Over (?) Development of Historic Racing Cars

[terence]

Things like the Arches,and Wheel sizes for a start,theres also the fact that a Griff could not keep pace with a Cobra in period.Cars are way beyond being sensibly modified,this applies also to some Cobra's,E-Types etc etc.
Its not entirely down to the owners,they have been allowed to get away with it and I think you'll find this view is shared by many other owners/drivers of 'Historic' car's.There need's to be a bigger clamp down before 'Our' type of racing disappears up it own exhaust [Thought that sounded better than where its really going]
One other thing that was quite obvious was the way in which they get their power down now,much much earlier than what they could do from the factory spec.

[SAMD]

The difficulty is, when one person/'preparation expert' pushes the boundaries a bit and gets away with it, everyone who wants to be competitive has to do the same. And the other preparation people have do it or they may not get the work because 'their cars are not as fast'

[john ruston]

So the only available police are the race organisers and they are not in a position to do it as they need entries!It's a bugger.

[SAMD]

Originally Posted by john ruston

So the only available police are the race organisers and they are not in a position to do it as they need entries!It's a bugger.

That it is John. But in the final analysis the race organisers are going to have to deal with it. Because if they dont it will get so far out of hand people will end up being injured and someone will bring a big lawsuit with lots of noughts on the end and the buck will only stop at the race organisers door. It would not be that hard to prove they have a duty of care toward the competitors and they have allowed the cars to get faster than they should be.

[terence]

Originally Posted by SAMD

The difficulty is, when one person/'preparation expert' pushes the boundaries a bit and gets away with it, everyone who wants to be competitive has to do the same. And the other preparation people have do it or they may not get the work because 'their cars are not as fast'

That just about sum's it up Sam. [And we wonder how come some race cars are so expensive when they come onto the market when all it is is the owner trying to re-coupe the huge sum he has spent already on trying to make the proverbial out of a pig's ear!]

[R59]

Then you take cars that win today, but in their day were dogs, uncompetitive.

Some of it may have been just a simple tweak that people didn't realise back then, but fixes their ills, some may be almost total re-designs of the car's underpinnings so it's not really period at all.

I know of one historic F1 car that fits that bill.

[Thundersports]

Thats the ex Berridge March.

[zefarelly]

quite R59 . . . some events actively seek oddities, and then they're made to go well, or not in some cases, and even when they do they're largely unreliable s they're not fully developed.

the bottom line will be an un-necessary death (hopefully not) and people voting with their feet and not racing, which is already happening. I guess the latter gets masked by a natural shift when people 'retire' and new kids come on the block. Its certainly changed a lot in the last 10 years

[simon drabble]

Historic racing have several types of participant. There will be those who simply want to win and are agnostic as to what car they have to achieve this goal. This type of racer will continually develop their car to the edge of legality and often beyond. You could argue that in some ways he is the most period correct racer.

There are those who race a car that has a place in your heart and whilst you will develop this you are probably more likely to retain a stronger link to period correctiveness. This type of racer is less likely to outright win races but probably makes up the bulk of the grid and in the case of clubbie mettings like HSCC most of the paddock!
Surprisingly I actually think both are important to ensure it doesn't become a parade... (for the record I classify myself in the second camp). Accept the hotshoes in an overdeveloped E Type/Cobra etc are the neccessary evil to ensure you can race at Spa and other great circuits.... All I ask is that they remember us weekend warriors are out for a bit of fun and therefore dont drive like a BTCC race!

[terence]

I think that one of the main cause's of cheating comes from having too many of one make in a series.The thinking being that if there are 10 Mustangs in said series,everyone is looking for the advantage over the other nine cars [competition,which is what the game is all about] Its the same as the V8 scenario,everyone wants to go faster so the go out and by their 'race winning V8' only to find that they are still not at the front of the grid! So it roll's on and on untill someone actually say's enough is enough gent's [as Simon H suggested in the other thread] it will keep on rolling along as long as there are enough people with money to throw at their chosen 'potential' race winner!. Time has come for the governing bodie's/organiser's to take a long hard look at the 'progress' of the various car's that we all know should not be doing the lap times that they are recording,it might hurt for a while,but at least it would give a little more time to sort this mess out!
After reading Simon's post I would add that the 'Hot Shoe's' in their bent car's are the main cause for this discussion,even if you have a strictly policed one make series,there will still be winners and looser's.

[andmark4389]

Originally Posted by terence bower

Things like the Arches,and Wheel sizes for a start,theres also the fact that a Griff could not keep pace with a Cobra in period.Cars are way beyond being sensibly modified,this applies also to some Cobra's,E-Types etc etc.
Its not entirely down to the owners,they have been allowed to get away with it and I think you'll find this view is shared by many other owners/drivers of 'Historic' car's.There need's to be a bigger clamp down before 'Our' type of racing disappears up it own exhaust [Thought that sounded better than where its really going]
One other thing that was quite obvious was the way in which they get their power down now,much much earlier than what they could do from the factory spec.

Not sure that proves anything though. The wheel sizes for all GTs were mandated by the homologation document which was written in period and which still defines the car today. As I understand it, the arches on the TVRs were imposed by the FIA on owners that didn't want them. And while on the subject of TVRs, what exactly allows them to get the power down earlier than they did ? If there's a cheat then it can't be beyond the whit of scrutinereers to see it. The car isn't exactly complicated.

[Al Weyman]

It can only be a none standard slipper diff or moving of the mounting points to adjust the rear suspension geometry (illegal?) and prehaps better shockers and springs which would be legal surely. Or maybe some additional device added?? Maybe the tyres are now better as well.

[andmark4389]

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

It can only be a none standard slipper diff or moving of the mounting points to adjust the rear suspension geometry (illegal?) and prehaps better shockers and springs which would be legal surely. Or maybe some additional device added?? Maybe the tyres are now better as well.

The diff is free in Appendix K, as it was in period. You can't move the inboard suspension pick up points on a TVR because they are attached to the chassis tubes. Pretty obvious, as is the cast upright which the FIA has also imposed on owners. And the tyres are actually not as good as they were in period. There is no choice but to run a 204 compound 'L' section Dunlop in Masters whereas in period there were other compounds and other makes. Gas shocks are not permitted and are easy to check.

All these details apply to all the cars so my take is that there is simply more effort put into running the unfashionable models - like the Grifo Bizzarini and yes, the TVR Griffith - and that has allowed them to realise the potential that they had at the time, but didn't alweays deliver. It's not necessarily a question of cheating. There's a real need to accept that a race comprising only Cobras and E-types would be a less compelling spectacle than the variety we have now.

[john ruston]

So you can make anything into anything if it provides a spectacle?For whom ,there are next to no spectators and if you paid 800 Quid entry fee the majority of owners want a real Historic Race

It's called Historic Racing which is a reenactment of History?

Just another excuse for development .

Do I want to see an E Type,Ferrari etc being beaten by a plastic pig.Not much of a spectacle.

Now understand why people spend all that dosh making featherweight Jags with more power to beat a TVR.What an aim in life!

I'm lost as with many things in Historic Racing,probably being a miserable grumpy old man .

None of this is important as using those odd names that still annoy me.Even old people are using them!Going to change mine to Old Fart

[simon drabble]

John those who cheat kid only themselves... if they need to do it and they stay safe on the track and it supplemenets my entry fee then I am ambivalent. I know who my competitors are in a race and that is how I determine if I have had a good time, it is after all only a hobby.....
Probably means I should stick to track days!

[Richy_Rich]

Maybe it's just that the drivers in the olden days were rubbish? I mean if you look at old footage they were always crashing and whatnot, sometimes they even forgot to get in their cars at the beginning and had to run across a live track just to make the start!

It's probably a bit like how everyone gets A's at GSCE and A-Level now days. Whereas in the 60's you'd be happy with a few C's and a B.

[terence]

Originally Posted by andmark4389

The diff is free in Appendix K, as it was in period. You can't move the inboard suspension pick up points on a TVR because they are attached to the chassis tubes. Pretty obvious, as is the cast upright which the FIA has also imposed on owners. And the tyres are actually not as good as they were in period. There is no choice but to run a 204 compound 'L' section Dunlop in Masters whereas in period there were other compounds and other makes. Gas shocks are not permitted and are easy to check.

All these details apply to all the cars so my take is that there is simply more effort put into running the unfashionable models - like the Grifo Bizzarini and yes, the TVR Griffith - and that has allowed them to realise the potential that they had at the time, but didn't alweays deliver. It's not necessarily a question of cheating. There's a real need to accept that a race comprising only Cobras and E-types would be a less compelling spectacle than the variety we have now.

I agree that you cannot move the Diff in theory,but with the limited space in the chassis it could be done.
Whilst involved with two front running Griff's,one task set for me was to purchase every publication that was available to look for any period photo that we could present to the FIA to allow us to use larger than 7.5in rim's.All I ever found was photos of car that had had the rear arches 'butchered and bodged' with a strip of ally screwed to the outer edge of the wheel arch.Not one shot of the beautifully crafted 'bubble arches that are now obviously allowed was ever found,I am curious as to where the 'proof' was obtained from. Do I get anywhere near by thinking that 'just perhaps' you own a Griff?

[andmark4389]

Originally Posted by terence bower

I agree that you cannot move the Diff in theory,but with the limited space in the chassis it could be done.
Whilst involved with two front running Griff's,one task set for me was to purchase every publication that was available to look for any period photo that we could present to the FIA to allow us to use larger than 7.5in rim's.All I ever found was photos of car that had had the rear arches 'butchered and bodged' with a strip of ally screwed to the outer edge of the wheel arch.Not one shot of the beautifully crafted 'bubble arches that are now obviously allowed was ever found,I am curious as to where the 'proof' was obtained from. Do I get anywhere near by thinking that 'just perhaps' you own a Griff?

No, not a Griffith owner, just an interested observer, and there would be no point in moving the diff on a Griffith. The point is that the FIA set the styling agenda for the Griffith, not the competitors. But they haven't, as far as I can tell, applied similar rigour to the E-types and the Cobras which all have similar issues with arches and wheel sizes.

Someone has expressed the view, and not for the first time, that the TVR is a plastic pig which has no right to be where it is. The only reassuring thing about that statement, is that some fellow competitors felt much the same way in the mid '60s.

[Heightswitch]

Originally Posted by terence bower

I agree that you cannot move the Diff in theory,but with the limited space in the chassis it could be done.
Whilst involved with two front running Griff's,one task set for me was to purchase every publication that was available to look for any period photo that we could present to the FIA to allow us to use larger than 7.5in rim's.All I ever found was photos of car that had had the rear arches 'butchered and bodged' with a strip of ally screwed to the outer edge of the wheel arch.Not one shot of the beautifully crafted 'bubble arches that are now obviously allowed was ever found,I am curious as to where the 'proof' was obtained from. Do I get anywhere near by thinking that 'just perhaps' you own a Griff?

How did we get back onto the subject of Griffs?

The reality about Griffs is exactly how they are quoted !! Plastic Pigs. and therein is the problem with todays fraternity that is the Historic motorsport scene. Your average AC Cobra, Ferrari, Lightweight E type owner often doesn't like the fact that his very expensively built by a professional motorsport outfit costing upward of £200k and more car is beaten by the old plastic Pig from blackpool.

There isn't half some ******** discussed on this thread? Racing is about racing. IE its about building cars to go faster than the next bloke on the grid. if you want to take the purist line then you go all anal and build a car to Appendix K and go race it in a strictly controlled championship. if you aren't such a slave to originality then you go and play somewhere else where you are a bit free-er to develop your car.

As for historical re-enactments ?? Sorry I just don't get it. I am not interested in re-enacting anything. I just want to race the old car I built myself in my garage at home specifically because I like the old car I built!! thats why I built it.

I have to agree with the other chap on here about the griff in general (as a sort of griff owner ). The concept of a griffith is quite a simple one in that it is generally an upended tower crane with a placcy body slung over the top. Apart from engine internals there is probably less to develop on that car than most other exotica out there. generally when spannering on race cars I look at much more altered exotica in jags which are changed beyond anything that ever raced in the 60's. The few griffs that raced in the 60's actually did trounce everything else at the time up until the point which the rear wheels fell off

The current resistance to Griffiths is entirely down to the desire by the Fia to make them uncompetitive. The Fia themselves have caused the current debarcle which will ultimately make them faster until such a point that the Fia wants to try something else to conspire against them.

There are some indisputable facts with repect to griffiths

8" wheels are one
The 400 being an extension of the 200 homologation another

The current Body styles were insisted upon by the Fia as the only in period HTP body proven to have raced in period in the E H paul car. all of the owners were happy just running as was with subtly flared arches all as per all the other 60's cars running 8" rims with equally subtly flared arches.

What appears totally crazy now is that the earliest notchback cars which are most in period aren't recognised at all because the 400 body was pictured on the 200 homologation document, This is despite being a mix of Kamm tail and notchback bodys on griff 200 models.

people should never loose sight of the fact that TVR went bust 3 times between 61 and 66 and during all that time various things happened various cars were built and various options all tried.

My car will never be an Fia car, quite simply because I am not prepared to butcher it about any more for some rules which likely as not will change next year after another season of trouncing the opposition.

as for over development ?? what utter tosh. I would suggest that some people would be better off going to tatton park with a polishing kit. All of our cars use modern materials in old style pattern parts. Metal grades have changed, rubber compounds have changed, Parts are made on modern computer controlled machinery rather than something like my 1953 colchester with 1953 tolerances.

Of course historics are faster today

Now please all sod off and pick on another model so this poor impoverished self builder can enjoy his car without the worry of wondering if I will ever have anywhere to race it

N

[terence]

Originally Posted by andmark4389

No, not a Griffith owner, just an interested observer, and there would be no point in moving the diff on a Griffith. The point is that the FIA set the styling agenda for the Griffith, not the competitors. But they haven't, as far as I can tell, applied similar rigour to the E-types and the Cobras which all have similar issues with arches and wheel sizes.

Someone has expressed the view, and not for the first time, that the TVR is a plastic pig which has no right to be where it is. The only reassuring thing about that statement, is that some fellow competitors felt much the same way in the mid '60s.

I understand exactly what you mean but the FIA ask for photographic proof of a particular body mod that was used IN PERIOD.Now we all know that there were never any Fibre Glass Specialists in period either.

[Al Weyman]

Ha ha good post Heightswitch!

[DaveGT6]

I was looking around the paddock the other Sunday morning way before racing started and was discussing with my racing partner the various merits of the cars present. He (a past E Type owner and keen on the marque) pointed out the size of the rear wheels, tyres and subtle?? flaring of the rear wheel arches, commenting that it didn't look period and and questioned if it was in the spirit of historic racing or if legal. No matter - it was what it was.

I have currently neither the desire nor the money to build a plastic pig (Griff) but I am now running a plastic piglet (Grantura) and have complied with the regs and only run 3 races since receiving HTP. It has proved to be an interesting learning curve - both the dynamics of the car on Dunlops and the development of other cars in the paddock. But moving on to the race - we had a close and fair battle with the E-type. His flares and big wheels did not appear to provide an advantage as we were fortunate to beat him (just) with far less rubber and power. I guess a lot is down to the drivers - don't get me wrong - I do not profess to be a hot shoe (other driver faster than me too). We had a good race and I think we all came away happy. I think what I am getting at is that if you have the desire and the money it is very easy to build the car of your dreams and then be suprised that you are not beating "less worthy" cars (not implying this was the view of the aforementioned - just making the point). So spend some more money and your preparation specialist is happy to further develop your car. And so it goes. We all get caught up in a spiral of trying to out do each other - it is competitive after all. Put a hot shoe in a car highly over developed by the owner because it is their toy, they have the money, they are succesful in business so will not be beaten......and see where we end up.

I absolutely understand Mr Ruston's view - it's not important, it's a hobby therefore it should be as per the regs. However not everyone sees it that way. As per Heightswitch's views - if you want to develop the car then historic racing is restrictive. Unfortunately the race organisers need the dosh so we are where we are.

I don't think that resolved anything but then that seems to be the crux of the matter!

[Heightswitch]

Originally Posted by DaveGT6

I was looking around the paddock the other Sunday morning way before racing started and was discussing with my racing partner the various merits of the cars present. He (a past E Type owner and keen on the marque) pointed out the size of the rear wheels, tyres and subtle?? flaring of the rear wheel arches, commenting that it didn't look period and and questioned if it was in the spirit of historic racing or if legal. No matter - it was what it was.

I have currently neither the desire nor the money to build a plastic pig (Griff) but I am now running a plastic piglet (Grantura) and have complied with the regs and only run 3 races since receiving HTP. It has proved to be an interesting learning curve - both the dynamics of the car on Dunlops and the development of other cars in the paddock. But moving on to the race - we had a close and fair battle with the E-type. His flares and big wheels did not appear to provide an advantage as we were fortunate to beat him (just) with far less rubber and power. I guess a lot is down to the drivers - don't get me wrong - I do not profess to be a hot shoe (other driver faster than me too). We had a good race and I think we all came away happy. I think what I am getting at is that if you have the desire and the money it is very easy to build the car of your dreams and then be suprised that you are not beating "less worthy" cars (not implying this was the view of the aforementioned - just making the point). So spend some more money and your preparation specialist is happy to further develop your car. And so it goes. We all get caught up in a spiral of trying to out do each other - it is competitive after all. Put a hot shoe in a car highly over developed by the owner because it is their toy, they have the money, they are succesful in business so will not be beaten......and see where we end up.

I absolutely understand Mr Ruston's view - it's not important, it's a hobby therefore it should be as per the regs. However not everyone sees it that way. As per Heightswitch's views - if you want to develop the car then historic racing is restrictive. Unfortunately the race organisers need the dosh so we are where we are.

I don't think that resolved anything but then that seems to be the crux of the matter!

Hello Dave. I think we spoke briefly in the Rain at Brands.

Your Appendix K car (if its the one I am thinking about) Is a thing of great beauty and as a true appendix K car is racing in a more strictly controlled set of regs.

As you say, other people such as me just like to build and race old cars. I am not really a purist, mainly because I cannot afford to be a purist. But that is why the CSCC format is so popular IE there are many more people with non original, Modified from standard cars who want to go racing. hence we have a different class structure for different cars.

The big issue with me and my Car is that it actually is very much in the spirit of running in period with a few subtle mods. It was built in a single garage, on a budget and will run on M section historic rubber. It mirrored the HTP regs at the time and has flared rear arches and 8" rims all round. it is fitted with a re-built engine bought second hand and re-built and unlike 99% of all other Placcy Pigs and Piglets is still sitting on top of its original Brazed Chassis..... Yep theres a one for the originality freaks, Its amazing how many mig welders must have existed in the 60's!!

Now will my 270hp car built to a set of old Fia regs now changed be welcomed into an open historic series? The only rules in CSCC is that the engine type must remain the same and the "sily hat" of the car must be unaltered.

A good friend of mine has a car which has always in its life been a factory racing car. Its never been road registered. Persons in certain organisational structures commented that the bonnet buldge wasn't in keeping, (Its 25mm higher than std road car dimensions to clear some webbers) but was always like that.

Now correct me if I am wrong but certain american cars at Brands had some pretty big Bonnet scoops? Period? who knows!

My point is that People came to the CSCC to run cars in fun open formulae racing. If you start getting some rules randomly applied to only some cars to suit the clique that exists then that isn't fair.

All facets of Historic racing has its place. I think some people confuse the 2 which is the real issue.

Is the shape of my rear arches and 8" baloons going to make 1 jot of difference to how fast the car runs??

[Al Weyman]

Is the shape of my rear arches and 8" baloons going to make 1 jot of difference to how fast the car runs??

Yeah but may even make it slower and trust me I have seen that happen on Mk 1 Escorts to give an example!

[zefarelly]

Wow, interesting debate!

flared wheel arches are common place, from tin tops up . . .as are wheel bases moved within arches, and an extra 1/2" on the rim, or more! its not in the spirit and of exceedingly dubious legality.

The problems/practice seems to mostly apply to 60's cars, where Garagistes stuck one up the prverbial of bigger manufacturers on 5% of the budget, they don't like it up em.

std or modified theres plenty of places to play . . .CSCC for example, 60's swingers, who like a bit of a change, or special K . . . . both sides of the fence covered.

What pi55es me right off is the b@st@rdisation of history, the way histrionic motorsport is distorting everything, if one applied the same principals to say the 2nd world war I'me sure there'd be people out there arguing that Hitler was a bl00dy nice chap with the general well being of all of Western Europes subjects close to his heart.