough of them, but would be outside the MSNZ rules. You would probaly find race meeting promoters that would run a grid of these cars for the novelty value. The concept does appeal to some people who dream of moving outside of the existing boundaries of what Historic and Classic racing is about, just as OSCA does in the South Island. The cars that were modified this way in period, with V8's in Escorts and Cortina's are real Sch K cars and another lot of modern 'recreations' could devalue the original cars.

Putting modern gear in old cars makes them a great club car, but it is not for Historic and Classic racing. Imagine the dissappointment of an old guy wondering up to an MG Magnette and saying to his grandson, "this were great old cars son. I remember taking your grandmother for her first date!" Then "Aaaaah what have they done to the engine, the whole cars wrong, oh my heart!"

[Paul Wilkinson]

There are a quite a few 'club' cars that should have transitioned into 'classic' racecars. They may have had bolt-on flares and wings etc but they generally had some semblance of the original engine or perhaps a period-repower. Many didn't get the of chance to age gracefully though and have either been wrecked or given totally modern powerplants in order to remain competitive. Personally I think we've missed a trick here, there are a lot of people who would like to see these period racers sliding around the track with their peers. Preserving our local motorsport history and character should be given priority up there with preserving marque heritage. I know classic and historic fields are big right now but history suggests it is much safer to be forward rather than inward-facing.

Anyway, I've said too much for someone that doesn't know terribly much about racing, I've probably made a fool of myself so over and out. Cheers.

[ERC]

We have a set of regulations in the MSNZ book for Historic and Classic racing that form a framework for H&C racing in NZ, along with the COD system to verify that competing vehicles do in fact meet these regulations. This is workable except for the number of series that spring up not quite adhering to the H&C rules. Just lately we have had the new MX5 series start up with its own set of rules that don't compley with the manual. Why? These cars could have just as easily adhered to the Historic and Classic racing existing rules and ensured an easy absorbtion in the future - now they won't. Same thing with the BMW E30 class, old enough for H&C,but misses out by running a single seat and allowing the glove box to be removed. Why are there four Muscle Car groups? Surely some common ground could be found?
A few relevant points here - and thanks for all the responses.

1) Our series was in existence long before CoDs...

2) The reason one or two series, including BMW E30's and Alfa Trofeo (and our own) plus presumably MX5's do not conform is because within the T & C rules, if adhered to the letter, are not 100% workable.

3) With the Alfa's, they run what the drivers want - knowing more about Alfas than anyone else.

4) Ditto BMW E30's.

5) Having standard dashboards, glove box lids, rear seats, headlinings, original window lifting mechanisms, all original exterior chrome trims etc. are generally petty rules that might be OK if it wasn't for the practicalities of sourcing, (particularly with older and scarcer cars - try and get the hockey stick chrome trims for a Magnette...) fitting decent roll cages etc.

6) You have made the assumption that the T & C rules are totally bullet proof and perfect. They are not and never have been. With Alfa Trofeo, we went through every single word and submitted our suggestions and also the reasoning behind them. Had the Commission accepted them in their entirely, (apart from the repower issue which we left open for a new set of rules), then both Alfa and ERC runners and BMW E30's would have conformed without any real dilution of the intent of T & C.

Although all are entitled to an opinion, I fail to see how standard window winding mechanism or a glovebox lid is so important. We insist on a front passenger seat but why is it so important?

Does anyone think that the average paying spectator sitting up on the bank cares a stuff?

As for running repowers in a separate series, by all means, but let's walk before we run/race. Unless there is a viable grid (which there isn't at the moment), then I am quite happy with them in our series to the agreed limitations as stated earlier. When and only when are there enough around to make it viable will it happen.

AMCO72 - I have give up doing the festivals as much as it is nice to race in front of an appreciative crowd, several of us have opted out having supported the earlier festivals, as scratch races only, with such disparate cars and massive speed differences, is neither racing nor enjoyable and in the wet, distinctly unsafe. Mixing under 3 litre cars, several of which are very standard, small and not very quick, with Muscle cars may appeal to the David & Goliath supporters, but in truth is not very apealing either.


Putting modern gear in old cars makes them a great club car, but it is not for Historic and Classic racing. Imagine the dissappointment of an old guy wondering up to an MG Magnette and saying to his grandson, "this were great old cars son. I remember taking your grandmother for her first date!" Then "Aaaaah what have they done to the engine, the whole cars wrong, oh my heart!"
I am not advocating putting a modern engine into an old car. This message board is full of people raving about Zephyr Corvettes, Morraris, V8 Starlets etc, so let's get this in perspective. A Morrari recreation is not exactly going to upset grandad when he spies a Ferrari engine under the bonnet of a car he did his courting in.

People have modified cars since day one and sorry, but restoring a totally knackered Magnette to original was never going to be worthwhile, as it was too far gone in all respects and just not worth it, much as I love the Magnette as a standard car.

There are times when people tend to forget that we are a small country with just 4m people and the heritage of NZ has always been to adapt with what is available. Purism is wonderful, but once again, who wants to see a grid of six pure 1100cc Ford Escorts and more to the point, it is not a viable, economic race grid unless race entry fees aren't to skyrocket - and who would pay to watch them anyway?

Several smaller "pure" race groups (super historics stands out here and Clubmans a year or two ago) have been very heavily subsidised by the larger less pure groups so be careful what you wish for... Any grid with less than 15 cars on a regular basis is not contributing much to the financial viability of the meeting.

[Howard Wood]

Maybe most people either don't have an opinion or don't care so it does make it difficult to establish a way forward.

Ray,

Don't think we don't have an opinion, I'm willing to bet there are some pretty strongly held views here on the subject but the various views were being reasonably well articulated. However, surely there is room for all combinations and permutations, a chrome and polish rodder may not want a rat rod but can appreciate it never the less.

For classics the issue used to be getting enough entries to run a class which I guess is why regulations were initially loosened and that probably still applies at the "lesser" meetings. More prestigious meetings such as the HD Festival meetings can be picky about purity and Goodwood can command a full grid of Ferrari GTOs at 10 million quid each.

For me, the beef is more about modern components and the VCC stance where a car's age is determined by the year of the MAJOR components seems to make sense. The Cosworth YB example is clearly an '80s engine, any car with a YB, whether its a Mk 1 Escort or a Sierra should run with "80s cars, similarly a sequential 'box is probably '90s therefore any car so fitted is a "modern" as far as I am concerned. I am not sure you can legislate about minor components such as shocks and springs, oil or even tyres except as regards size. The unavoidable fact is that the technology is those areas has improved vastly and even your GTO will be running modern oils because to do anything else would be lunacy.

As regards engine transplants, I can see no issue as long as it was done as in period and nobody is trying to pass the result off as some famous car from whenever. Of course a repowered car would never comply with sched K for example and if that were the entry requirement of a particular series or meeting organiser, then so be it.

On the other hand, if a series organiser such as the BMW series draw up regulations too far away from accepted H & C regs, that is their perogative but anyone building a car purely to those regs would be well advised to remember that the world is littered with redundant one make series race cars.

[ERC]

Perfectly well balanced response Howard. Thanks.

Just so that you can see what I am talking about! Thought it was about time we had a pic to lighten the words.

Cruddy interior
14491

Even worse bodyshell with the whole of the sills and underfloor area and lower bodywork stuffed. The front was even worse. The engine and brakes were seized. Front suspension tie bars so corroded that they snapped on dismantling.
14488

Work in progress last year
14489

Ditto
14490

[RogerH]

Ray, your Magnette looks a very interesting project (I was following it on your site for a while) but it reminds me of a project I did a few years ago. The intent was to built a race sports/saloon and although it was not as radical as yours (the same engine was used), I soon clicked that with the "improvements" I was making (predominantly suspension and brakes) it was not going to find a home in classic racing. It is now a fast road car that I'm very happy with it in that guise but it taught me a lesson of checking to see if my project would have a home before I started planning the work and buying components.

[ERC]

The difference is Roger that mine does have a home if I decided to race it, as our rules allow it - and if yours is Euro, probably your's would also be welcomed.

[Racer Rog]

The difference is Roger that mine does have a home if I decided to race it, as our rules allow it - and if yours is Euro, probably your's would also be welcomed.
If that is the case Ray, why do you want a CoD?, its just a club car, you can't call it a classic, nor is it historic, the interior looks nice, (and very modern) but in many ways, its no different in mechanical terms, to the Hot Rod owned by my next door neighbour, his only took 5 years to build, its well engineered, as I don't doubt yours is, but in essence, they are the same type of car.
Roger

[RogerH]

If that is the case Ray, why do you want a CoD?, its just a club car, you can't call it a classic, nor is it historic, the interior looks nice, (and very modern) but in many ways, its no different in mechanical terms, to the Hot Rod owned by my next door neighbour, his only took 5 years to build, its well engineered, as I don't doubt yours is, but in essence, they are the same type of car.
Roger

I suppose Roger, you are saying something along the lines that what is the difference between a "re-powered classic" and this : http://www.ipernity.com/doc/155265/13271072

[Racer Rog]

Yes, totally correct, the next door neighbours is a Chev coupe, its repowered, early S/B Chev, runs like the devil is after it, put a roll cage in it and its a classic race car, NOT, this might be a extreme view, but what is the difference between what Ray has done, and what he has done, none in my mind, on the face of it both well engineered, but Classic or Historic, Nah.
Roger



I suppose Roger, you are saying something along the lines that what is the difference between a "re-powered classic" and this : http://www.ipernity.com/doc/155265/13271072

[RacerT]

If that is the case Ray, why do you want a CoD?, its just a club car, you can't call it a classic, nor is it historic, the interior looks nice, (and very modern) but in many ways, its no different in mechanical terms, to the Hot Rod owned by my next door neighbour, his only took 5 years to build, its well engineered, as I don't doubt yours is, but in essence, they are the same type of car.
Roger

Racer Rog you have hit the nail on the head! If you want to built a T bucket, or hot rod, say a '38 Chev Coupe, then go for it, but it will be a 'hot rod'. As a 'hot rod' it can join a Hot Rod Club and meet in parks, go for drives etc. The point is, that the 'hot rod' doesn't try to join the local VCC Club and expect full entrance to all their events and benefits of being a vintage car.

Ray, you mention that your series existed before COD's. Bit of a red herring, as it didn't exist before the MSNZ regulations.
Like many off the series running today, the promoters seek to put their own personal stamp on the series. In their minds it is for the best of reasons, but the result is still an array of invented regulations that almost line up with T & C, when with a bit of effort we could have a coordinated approach for the long term future - pity really!

Howard's last paragraph sums it up.

"On the other hand, if a series organiser such as the BMW series draw up regulations too far away from accepted H & C regs, that is their perogative but anyone building a car purely to those regs would be well advised to remember that the world is littered with redundant one make series race cars."

[ERC]

Racer Rog you have hit the nail on the head! If you want to built a T bucket, or hot rod, say a '38 Chev Coupe, then go for it, but it will be a 'hot rod'. As a 'hot rod' it can join a Hot Rod Club and meet in parks, go for drives etc. The point is, that the 'hot rod' doesn't try to join the local VCC Club and expect full entrance to all their events and benefits of being a vintage car.

Fair comment, BUT, the hot rod doesn't want to go on a race track, it is a show pony and therein lies the difference!

In my own case I am not after a CoD but the MSNZ rules for T & C have a milder requirement for scrutineering, recognising the safety requirements, particularly cages, which are very much a modern afterthought, and the design of the older cars was somewhat different to today's cars.

In simple terms, there exists a protocol and a structure for pure classic and historic cars, so in that respect, owners of such cars are catered for and catered for very well. I have no problem with that at all.

My point is that there is no coverage for the cars that sit between a modern club car and the genuine classics/historics with the intention of doing some track work, however mild or serious.

To simply state that because it isn't a pure classic, therefore it must be a modern is somewhat missing the point. That is like saying there is soccer and rugby, but rugby league or Aussie rules don't exist, both having their roots in the two former codes, or, one day test cricket, cricket max and 20/20 don't exists either.

The above examples are merely catering for a need that may always be a niche, but they do have support. How many here can't stand the tedium of a 5 day cricket test, but will happily watch a one dayer?

I love the purity of front engined GP cars of the fifties and the formula juniors of that era and even the pre 1970 GP cars, but I also love the way-out saloons and sports racers of the era. I really can't see the problem with accepting that not all want to adhere to the period purity, when so much of the period was anything but pure anyway.

The biggest complaint of modern racing is that in their quest for total parity, they have totally stifled the sport to the extent that it has little or no appeal to the average spectator let alone the enthusiast.

Within the classic fraternity, even at the Festivals, there have been so many one offs and specials that add a bit of interest to the grids. You may think that the "Comic Book Special" is indeed a joke, especially alongside the Coopers and period race cars but I thought it was just great to see it out there.

In a few years time, if we are not careful, we'll see a continued decline of genuine classics simply because they are getting too valuable to race. Take a look at the 1983 Pukekohe Le Mans relay race entry for example, then take a look at what is NOT racing any more on a regular basis, locally.

Examples: Morgan 4/4; Morgan Plus 4; Jaguar XK 120, XK 150, XJ12, E-type; Triumph Spitfire; Fraser-Nash Replica; Daimler SP250; Austin Healey 100/4, 100/6, Healey Sprite; Porsche 356; Triumph TR6, TR5, TR4A, TR3; Lotus Elan; Ferrari Dino; Reliant Scimitar; Lotus Europa - and bear in mind several of these were fielding teams, so there were several examples.

You can argue that scrapping a 1956 Magnette would be less ignominious than repowering it, but I suggest you try and take a look forward. Do you just want E30 BMWs, Ford Escorts, Capris and MGBs to be the only cars on the track, because that is the way it is rapidly heading as parts for them is relatively easy? Heck, you can even get a brand new Heritage MGB bodyshell and retain your existing rego number. Woodsman's axe anyone?

We have NOT seen a spectacular growth of support for Schedule K cars despite the constant pushing for it. We have seen a massive growth in drivers just wanting to go out and have fun, with a minimum of red tape.

[RogerH]

Ray - this is good robust debate and we haven't had to resort to abusing each other :)

A couple of issues :

I don't think the point about the hot rod not wanting to race is relevant as a hot rod is a rod hot irrespective of whether it sits inside as a show car, goes on runs, competes at the drags or anything else.

The genuine period "way-out" saloons are catered for under MSNZ's regulations but the problem is when someone wants to recreate a car that is meant to be something that use to exist but doesn't do it properly (Custaxie) or someone wants to create something that never exited but maybe could of. These perhaps could sit under Schedule CR but most Classic meetings don't provide for these cars as they are generally acknowledged as not being true classics.

The "Comic Book Special" is actually a genuine period car built in 1952 : http://bmhspecial.bigpondhosting.com/

[ERC]

Robust debate was always the intention Roger. I always appreciate different views and have been aware since the day I started that it was always going to be contentious. My greatest support was from the MG Car Club, right from day 1 and they are still the keenest of all groups to see the car completed.

As long as people don't throw beer cans at it or key it, I can live with any written or verbal criticism, but everytime I see under the bonnet or inside a so called genuine classic and see Kevlar air boxes, engine management systems, shift lights and yes, even gps video/data recorders, forgive my wry smile!

[Russ Cunningham]

Terrific debate on this thread and dignified. Hopefully some good things may come of it but just remember?....the world ends on the 21st of this month! Personally, I'm going to write myself off on the 20th and if I find we're all here still on the 22nd I'll continue my build on the Austin Princess. Already half way through with the kevlar bodywork.

[crunch]

Terrific debate on this thread and dignified. Hopefully some good things may come of it but just remember?....the world ends on the 21st of this month! Personally, I'm going to write myself off on the 20th and if I find we're all here still on the 22nd I'll continue my build on the Austin Princess. Already half way through with the kevlar bodywork.

Russ; can I respectfully suggest that if you are rebuilding an Austin Princess....you have already written yourself off!

Bruce; forgeting the personal attack last statement of yours, the reason I have referred you to Mike at the MSNZ office is that he is doing the research for me as the office has all the original paperwork submitted, and the email trail of the time. The reason I have not written an earlier reply is that I have been in Wellington since Friday and the two days before that were taken up with family time with a brother home from Spain for the first time in 5 years. Mike will get back to you and/or me with an answer. As I stated in my first reply to your question we obviously try to limit mistakes. If there is a mistake made, obviously no other cars will be given a Schedule RH COD is this configuration.
In future; I would appreciate less of the personal slurs.

I hope the world doesnt end on the 21st December as on the 22nd I am viewing a personal collection of historic race cars!

Great discussion, which I am sure the H&C Commission are following. Ray; your car is looking great, but in my humble opinion please find a better steering wheel??? It's a credit to you

Merry Christmas one and all and stay safe
Raymond Bennett

[woody]

Russ, Will the car be ready for the Denny Hulme Festival?

[AMCO72]

Actually Crunch, I think the steering wheel might be from a MG Montego. If it is, then its all in period. Cant see Ray using one from a Toyota Hilux!!!!!!!. Instruments look to be from a MK2 Jaguar, inserted into a dashboard from........Rays fertile mind.

[Racer Rog]

That will just at the rust line?
Roger
Terrific debate on this thread and dignified. Hopefully some good things may come of it but just remember?....the world ends on the 21st of this month! Personally, I'm going to write myself off on the 20th and if I find we're all here still on the 22nd I'll continue my build on the Austin Princess. Already half way through with the kevlar bodywork.

[GeebeeNZ]

ERC commented
"In a few years time, if we are not careful, we'll see a continued decline of genuine classics simply because they are getting too valuable to race. Take a look at the 1983 Pukekohe Le Mans relay race entry for example, then take a look at what is NOT racing any more on a regular basis, locally.

Examples: Morgan 4/4; Morgan Plus 4; Jaguar XK 120, XK 150, XJ12, E-type; Triumph Spitfire; Fraser-Nash Replica; Daimler SP250; Austin Healey 100/4, 100/6, Healey Sprite; Porsche 356; Triumph TR6, TR5, TR4A, TR3; Lotus Elan; Ferrari Dino; Reliant Scimitar; Lotus Europa - and bear in mind several of these were fielding teams, so there were several examples".

Ray I still look at and enjoy old tapes I have of races like the Porsche Lemans relay and wonder why we cant get those cars out racing again. I dont think that its just because they are valuable I think the modern regulations have had a big impact on it. Many of those cars ran without rollbars and were normal road cars. Once the roll bar regs came in along with the increase in fire safety requirements for overalls etc plus an increase in the cost of competition licences. many of the gentleman racers decided to call it a day. I am not saying the increase in safety requirements is a bad thing but I believe it has had an effect on the number of road going sports cars that we used to see race in large numbers.

Graeme

[nzeder]

Interesting topic Ray, I have been for the last 8 years or so been a regular spectator/helper for a few racers in your series. I now have 2 x Datsun 260z 2 seaters as my first one has body mods out side of T&C rules and an opportunity came up to purchase another part finished Targa/race car 260z. This new project did have a repower that also did not fit T&C so I am in the process of correcting the drive train issues and finish the assembly.

What I find interesting is how even MSNZ own rules have changed. I recall the T&C rules stated that body parts could be substituted for alternative material if the original parts where NLA (no longer available). However now in manual 35 this has been removed and body must be of the material as supplied at manufacturing. So does this mean cars that once conformed to T&C with fibre glass guards as original steel items are unavailable then today that car is now illegal under T&C?

The way I see it/read the regs schedule k is there for standard production cars (that is 100% as they were made with no option/catalogue parts allow to be added) or for the, let me state that again, for "the" 100% period race car as it was as it should be. So using your escort example Ray, a schedule k escort 1300 sport will be as it left the factory no mods no exceptions or it must be "the" one and only "Hannu Mikkola" winning car. Anything else fits under T&C no exception. Or am I reading it wrong?

The current T&C rules are clear allow for period mods and the use of period parts for those that want to race a modify classic. I personally believe schedule CR needs room for saloons, for those that want to build a replica of "Hannu Mikkola" winning escort, or a retrospective special of a 1970 formula Ford chassis with a Toyota 3k engine or Mazda 10a rotary or a rover v8...someone could have build these in period or did, so why not an MG with a V8 using period chassis and engine how is that different to the single seater retrospective special? Or am I missing something there too?

For me I like the series Ray runs, different marques have good clean racing and a handicap grid can aid in any performance advantage a V8 MG has over a pinto power mk2 escort. I hope that one day I can finish my track 260z and be allowed to join such a grid/series. In the mean time I wait for room in a certain fabricators shed/hoist to get me car there to sort out my installation of a stock drive line ;)

Regards
Mike Lucas

[ERC]

We look forward to seeing you Mike. People have already made representations on your behalf! Good post. My car is now off the hoist and home as I try to finish off a small mountain of jobs...

A good point about fibreglass panels. As soon as I can, I'll revert to getting fibreglass front wings done for mine, as the ones I have are now just too scarce to risk on road or track. Ditto boot and bonnet lid. I have advertised for a spare bonnet and so far have only been offered two - both from the other side of the world and not exactly cheap, even without the cost of packaging, shipping and insurance, which is also a major factor when we are located so far from Europe.

As you point out, we are pragmatic about such things for very sound reasons - scarcity of originals. Once again, easy for an MGB or a Mini, not so easy for many other makes.


Well spotted. It is indeed an MG Montegeo wheel because the steering column and switches and wiper motor and delay unit are also Montego, and the column includes hazard flashers and switch. The speedo and rev counter are in fact MGB, the rev counter has been converted for a V8 and the instruments are period Smiths - of course. I'll happily move to a woodrim wheel when finances allow - and I can find one that fits!

The dash follows the shape of the original but is completely home made, as the original Magnette didn't have a rev counter or oil temperature gauge - and I can't stand "pod" or bolt on additions, so the original dash shape was simply stretched to incorporate the tacho and oil pressure gauge. Mixing mahogany and burr walnut never worked for me so it is now all burr walnut, with a padded dash top which is much safer than highly reflective polished wood.

If you have studied ergonomics at all, you'll also know that both MGBs and Aston Martins have a fatal design flaw - with hands at a quarter to three, you can't see the essential instruments... When you are doing a project like this, it seems rather pointless replicating the mistakes of the past when it is is so much easier to make improvements that are sympathetic to the whole car, hence incorporating a fan overrride switch and fuel pump switches with warning lights and a warning light for a low fuel level.

All those of us who ran Minis in our youth, went out and bought a stage 1 or 2 cylinder head, bolted twin carbs or a Weber, a LCB exhaust, added an oil cooler, dumped the grotty seats and fitted Corbeau or something similar and fitted a set of Cosmics, Dunlop or even Minilite wheels and fitted a straight through exhaust and an alloy rocker cover. Most also added a rev counter, possibly with an after market dash. Keeping a Mini bog standard just wasn't done and we accept all those mods today as period.

Hot rod? Customised? Call it what you will, but there is nothing that couldn't have been done in period and in that respect, I maintain it is rather more period than many cars we see out there.

Good debate - still - and hopefuly more will join in.

[ERC]

Fair comment Graeme re roll over requirements and I tend to agree that is also a major factor. The current regulations are totally over the top and highly inconsistent and even Crunch is chasing this one.

I do believe that decent overalls are important though, as we are running older cars where a burst fuel line and fire is probably far more likely than a roll over. The response time at our tracks is likely to be well outside the 30 second window that a decent set of overalls will protect you. I'd also be happy if gloves were mandatory too, as fire is extremely nasty and like Stirling Moss, the thing that most of us genuinely fear.

If we counted all the race meetings held over the last 60 years, the number of drivers, laps and distance covered, we'd probably find that the accident and fatality rate was considerably less than on the public roads...

[Bruce Sollitt]

Yes Crunch, I ought not allow my frustrations to get the better of me. My apologies.
Also thankyou for finally providing some semblance of an answer to the original question.

Classics & historics are generally expensive, can be temperamental and are usually costly to run.
It is vital that the integrity of the competition be maintained in order that those who commit the investment, time and
effort are not disadvantaged.

I understand and sympathise though with Ray's, and Graeme's, points.

In rallying we generally all play to the same safety rules and any rally car in NZ is eligible for pretty much any event. Therefore, regardless of specification, the opportunities to use a rallycar are endless.
If in racing there are cars which would, through practicality, require the leniencies of Schedule AA in order to race anywhere, it would seem curious to deny those freedoms simply on the basis of authenticity.

[Russ Cunningham]

Russ, Will the car be ready for the Denny Hulme Festival?

Unlikely Woody, would love to be there but the revolutionary all plastic motor is still undergoing teething problems. Nothing major, just little clitches like pistons welding themselves to the bore and things like that. Really have appreciated your input regarding the distributor. Your suggestion of a 500ml coke bottle works really well and you were right----adding vodka did advance the dizzy! in fact its so far advanced that we might use it for a member of parliament.

[ERC]

Can anyone please tell me how Clark Poctor's Nissan powered Escort was allowed to run at the Hulme festival? Great to see the car, but a high degree of hypocrisy here?

With my own car, after numerous battles, (one major win!) it is getting near to being on the road thanks to the guys at LVVTA.

As I am out of action at the moment, plenty of time to think, but to repeat what has been said before, we have an under supported Schedule K for pure classic saloons. A class that everyone raves about, but when push comes to shove, very few actively support it. (Less than 10% of our current 115 cars have a K CoD.)

Why do HMC cars need a comprehensive set of regs? Why not just Schedule K?

We have a T & C set of rules that may be a little bit looser than Schedule K, but don't adequately reflect the requirements of the majority of active racers and in some areas are so close to K that it renders T & C effectiveness and desirability questionable.

There is no CR for repowered saloons.

Yet, if I were to post a survey of 25 saloons, old and new, but without any engine details being disclosed and asked any casual observer simply to categorise them as old/classic or modern, then there is no doubt at all in my mind that no repowered classic could possibly be thought of as modern.

Having ascertained that, and surveyed 25 'classics' with repowers dating from before the cars were originally built, to a repower from the period it was built, to modern engines, then where would Clark Proctor's Nissan powered Escort fit and where would a Magnette/Rover fit? One is welcomed into the classic fold by virtue of racing at the Hulme Festival, the other still sits in no mans land? I can totally destroy the purity of the Marcos by dumping the scarce, slow, heavy, Volvo six, still with even scarcer original Volvo manual 4 speed gearbox, and pop in a Rover V8, but I can't rescue a 1956 heap from the scrapyard and use the same engine. Sad lack of logic here somewhere.

[BWilliams]

It's a bit like my brothers Turbo 2litre Pinto Escort rallycar.It's not allowed to run in the classic class due to being a non factory produced engine,but it could have been built at the time, and uses period parts.Even if it ran the 2.3 factory turbo engine it wouldn't be allowed,due to Escorts never using that engine.But throw a Rover V8 or a rotary in there and its legal.

[Kiwiboss]

It's a bit like my brothers Turbo 2litre Pinto Escort rallycar.It's not allowed to run in the classic class due to being a non factory produced engine,but it could have been built at the time, and uses period parts.Even if it ran the 2.3 factory turbo engine it wouldn't be allowed,due to Escorts never using that engine.But throw a Rover V8 or a rotary in there and its legal.

Im on both you sides RE: Nissan powered Escort at the Hulme Festival, you need to put your concerns direct to the 4 Festival Directors. Dale M

[Howard Wood]

At the risk of sounding cynical, the Proctor Escort is allowed for much the same reasons as the Stewart/ Skope Porsche was allowed at Ruapuna.

The non negotiable stance of the HMC group clearly shows that competitors can and will build cars to proper, well thought out regulations.

Ray, I am of the view that if you tightened your regulations to at least T&C with a reasonable compliance lead in time, you might be pleasantly suprised at the response, both from your existing client base and potential new competitors.

[John McKechnie]

Howard- just reading a Motorman from the 60s that says- Howard Wood is a better insurance risk than his brother...........
Does this bring back memories?

[Howard Wood]

Possibly the '70s John but who is counting. To be fair, my brother Donald started his FFord career with a bang, backwards through the "catch" fencing at Levin while attempting to overtake the field around the outside. My personal favourite early quote was Robin Curtis in MotorAction who described our driving as "driving (the cars) as if they had stolen them".

[Kiwiboss]

The non negotiable stance of the HMC group clearly shows that competitors can and will build cars to proper, well thought out regulations.

If even half the proposed vehicles that are plan'd for HMC turn up i'd be happy, it is clearly proving that people/person want to build to a definded set of regulations is the way to go, especially when they see the rules are for everyone, no exceptions!! the non points/championship status clearly sorts out the type of person heading in our(HMC) direction, this would be my No1 advice to anyone proposing a class, 2nd is to make sure its guide lines are along a proper historic and classic racing as used by many overseas!!

Dale M

[ERC]

With 17 years under my stewardship and continued strong support (two more registered this week) our rules and attitude have stood the test of time. Longevity counts for a lot in my book and I doubt you'd find a happier bunch or racers anywhere.

You have to be careful that creating tough rules may have a detrimental effect, if it seeks to eliminate rather more than it encourages or if parts supplies are rare and rules demand originality. One of our reasons for success is the wide variety of make, model and year. At the risk of sounding like a long playing record, there is no level playing field when engine capacities vary so much. Muscle cars by definition have large engines. Ours are from 1300cc to 7000cc...

Sure, we'd like to be closer to T & C, (and we have offered our suggestions) but whilst there are either unworkable or unecessary rules or hiccups within their rules (and only those who know what they are, can really understand), we will happily carry on and welcome and encourage participation.

We totally support HMC's philosophy, but whilst we run as a points series, no-one knows the points awarded until the awards dinner as they are never published, but a season of six or seven rounds means that there are enough to make participation or building a car worthwhile.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it...

[markec]

Even under Dale's watchfull eye, it appears that those cars running in HMC are devaloping much more horsepower than they did period. Technology has moved on, methods of gaining hp have changed more than subtley, so where does the line stop. The OSCA V8's were getting around 400hp, thats the good ones, back in the 70's and 80's, with the exception of the Wills RX8, that was getting closer to 500hp, many of the middle of the pack cars in HMC would seem to be up around 500hp with those with a few more dollars and knowledge probably over 600hp. So its not only classes of the cars but also the performance increases that should be considered.

[Kiwiboss]

Even under Dale's watchfull eye, it appears that those cars running in HMC are devaloping much more horsepower than they did period. Technology has moved on, methods of gaining hp have changed more than subtley, so where does the line stop. The OSCA V8's were getting around 400hp, thats the good ones, back in the 70's and 80's, with the exception of the Wills RX8, that was getting closer to 500hp, many of the middle of the pack cars in HMC would seem to be up around 500hp with those with a few more dollars and knowledge probably over 600hp. So its not only classes of the cars but also the performance increases that should be considered.

You are correct Markec, i have 100 more HP than Moffat had back in the day and the Gimblett Camaro is 600HP(500 at wheels) early on we figured we can't stop what some have as long as the rest of the car was correct, so all we could do is restrict it, EG: iron heads, stock port spacing and valve angle, but to myself and others the most important part of HMC was Body(iron panels), Suspension, steering, Wheel size, bias period tyres, interior/exterior correctness. To fit 15" wheels required a max 12.25 dia rotor, we added that to keep historic correctness in brakes the calipers must be a 2 piece lug mount design from the era, and from there we can chip away at the other items so although not prefect still pretty close(for NZ anyway)

If i had my way i would have completely adopted the Australian Group Nc rules as their attention to detail and for rule accuracy in Historic Saloon car racing is fantastic, unfortunately not a single vehicle in NZ would have comply'd so would have meant building a complete fleet from scratch, something at my age of early 50's i doubt i'd live to see, but this would have been the best way!!

Also, under T&C and basing the HMC rules on similar vehicles raced in the day, any complying vehicle can use its correct engine as supplied by the factory in a "standard series production" car so although my Boss 302 is currently 358 its still no larger than a 351, 390 or even a Boss 429 engine which i can use, and probably produced more HP, same as a early Camaro that can use a 427 BB. The secret being is you gotta make the rest of the car LIVE with all this HP, and too much horsepower with not much else makes for a spectacle atleast.

Heres a great quote i got from Tony Roberts the other day: "The problem is that modern knowledge can take an idea that didn’t work in period and fix it in the 2000’s" and that one sentence is sooo correct when it comes to ANY old car racing, rite down to Alfas, Escorts, Mini's, etc

Also, and this important to remember, all HMC vehicles have their correct style of engine fitted, they are NOT "Repowered Classic's"

Dale M

[Steve Holmes]

Even under Dale's watchfull eye, it appears that those cars running in HMC are devaloping much more horsepower than they did period. Technology has moved on, methods of gaining hp have changed more than subtley, so where does the line stop. The OSCA V8's were getting around 400hp, thats the good ones, back in the 70's and 80's, with the exception of the Wills RX8, that was getting closer to 500hp, many of the middle of the pack cars in HMC would seem to be up around 500hp with those with a few more dollars and knowledge probably over 600hp. So its not only classes of the cars but also the performance increases that should be considered.

Thats a really great point Mark, although I would say in many ways horsepower has just become cheaper, which has made it more accessible to more people. The HMC rules bare many similarities with those of Australian Improved Production, of the late 1960s through 1972 period, which bore cars such as Bob Janes ZL1 Camaro, Norm Beecheys HT Monaro, Pete Geoghegans Super Falcon, Allan Moffats Coke Mustang etc.

The Geoghegan Super Falcon was producing 620hp in 1972, which was a phenomenal amount for the period. Bob Janes Camaro and even his new HQ Monaro which appeared right at the end of the Improved Production era were both said to be producing 600hp. Even now there aren't that many HMC cars that have more power than the Geoghegan Falcon, but back in 1972 it was massively expensive to buy that sort of horsepower, whereas now its much cheaper.

Its now possible to buy 850hp Nascar motors which is what is happening in the Central Muscle Cars group, which is really phenomenal power. But the HMC engine rules will never allow those types of motors to be used, and cars must retain their original bonnet, which limits the height of the inlet manifold they can run, therefore also limiting horsepower. There are often tricks to achieve more power, but power is only useful if you can use it, so by limiting wheel and tyre width, and tyre grip, reducing brake size, and the way the suspension performs, there is usually a limit to how much horsepower is actually useful.

As far as horsepower gains comparing cars in period to how they are now, I would think Formula 5000 has probably made greater gains than the HMC cars.

[Steve Holmes]

Can anyone please tell me how Clark Poctor's Nissan powered Escort was allowed to run at the Hulme festival? Great to see the car, but a high degree of hypocrisy here?

With my own car, after numerous battles, (one major win!) it is getting near to being on the road thanks to the guys at LVVTA.

As I am out of action at the moment, plenty of time to think, but to repeat what has been said before, we have an under supported Schedule K for pure classic saloons. A class that everyone raves about, but when push comes to shove, very few actively support it. (Less than 10% of our current 115 cars have a K CoD.)

Why do HMC cars need a comprehensive set of regs? Why not just Schedule K?

We have a T & C set of rules that may be a little bit looser than Schedule K, but don't adequately reflect the requirements of the majority of active racers and in some areas are so close to K that it renders T & C effectiveness and desirability questionable.

There is no CR for repowered saloons.

Yet, if I were to post a survey of 25 saloons, old and new, but without any engine details being disclosed and asked any casual observer simply to categorise them as old/classic or modern, then there is no doubt at all in my mind that no repowered classic could possibly be thought of as modern.

Having ascertained that, and surveyed 25 'classics' with repowers dating from before the cars were originally built, to a repower from the period it was built, to modern engines, then where would Clark Proctor's Nissan powered Escort fit and where would a Magnette/Rover fit? One is welcomed into the classic fold by virtue of racing at the Hulme Festival, the other still sits in no mans land? I can totally destroy the purity of the Marcos by dumping the scarce, slow, heavy, Volvo six, still with even scarcer original Volvo manual 4 speed gearbox, and pop in a Rover V8, but I can't rescue a 1956 heap from the scrapyard and use the same engine. Sad lack of logic here somewhere.

Ray, surely your V8 Magnette could also race in that Allcomer group with the Proctor Escort? Why would you not be allowed in there?

[RogerH]

Ray, surely your V8 Magnette could also race in that Allcomer group with the Proctor Escort? Why would you not be allowed in there?

The "Escort" was running in the Pre 85 Open Saloons with other "re-powers" such as the Roger Williams Mercedes and the Dobbe Viva. I presume that the criteria for entry was that there was some established period history with the re-power and accordingly there may be a question as to how period the modifications to the "Escort" actually are.
If the significant modifications are not period then it probably shouldn't have been allowed to run in that grid - if this is the case then I don't think it should create a precedent that would open things up for more modern re-powers.

[Kiwiboss]

The "Escort" was running in the Pre 85 Open Saloons with other "re-powers" such as the Roger Williams Mercedes and the Dobbe Viva. I presume that the criteria for entry was that there was some established period history with the re-power and accordingly there may be a question as to how period the modifications to the "Escort" actually are.
If the significant modifications are not period then it probably shouldn't have been allowed to run in that grid - if this is the case then I don't think it should create a precedent that would open things up for more modern re-powers.

"I presume that the criteria for entry was that there was some established period history with the re-power"

Yes, this is/was surpose to be the criteria. Dale M

[ERC]

Ray, surely your V8 Magnette could also race in that Allcomer group with the Proctor Escort? Why would you not be allowed in there?
As I understand it, the rules for entry to the meeting wouldn't allow it. However, please bear in mind the Magnette is a road car, not a race car and was built with low key competition on mind.

One of the reasons I didn't enter the Hulme with the Marcos is the performance and size difference between my car and others. When I visualise large 500bhp+ metal bodied cars in HMC, sharing the track with my 90bhp at the wheels tiny fibeglass car, or racing against Tony Roberts 700bhp Corvette in the Sports GT race, then sorry, I see potential problems.

Ditto with the Magnette you run amongst cars of a similar performance and putting a fairly standard 190bhp Rover engined car against 500bhp monsters is not on.

[John McKechnie]

Ray,
I would like to take issue with this.We so called HMC monster cars watch our mirrors as we dont want accidents with our fellow cars, and we are aware of the little ones nimbleness and ability to appear from nowhere. None us us got close to each other, we are not even racing.
Also, most obvious, is that there is a large compliment of under 3 litre cars, so not many have your fear.
You are safer on the track, than travelling in your light car on the motorway and a huge truck zooms past sucking you into its draught.

[RogerH]

Ray,
I would like to take issue with this.The accidents that happened were caused by smaller cars going for gaps. We so called HMC monster cars watch our mirrors as we dont want accidents with our fellow cars, and we are aware of the little ones nimbleness and ability to appear from nowhere. None us us got close to each other, we are not even racing.
Also, most obvious, is that there is a large compliment of under 3 litre cars, so not many have your fear.
You are safer on the track, than travelling in your light car on the motorway and a huge truck zooms past sucking you into its draught.

I saw a YouTube video the other day of one of the HMC races and it appears as though the Camaro drove the Porsche off the track (it happens about 30 sec into the clip) : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_OaOg5SCes

[ERC]

I am not aware of the accidents John as I wasn't there, so I can't really comment, however, it raises the issue as to why there were any accidents at all, given that it was all supposed to be fun and you weren't even racing for chocolate fish? Were the guilty drivers held to account and brought into line? So far HMC is only fielding 14 or 15 cars but when you get up to 25 (which I hope you do) the chances of a driver not being up to the present standards increases.

Dale has stated several times that he is not bothered if the class is small, but pure, but if I put on my promoter's hat, each grid costs the promoter about $2,000, so the class has to grow to be financial viable.

I have always maintained that although we'd like to think our level is all about the cars, the truth is that driver behaviour is equally important, maybe more so. I'd far rather compete alongside someone in a repowered car who is awake, aware and not going to do anything stupid than someone in a Schedule K car with pots of cash who seems oblivious to what our level of racing is all about.

We are probably tougher on driving standards than most and this year, any panel damage has to be reported and those guilty of poor driving will be dealt to accordingly. We have done it before and we will do it again.

I love to see the muscle cars out there but I am not sure that mixing them with under 3 litre cars is such a brilliant idea. Maybe a better mix would be the larger, faster over 3 litre sports/GT/saloon cars? Watching Angus doing a David and Goliath is not a justification for the mix.

Agree totally about being safer on the road, but in the 22 years I have owned my car, every single bit of damage on the car has been the result of someone else's mishap on the race track, three times, avoiding a spinning car (one on his roof) or when they have lost it or spun out of Pukekohe's hairpin and caused a nose to tail behind them.

Having had problems in the past with Mk2 & XJ6 Jaguars not seeing me, as my roof is only 43" from the floor, I can assure you that it is all too easy to slip under the mirrors of larger cars!

We are off the subject though...

[Howard Wood]

Ray,
I would like to take issue with this.The accidents that happened were caused by smaller cars going for gaps. We so called HMC monster cars watch our mirrors as we dont want accidents with our fellow cars, and we are aware of the little ones nimbleness and ability to appear from nowhere. None us us got close to each other, we are not even racing.

John, how about "happened when smaller cars went for gaps", the only post accident flag marshall's report I saw put the blame squarely on the larger car.

[RogerH]

Refer to post #100 for a video of a HMC small car / big car incident.

[Oldfart]

Refer to post #100 for a video of a HMC small car / big car incident.

On which thread Roger?

[RogerH]

On which thread Roger?

This thread Rhys - last post on page 5.

[John McKechnie]

Howard, all I was trying to do was to bring Ray to understand that the size and power difference did not mean that he was in danger from large cars, he was equally vulnerable to smaller cars. I did not single any incident specifically. I was not denigrating any driver also.
On the track I respect every car and driver . I am not arguing your point here. I was once a small car-Mini- driver and I know the risks sharing a corner with a large car. Ray himself pointed out that David and Goliath battles is not a justification for the mix.
Pointless trying to make a point sometimes.

[fullnoise68]

Let me clarify something: On the first day of the Festival there was an all in drivers meeting, then Dale held an extra one for HMC.
The driver of the white Porsche in the video you are referring to wasn`t even there, he only entered the second weekend. People who were there would have heard Dale repeatedly state `give the big cars room, most HMC cars are left hand drive so have a blind spot in the right rear'. Now watch the video where the Porsche with the in car camera is behind the Capri going up over the dogleg, and the camera Porsche has to brake suddenly, as the problem Porsche brake checks the Capri. Why brake there, like that? What you didn`t see are the problem Porsche' brake lights - that`s because there aren`t any! Who, in an `historic' race meeting would continue to dive bomb another car - which is clearly in front, his left front bumper hit my r/h door - into that corner up on the ripple strip, then coming out of the corner, again clearly in front, he tags me for a second time in the r/r guard spinning my Camaro and him ending up against the concrete. There was a hearing with the Clerk of the Course, there was no flag marshall report, and it was adjudged a `racing incident'. As with my comments on one of the other threads, if you are all on the same page, the racing can be good fun. That`s what happened, that`s my version, my Camaro was damaged from the `A' pillar back to the rear bumper, the damage to the white Porsche was left frontal, meaning at no stage was he past me at all. There`s another thread for Motorsport Fiction, I`ll stick to the facts, end of story.

[RogerH]

Are we watching the same video clip? I've looked at it several times and it appears the Porsche held the inside line and the Camaro abruptly changed its line and came across from left to right and then hit the Porsche.

[fullnoise68]

You don`t think the Camaro should of gone from left to right, given that the corner actually goes that direction? You don`t think that the white Porsche didn`t avoid contact by simply braking? And you don`t think that by tagging the Camaro in the r/r guard, the Porsche was again in the wrong? Brake = Stop. Accelerator = Faster. Muscle Car = Front Engined US/Aust Origin.
I`m over it, I`ve moved on, I`ll let those that want to dwell or dither over it do just that.

[ERC]

Sorry guys, but this spat doesn't belong in this thread, even though it raises several valid issues.

[bigbanger]

..... The OSCA V8's were getting around 400hp, thats the good ones, back in the 70's and 80's, with the exception of the Wills RX8, that was getting closer to 500hp, many of the middle of the pack cars in HMC would seem to be up around 500hp with those with a few more dollars and knowledge probably over 600hp. So its not only classes of the cars but also the performance increases that should be considered.

400 hp at the flywheel for 'good' V8 engines in OSCA in the 1970's/1980s?

Now more lies have probably been told by competitors about horsepower than anything else, but speaking of SI OSCA, 400 hp may have been true of some engines in the early/mid 1970's, Ian Munt told me he had 400 hp from the 302 Ford Windsor as originally fitted to the Capri, but by the 1980's, most of the top runners running Chev and Ford engines 5.7 to 6.0 litres were north of 500 hp and certainly Ian claimed 540 bhp from his Murray Baker built fuel injected Chev 366 that he ran from around 1983. Inky Tulloch, John Osborne, Rod McElrea, Avon Hyde and many others were well north of 500 hp, as was Rob Kennards Ford.

The 'good' Chev engines by the likes of Murray Baker, Denis Wise and Rob Kennard often had extensively worked angle plug (292 'Turbo') iron or Brodix alloy heads and induction ranged from fuel injection through the popular 4 x 48 IDA Webers to the single 4 bbl Holley. And it was these engines in what today we see as comparitively basic chassis/suspension setups that managed to break lap records set by Leo Leonard in the PDL Mustang II, so that had to be some decent horsepower there.

But it's certainly true that it's easier to get more horsepower per cu in today, even using the same or similar heads as back in the day. Gas flowing, computer analysis and just 'development' have helped here.

[ERC]

Are we watching the same video clip? I've looked at it several times and it appears the Porsche held the inside line and the Camaro abruptly changed its line and came across from left to right and then hit the Porsche.

Sorry, couldn't resist! That is what I see. Three wide into the corner before the incident surely means three wide coming out and not moving off line?

[Allan]

If we return to the origional thread..........
The way I see it there are as many ideas on what is and what isn't a "classic" as there are owners and cars. Whilst I appreciate the time, effort and workmanship that has gone into your MG ERC I personally don't see it as a classic as it exists. I would consider it to be a hotrod. Had that particular MG been raced 25 or more years ago as it now exists then it would be a whole different story. But be proud of what you have done.
The next point I would make is on replicas of previously raced vehicles such as the Custaxie. In my mind there was only one Custaxie and it no longer exists and so the Custaxie II is not a reincarnation of the origional. It is a completely "new" car built using today's materials and technology. I have no opinion as to where it fits into the ERC or HRC fields. What would happen if someone decided to build another Custaxie? Or for that matter half a dozen people decided to make a replica of the Carney Escort Twin Cam for example?
I do not have issues with the conversion of an 1100 Escort into a Twin Cam provided the conversion is done correctly warts and all.
Some time in the late 70s I attended a meeting at the Auckland Car Club called by a group who were trying to get a series running for pre 1960 cars. There was no resolution at the end because there was so many differing views as to what should or shouldn't be allowed and as and added problem there were already a couple of cars being built and the owner/builders wanted the rules written to suit their cars.
I am NOT taking a dig at anyone in particular here nor everyone in general so please no one get offended by what I have written. I would not envy the job of setting the rules for any class. Let us remember that things should be done within the "spirit of the regulations".
Just as aside I am a Targa competitor and car preparer. There have been some changes to the classic class that we run in. What is very interesting is that one of the changes bought about three different interpretations to one of the changes.
Interesting.
Allan

[Dave Silcock]

I have posted on this subject before, but why does a car have to have been in exsistence before to be able to race? If it is built to the design and technology of the period then is it not for example a Twin cam or BDA Escort? or a Mini Cooper? What is wrong with having 6 or 8 of these running round our tracks? As long as no one is claiming it's something it's not. I am reminded of a elitist who came into my shop, looked at My Mk2 Jaguar and said" is that a replica of your old car" and I replied " no I have just built it" and he said " I don't think we should have these sort of cars racing with real ones" Hello where are we going to get enough cars to make a field in this country? How ever he has got his wish, because of other reasons it won't be racing anyway. And on the subject of people paying over the top for cars with history, it does my heart good to hear of the problems faced those who bought the disgraced Jimmy Saville cars LOL!!

[ERC]

The way I see it there are as many ideas on what is and what isn't a "classic" as there are owners and cars. Whilst I appreciate the time, effort and workmanship that has gone into your MG ERC I personally don't see it as a classic as it exists. I would consider it to be a hotrod. Had that particular MG been raced 25 or more years ago as it now exists then it would be a whole different story.

And therein lies the major issue. How do you then define a Hot Rod? A Zephyr raced in period with a Corvette engine was just accepted as "a car". Put a 1970 Corvette engine into a Mk4 Zodiac today and it magically becomes a Hot Rod.

Why do we need to to have specific definitions anyway? Everything is down to Personal Perception. As several regular posters on here know, I carried out a very quick quiz on perception and the results enlightening.



Some time in the late 70s I attended a meeting at the Auckland Car Club called by a group who were trying to get a series running for pre 1960 cars. There was no resolution at the end because there was so many differing views as to what should or shouldn't be allowed and as and added problem there were already a couple of cars being built and the owner/builders wanted the rules written to suit their cars.

No surprises there then! Nothing changes... Most series develop to suit a perceived need and I am the first to admit that long before I even dreamed of building my own car, I was aware that Jo Hill's Triumph Herald V8 was outlawed from mainstream classic competition, as many deemed it a Hot Rod, but what I saw was a well constructed car, driven with verve and a real crowd pleaser on Targa.

Watching the on track performance of many drivers over many years, the ones who really get the crowds on their feet are the pre-cursors to the drifters. The days when there was more power than grip. That is why Muscle cars are so popular today. Smoking tyres and bags of oversteeer appeal to the crowds far more than beautifully driven Formula Fords. Just put Ken Smith in Formula Ford or Skidmark Parsons in his TR8 or Mal Clark's Rover on old rally tyres and ask the average (and I do mean average) spectator who rates the higher in spectator appeal?

However, anyone wanting to recreate the SPIRIT of a bygone age, by putting in a larger engine is now deemed to be a hot rodder, even though the car may have been built out of period parts.


I am NOT taking a dig at anyone in particular here nor everyone in general so please no one get offended by what I have written. I would not envy the job of setting the rules for any class. Let us remember that things should be done within the "spirit of the regulations".
Spot on. I don't take offence, but the spirit of the regulations is indeed the key point. It should also be the spirit of the age and in that respect, many people change tack 180 degrees.

Dave's post above is in similar vein. Perception/viability/sustainability/practicality etc. It is not a one dimensional issue, but some see it that way. "It wasn't done in period". Why not? Because no-one thought of it. That is the only reason and for some of us, that is not sufficient to outlaw.

Meanwhile, the critics will fit electronic ignition, use modern oils/filters/tyres/shocks/disc pads, remanufactured heads, cams and cranks (even blocks!) to a better quality etc., "to iron out issues with the originals" not to mention data loggers, shift lights etc., to their own "classics".

[Allan]

To answer Dave's point on The Escort Twin Cam/Mini Cooper etc there is no problem with these being built from a lesser body provided the car is true to the period. The point I was trying to make is that there is/was only one Custaxie/Carney Escort/Spears Escort etc and in my opinion unless one has the majority of the origional car with which to build another then that car is lost forever. The point here is that the likes of the Coppins Zephyr Corvette were such iconic cars that if they could be found and rebuilt to origional specs should be allowed in. To build one from scratch today is to build a hotrod.
Allan

[ERC]

After 10.75 years, at long last I have a legal road registered car with period V8 power!

[Alan Hyndman]

Fantastic news Ray! Any photos of it in action on the roads getting it's first speeding ticket? :-p

[CUSTAXIE50]

To answer Dave's point on The Escort Twin Cam/Mini Cooper etc there is no problem with these being built from a lesser body provided the car is true to the period. The point I was trying to make is that there is/was only one Custaxie/Carney Escort/Spears Escort etc and in my opinion unless one has the majority of the origional car with which to build another then that car is lost forever. The point here is that the likes of the Coppins Zephyr Corvette were such iconic cars that if they could be found and rebuilt to origional specs should be allowed in. To build one from scratch today is to build a hotrod.
Allan In what way would it be a hotrod if one put the time in,to build true to period a car.

[Carlo]

Possibly the '70s John but who is counting. To be fair, my brother Donald started his FFord career with a bang, backwards through the "catch" fencing at Levin while attempting to overtake the field around the outside. My personal favourite early quote was Robin Curtis in MotorAction who described our driving as "driving (the cars) as if they had stolen them".

Donald's name came up in a conversation last night, I have been lead to believe that his pick up line when chatting birds up in UK pubs went something like " Do you have a car and does it have a tow bar". If the answer was yes he gave her some of the good old Woods Bros attention and solved how he was going to get his race car to the next meeting

[Allan]

In what way would it be a hotrod if one put the time in,to build true to period a car.

The problem here, as I see it, is these older cars were built to comply with a different set of rules and used the technology available at the time. You could build an exact copy of one of these but because of the current rules on items such as role cages, using it would not be allowed. Ask Ray (ERC) about cages sometime.
Allan

[Jac Mac]

The problem here, as I see it, is these older cars were built to comply with a different set of rules and used the technology available at the time. You could build an exact copy of one of these but because of the current rules on items such as role cages, using it would not be allowed. Ask Ray (ERC) about cages sometime.
Allan
I would re-phrase that- there were no rules in regard to roll cages to comply with. Addition of a full cage to any older car or even a modern car will stiffen the chassis and improve the handling to the point that a modern production class can no longer be seen as a true picture of that cars performance and obviously an old classic that once handled like a sponge pudding can be transformed into a joy to drive. BTW I 'waded' thru Ray's build thread one evening.....