The State of NZ Motorsport.

[Dave Silcock]

I am sure David will correct me if I am wrong but from what I understand from my readings here is that he started the project a few years ago and during that time built the roll cage to the then current specification. By the time that the car was completed time had passed and the requirements had changed to that which is the current FIA specification relating to the diameter of the main roll cage hoop and because of that, his cage was no longer eligble.

I got caught out the other way in that I built my replica RS2000 rally car to the then current specification only to find out that it had changed internationally to the new specification and my thoughts of taking the car overseas to compete have now been dashed as I am not going to cut half the car apart so as to make the changes required to fit in the larger diameter tubing

For sure It would have been nice to know that there was a change in the wind when I could have done something about it but I guess we can not all be mind readers and I suspect that the same could be said for those in the MSNZ office

It is not the diameter of the tubing but an increase of .4mm in wall thickness,and that is allowable in mild steel. not taking into consideration the greatly increased stiffness of chrome moly. Your claim it is an FIA requirement does not ring true as various people on this forum have had to have FIA approved cars, with the ink hardly dry turned down by MSNZ. The fact of the matter is it nothing to do with safety and all to do about procedure. I am not going to buy into this stupidity and if the cage is not approved as it is I will take no further part in NZ motor sport.

[richard lester]

It is not the diameter of the tubing but an increase of .4mm in wall thickness,and that is allowable in mild steel. not taking into consideration the greatly increased stiffness of chrome moly. Your claim it is an FIA requirement does not ring true as various people on this forum have had to have FIA approved cars, with the ink hardly dry turned down by MSNZ. The fact of the matter is it nothing to do with safety and all to do about procedure. I am not going to buy into this stupidity and if the cage is not approved as it is I will take no further part in NZ motor sport.

reminds me of a few years back when the aussie v8 utes first turned up at manfeild for the tasman clash and MNZ wouldnt allow the australian homologated cages in the falcons ?? and some intense changes were made to the cars to get the event happening......ive never really been able to get my head around that one....

[Carlo]

Thanks for clearing that up David, as I said I got caught out with the changes that occured just after I built mine that they would have been nice to have been avoided

[rf84]

The AGCM was my first. A couple of things quickly became apparent:-
1 A lot of people think of car racing as a homogeneous group. It isn't. There are a lot of quite disparate groups ranging from sporting trials to truck racing. I have not yet decided if MSNZ is a bunch of masochists or a bunch of megalomaniacs. They seem to see it as their duty or right to administer anything with 4 wheels and a motor. In doing so they are making 'a rod for their own backs'.
2 No system is perfect. Another writer has alluded to the fact that we have a National government yet they did not get a majoity of the votes. Remember democracy could be 2 foxes and 1 chicken in the kitchen voting for who they are going to eat for dinner! From what I saw of the AGCM it is not a bad system.
3 A lot of the benefits to be gain

[screwdriver]

Wall thickness etc on roll cages on an existing car should never have been a major issue, as this is classic case of the law of diminishing returns.
I have been a spectator since the early 1950's, a competitor since 1970 and have lost count of the number of racing miles I have witnessed on everything from grasstrack to speedway, F1 to truck racing. In all that time, I don't think I have ever been at a meeting where there was a fatality and from memory, I can recall just three where there was any serious injury and very few where there was any minor injury. One of those was broken arm caused when the fire extinguisher came adrift! Ironic really.

I would be far more concerned at the paucity of fire extinguishers at marshals posts, given that 1 extinguisher is next to useless in a fire and the fact that the distance between posts is often quite long. Even a triple layer suit will not save you if the fire isn't extinguished within 30 seconds, meanwhile, we are fluffing around with roll bar thickness, when fire is the single greatest enemy to driver safety.

Motorsport (personal) safety took huge leaps forwards with the following innovations:
1) Hard hats/helmets
2) Fire resistant suits
3) Seat belts
4) Roll over bars
5) Roll cages.

The only item that has been introduced in recent years is a head and neck restraint. Improvements to any of those items in terms of specifications has such a tiny overall effect, it is immeasurable, so excluding a car with an older roll cage is petty in the extreme.

Most of us are not running F1 cars at F1 speeds and for those who only race less than 10 times a year, some of these so called safety improvements are no more than 'personal choice.'

You can still legally race an unmodified car in NZ with a 15 year old 2" lap/diagonal belt, yet up until recently a six year old 3"race harness could be deemed scrap, even it it had never even been used.

We need to get away from the US lawyer ambulance chasing mindset and apply reality. To exclude any Dave Silcock produced vehicle on a technicality, when quite clearly, the man is a proven engineer, is farcical.

Most updates to the rule book could surely wait until the end of the season, as bulletins every couple of weeks merely show that something hasn't been thought out properly in the first place. Building a race car can take years and I have a car that had its cage fitted years ago, to the then current regulations, but had it photographed and noted by MSNZ at the time. If it fails to be accepted now the car is almost ready, I'll simply remove it altogether, as the car will still be legal without it - and that is a crazy situation.

[Oldfart]

I wonder (as a result of something I was told) if the change to rollcage steel spec was brought about as a result of a worn out die at the steel works.
Of course the change was signalled, but only if you had a competition licence, and had signed up to the myriad of technicalities to be sent you by email, and then took the time to wade through them all. Many have been changes to the fines and other stuff that just overwhelm you, so the real issues slip by un-noticed.

[Dave Silcock]

Thanks for your support Old Fart, if you are right about the dies then as my steel was 08, and probably a lot earlier stock, mine should be OK don't you think?

[Oldfart]

Thanks for your support Old Fart, if you are right about the dies then as my steel was 08, and probably a lot earlier stock, mine should be OK don't you think?

I would have thought so! But then as one of those caught out by an FIA homologated cage (4 months old and OMP) not being deemed "compliant" I might be seen to have an axe to grind! FWIW every tube in the OMP cage was larger, and greater wall thickness than required, but the main issue was an extra curve in the front hoop (near the A pillar)

[Chris Read]

Saw this in a MSNZ conference report by Chris Watson of HRC.
Just thought it should be recorded somewhere in the discussion.

"Of the over 200 car clubs in the Auckland area, only 23 are affiliated to Motor Sport NZ, so of the approximately 97 clubs affiliated to Motor Sport NZ, our affiliated Auckland Clubs are very much in the minority. It is also interesting to note that HRC has recorded 2021 individual drivers competing at HRC meetings and there are only 4942 licence holders in New Zealand. Add in the drivers who compete at other Auckland events, like NZIGP meetings and the Auckland car clubs are providing half the competitors but have only 23% of the voting power. This is probably the main reason for the dissatisfaction with Motor Sport NZ from many Auckland competitors and clubs." Chris Read - Arrowtown

[RogerH]

Saw this in a MSNZ conference report by Chris Watson of HRC.
Just thought it should be recorded somewhere in the discussion.

"Of the over 200 car clubs in the Auckland area, only 23 are affiliated to Motor Sport NZ, so of the approximately 97 clubs affiliated to Motor Sport NZ, our affiliated Auckland Clubs are very much in the minority. It is also interesting to note that HRC has recorded 2021 individual drivers competing at HRC meetings and there are only 4942 licence holders in New Zealand. Add in the drivers who compete at other Auckland events, like NZIGP meetings and the Auckland car clubs are providing half the competitors but have only 23% of the voting power. This is probably the main reason for the dissatisfaction with Motor Sport NZ from many Auckland competitors and clubs." Chris Read - Arrowtown

I think Chris Watson has expressed the sentiment of a number of Auckland clubs and competitors - and backed it up with some hard figures. The situation is exacerbated by there not being a representative on the MSNZ Executive from north of the Bombay Hills for around 10 years. In addition (and of perhaps more relevance to this forum), there has not been a representative on the MSNZ Executive from the Historic and Classic fraternity for many years.

[Racer Rog]

I think Chris numbers are somewhat astray, but as I have said before, put the people up to stand in a election, there were positions available as you know Roger, but there was a lack of people from the Auckland area who could have or would have etc put their names forward, as you know a support a few of the things that have been noted here, and we agree that the Governance of MotorSport NZ does need a review, but on wheather there is enough people from Auckland on the exc of the motor sport, that is another matter altogether, this and extending the date that the VCC can run vehicles, those that went to the H & C commission meetings, the informal one and the formal one will understand why this will not happen, a solution to this was agreed with the VCC at a meeting in Christchurch and I was there to hear the summary of the points of agreement, but within 24 hours, the VCC went against it, and decided not to honour it. While the VCC meeting that has just been held, The Roycroft meeting was very well run and I am told a real pleasure to watch, the same can not be said of VCC meetings in the South Island, where vehicles fail to comply with their own rules, and in light of a incident at a recent race meeting, we are lucky that we are facing Queenstown type case, and for those that think that could never happen, pull your heads out of the sand, if you don't follow the rules set out on your paper, the Police will nail you to a cross, as happened in that case, which most people are aware of. These days there is no accidents, some one must to blame, I don't agree with this myself, I think thing have gotten to PC, but this is the world we are living in now.
Roger

[Oldfart]

In reply to Racer Rog, I as a person attending the Roycroft (and having problems with my car) spent a huge amount of time discussing the "cut off" with VCC speed stewards (note the plural). I was informed that "with the agreement of both Motorsport and VCC speed stewards of a particular meeting cars of later date can be allowed to run with VCC on a case by case, and meeting by meeting basis". Another person in the same room had not asked for this, and was not allowed to run, although the car would have been asllowed to run, without question according to those present. I specifically asked about, by name, the cars involved in the recent south island events, and was told that both stewards (Motorsport and VCC) had agreed to them running. I asked about the incident, I was told that it was down to overdriving, and a desire to pass in stupid places. According to that information, you can hardly lay blame on the agreement over cut off date!
If you look at the state of tyres etc in the published photos you could argue that the entrant/driver of one of the cars signed a declaration in a manner that would be questionable, and that audits(not scrutineering) also failed to pick this up!
As I read the numbers quoted by Chris Read, these are numbers from Motorsport, as he quoted their own material, so hard to say "his numbers are somewhat astray"!

[Oldfart]

Interesting, I think, that Roger has commented that the Roycroft meeting was well run, but that VCC meetings in the South Island cannot be said the same of.
For absolute certain the Roycroft is a pure VCC run meeting, please correct me but most, if not all, of the SI race meetings have been combined with MSNZ?
Nuff said?

[screwdriver]

Last year's Roycroft might well have been a combined permit one, but I am not sure about this year's.

VCC Waitmata's committee appear to be fairly new to circuit race meeting organisation, and without the Hampton Downs permanent staff stepping in at the 11th hour, I doubt the meetings would have been allowed to start, either last year or this year. My involvement doubled, trying also to carry out a regular role that had been overlooked!
They are learning fast and one can only hope that the meeting will continue to grow, as it really is a joy to be there.
It would be nice to have a grid of VCC cars at a few more classic (MSNZ) north island meetings, as they represent tremendous variety and are on occasions, very dramatic.

A later cut off date could entice more saloons out to play, as they were conspicuous by their absence and there is only one pre 1960 saloon that regularly appears at local MSNZ events - or did.

[RogerH]

A couple of points :

I understand that the numbers quoted in Chris Read's post (from the HRC newsletter) are pretty accurate and indicative of the situation. The only question is that the 2021 individual drivers running at the HRC events (primarily at HD but also at Pukekohe) may not be all from Auckland - however I think the vast majority of them would be Auckland based.

With my mate Racer Rog - the "why don't you put your name forward" is a hardy annual response to criticism of the MSNZ structure. From my experience with MSNZ Conference there is a degree of parochial voting and with Auckland clubs having around a quarter of the votes it is pretty hard to get onto the MSNZ Executive. Even if you do get on you are just one of six and getting any traction for change is nigh well impossible. Last year Auckland candidates stood for the Executive and the Historic Commission and didn't even get close to getting elected. Also, its not whether there are "enough" Aucklanders on the Executive - there aren't any and it has been that way for over 10 years. I wonder what the reaction would have been if, for whatever reason, there had ben no Executive member from the Mainland for ten years.

I was fortunate to be able to run at both the South Island VCC events (at Ruapuna and Teretonga) and at the Roycroft meeting at Hampton Downs. I don't think the issue is how well the meetings were run but what sort of cars ran under the VCC banner at each of the meetings. Firstly, the Roycroft meeting was pure VCC while the South Island ones were VCC included as part of a general meeting. The issue that I noticed was that the Roycroft cars seemed true to the VCC spirit in the way they were configured and presented. With the South Island VCC grids there were a number of cars that would never have had a look in at being accepted at the Roycroft meeting primarily due to "modern" improvements. There seems to be a different view between the two groups as to what constitutes a complying VCC car.

[Racer Rog]

Whoa!!! you guys don't sleep! well there are lies, damm lies and then there are statistics, the numbers will only mean something if you can say where the people entered come from and how many events are entered and then I think you may be surprised, but in saying that, overall I think about 45% of licence holders are active in H & C racing, but as I have said before democracy comes in many forms and you can only please some of the people some of the time.there will always be some one pissed off that's a fact of life.You are right about how the VCC run their meetings north and south, they are not on the same page, both cars involved in the incedent would not comply, in fact one car wasn't allowed to compete in VCC North Island events.
The Pre 1960 rule is a international one is is in line with FIA policy which the VCC is a party to, but as I said a deal was done that would allow members of the VCC to race in the correct class with the need to belong to a MotorSport NZ club, they decided not to honour that agreement for reasons unknown.
MotorSport NZ has many faults, but has many good points as well, and one of these is the training that it puts its officials through, and has procedures to follow, and this ongoing training cost a lot of money, this is one of the reasons why our licences cost what they do, and really the VCC ride on the coat tails of all that training that we are paying for, in fact the VCC is represented on the FIA by MotorSport NZ, and their President has said that that motor sport represents only a small fraction of what they do so they are not that interested, they do have a very nice magazine, that I buy all of the time so that's a plus from me, but I don't think they understand what can happen when it all goes pear shaped, and what costs are involved and the disputation of peoples lives, the lengths that the Police will go to, when it does go all wrong, the days of racing in a paddock, I'm afraid are long gone, without a written up procedure, and adherence to that procedure.
Roger

[Racer Rog]

Whoa!!! you guys don't sleep! well there are lies, damm lies and then there are statistics, the numbers will only mean something if you can say where the people entered come from and how many events are entered and then I think you may be surprised, but in saying that, overall I think about 45% of licence holders are active in H & C racing, but as I have said before democracy comes in many forms and you can only please some of the people some of the time.there will always be some one pissed off that's a fact of life.You are right about how the VCC run their meetings north and south, they are not on the same page, both cars involved in the incedent would not comply, in fact one car wasn't allowed to compete in VCC North Island events.
The Pre 1960 rule is a international one is is in line with FIA policy which the VCC is a party to, but as I said a deal was done that would allow members of the VCC to race in the correct class without the need to belong to a MotorSport NZ club, they decided not to honour that agreement for reasons unknown.
MotorSport NZ has many faults, but has many good points as well, and one of these is the training that it puts its officials through, and has procedures to follow, and this ongoing training cost a lot of money, this is one of the reasons why our licences cost what they do, and really the VCC ride on the coat tails of all that training that we are paying for, in fact the VCC is represented on the FIA by MotorSport NZ, and their President has said that that motor sport represents only a small fraction of what they do so they are not that interested, they do have a very nice magazine, that I buy all of the time so that's a plus from me, but I don't think they understand what can happen when it all goes pear shaped, and what costs are involved and the disputation of peoples lives, the lengths that the Police will go to, when it does go all wrong, the days of racing in a paddock, I'm afraid are long gone, without a written up procedure, and adherence to that procedure.
Roger

[Racer Rog]

Sorry failed to proof read, left out one very important word, " without"

[AMCO72]

Some extraordinary revelations on this thread regarding the VCC, and it's ability or otherwise of organizing a race meeting. To a casual observer, me, the Roycroft meeting seemed to run extremely well, and yet we are hearing that all was not what it seemed behind closed doors. The comment was made that they, Waitemata branch, are new to motorsport and that they have a lot to learn, and but for some timely intervention, these meetings might not have taken place. Amazing! Also that the VCC are not experienced in speed events that only form a very small part of what the VCC is all about. Ok, but there are some very experienced VCC members involved in motorsport, and they should be able to steer people in the right direction.

It surprises me that the South Island clubs are even more inept at running these events, or is it that they are a bit more relaxed as to what participates. When grids are small there is a tendancy for promoters to allow stuff to race that perhaps shouldn't, and the recent example of an 800 hp Porsche racing in the same class as Bernie Hines is ridiculous. Actually I dont know what satisfaction the Porsche driver got from racing with an old Mini, bugger-all I would have said. When we did the South Island tour last year, we were very surprised at the machinery that was in our 'class' but as the grids were so small, the organisers lumped us all together. Nothing worse than a grid of ten cars. I actually didn't care, as I raced with stuff I wouldn't normally, but certainly not an 800 hp Porsche!!!

Oldfart has been doing his best to get some enthusiasm for some pre 60 saloons, which as someone said are notable by their absence, but he has also said that he does not want to see Anglias and Minis in this class, because in his words, they would clean up. He is probably right, as it is very easy to put 'modern' stuff into both of these cars without in any way altering their looks. I would love to get the MG 1300 back on the track, but it doesn't look as though it's going to happen. I could theoretically stuff a very potent engine in the car, adjust the suspension a bit, and have a mighty quick machine.....we have the technology, but it's not going to happen. Same with an Anglia.

Would be nice to see a grid of proper VCC cars, that are in the spirit of the VCC, as was the entry at the Roycroft meeting, at a regular MSNZ meeting, but would the VCC cars then have to comply with MSNZ rules rather than the VCC rules, especially as regards seatbelts and roll-frames. I dont know, it all seems a balls-up to me, and there are a lot of disaffected members throughout the country that have just said to themselves.....stuff it, I'm not going there, and park their cars up, where someone in the future is going to find them tucked away in a shed and claim them as 'barn-finds'.

[Racer Rog]

AMCO72, I think that you are right, both Roger H and myself, along with others would like to see this sorted, and I think the ball lies with the VCC, but as some people would say, I'm biased, but not in the way a lot would think, a true VCC field is what I'm interested to see, if they wish to race other cars, there are fields out there to cater for them.
As a committee member for the ENZED Historic and Classic meeting, we try to do the best we can, when placing cars in grids, and we do take into account the driver, car and speed, and so try and put like with like, eg Formula Juniors with NZGP cars, and that went very well, unforgettably the one star driver for Formula Junior was unable to attend, but Nigel Russell said it was he would beat him, but Roger H has promised a return match!, For our meeting next year, it is planed to have between 20 and 30 formula Juniors on the grid, and depending on the final numbers, the same grid match with the NZGP cars will happen, but if we get enough of them they will have their own grid, we also have invited the Porsche Club for a stand alone grid, and Dale is trying to get his guys down as well, the meeting we put on at Levels is a top meeting, and we endeavour to place a great social emphases on it with the cars as the stars, and I think we get about 85% of it right, and the meaning to that is there is no perfect meeting, but we are aiming for it, but most go away with a smile on their faces.
Roger