Silverstone Classic 2010

[krt917]

Originally Posted by zefarelly

what are you suggesting? as professionals, they show caution and understanding to the rest of us dog slow bungling amateurs?

No, I was referring to a certain public outburst at Silverstone by an ex-BTCC racer. If you didn't hear it, it was quite ranty about Dean Forward's Mustang, but I probably shouldn't go into any more detail here!

[zefarelly]

enee fule kno most races are free for all/invitation so anything goes

I suppose if someones paying you to shwboat for them in their car the last thing your going do to is read the paperwork!

[john ruston]

Think we have covered the antics of the ex BTCC man before and he has been named and all that stuff so why worry.He's a prat.

[John Turner]

Yes, but as National Editor of Autosport, Kev has to be a bit more diplomatic than some of us, John.

[john ruston]

Thats why I chipped in to save him doing it!

[redsky]

Originally Posted by John Turner

Race 20 was the last that I watched as I had to get back home. However, I can tell you that the Dean Forward's Mustang did not appear for the second Big Banger saloon cars race (race 22). The official reason was given as a failure to resolve the oil leak from the first race, but in truth, as I understand it, it was re scrutineered after the first race and found to be underwieght. Now, just for the record, as has been explained before, the race was not solely for Appendix K cars, but also included cars built to HRSR rules and Dean's car was built to those rules. However, in that form, it was required to run with ballast, and for reasons I know not, it was not carrying that ballast.

The HRSR have quite a long association with HSCC, and the combination of Appendix K cars and HRSR cars appear regularly on grids at HSCC event, so any outburst at non appendix K cars was misplaced for this race. It has been suggested that in order for the public to understand that the cars on this grid run to two different sets of rules which would, for example, lead to one Mustang being a lot quicker than another (other factors excepted) that there should be some clear indication of such difference displayed on each car. May I suggest the letter K for appendix K cars and the Letter H for cars built to HRSR rules be placed adjacent to the competition number on the sides of the cars.

The 'official' reason you mention for the Mustang not appearing in the second race is actually the truth. Dean Forward's Mustang wasn't underweight and there were no scrutineering issues. It couldn't race again because of the oil leak - no more to it than that.

[kipper]

Originally Posted by redsky

The 'official' reason you mention for the Mustang not appearing in the second race is actually the truth. Dean Forward's Mustang wasn't underweight and there were no scrutineering issues. It couldn't race again because of the oil leak - no more to it than that.

That said, I was interested to note in this weeks Autosport a reference by Marcus Pye to Dean Forward's Mustang now being heavily ballasted.

[john ruston]

Can't imagine anyone racing a car that is not within rules.
Suppose its ready for Eau Rouge Trophy now.Should fit all parameters that are required!

[LYNX]

Originally Posted by john ruston

Can't imagine anyone racing a car that is not within rules.
Suppose its ready for Eau Rouge Trophy now.Should fit all parameters that are required!

I agree, but you were probably 'tongue-in-cheek'! If I was to win and cheat I would never know if I could have won legally. Having said that I probably wouldn't be able to win either way.

[ianglyn]

The reason for the mustang not showing for the second race, is that the back axle was damaged due to a loss of oil as seen by everyone.
I know this to be fact not fiction.
As to the car being re-inspected and found to be underweight as quoted this is pure fiction.

[SAMD]

Originally Posted by ianglyn

The reason for the mustang not showing for the second race, is that the back axle was damaged due to a loss of oil as seen by everyone.
I know this to be fact not fiction.
As to the car being re-inspected and found to be underweight as quoted this is pure fiction.

Ah! so! Velly intelesting. The car was under weight due to no oil in the black axle. Or perhaps it is, no Black oil in the axle. hmm.

[john ruston]

There is an easy answer.
Car comes out again,wins race,checked and found OK.Answer,Drivers brilliant.
But if it is not as quick...
No problem, the truth will become apparent when it races again and until then give it the benifit of any doubt.
Who is ianglyn and does he have all inside info?
It's only racing old bags of bolts!(or new bags looking like old bags)

[Robyn Slater]

What is this supposed to be about?

This mustang (I believe its the same one) raced at croft last weekend,
no one seemed to be making any fuss about it at that meeting.

I,m puzzled

[john ruston]

There is the answer assuming its same type of race.

[John Turner]

Ok. let's try to sort this out. No-one has said that there is something wrong with the Mustang, so there is no reason why it would have caused consternation at Croft. As I said, the car was built to HRSR rules. In fact my ire was with Patrick Watts public outburst about the car. No-one has denied the oil leak either as far as I can see. In fact, in Jason Minshaw we have a first hand witness of its existence. However, why would someone not in the race but close to the sport, who I consider to be a reliable source ring me to inform me of the lack of ballast, and why would Marcus Pye allude to it in his report of the Croft meeting, where, incidentally, the car won again (in the second race).

This is apparently a highly modified car (Marcus Pye calls it 'Group 5') but built within HRSR rules. So the questions are 'do HRSR rules require it to run with ballast when racing against Appendix K cars', and 'was it carrying that required ballast in the race that it won at the Silverstone Classic?'

None of us get everything right when we are reporting, especially those of us who do it as an unpaid hobby. We sometimes have to rely on what is reported back to us. I'm always more than happy to make corrections, and have done so in the past, to anything I write, and I'm sure that goes for others on here, too. However, they say there is no smoke without fire, so you'll forgive me if I don't jump into immediate retraction mode. A statement from an official source would not go amiss at this stage.

[zefarelly]

HRSR regs are based around Group 5 regs from 66 on, for cars built/available pre66.

The HRSR introduced minimum weights for all classes to try and equilise any disparity betwixt Gp5 and Gp 1 or 2 (pre66 regs) more commonly known as the App K breakfast cereal. ( doesn't work IMO, the U2TC cars are quicker!!!)

I guess the ambiguity may be mere confusion or suprise as to why anyone would want to build an HRSR spec Mustang, the reason appears clear, it'll win races!

Thats not an official source but I think its correct?

[morninggents]

As John and Zef have stated HRSR/HSCC allows greater flexibility in modifications than those allowed by App K. A Mustang to HRSR spec can have rear discs, better suspension location, more engine mods, etc but must run in HRSR Class A where 8 cylinder cars over 3000cc must weigh a minimum of 1455 kg. An App K Mustang is homologated, I believe, at 1200 kg. I don't know the car in question and was not at Croft but I assume it ran with no problems there.

[morninggents]

Originally Posted by zefarelly

'K' on App K cars has been in the regs for donkeys years, since Peter Wray had coloured hair in fact

Just seen this one !!!

I'll have you know my hair is coloured - light gray, dark gray, silver and even flesh coloured in some places.

And yes - HRSR does require all App K cars to wear the letter K at the side of the number.

[compte deGraves]

One thing that is abundantly clear is that cheats appear throughout motor racing. For the life of me I cannot understand what pleasure they can get from winning if they have cheated. I suspect that the inadequates cheat because in many other ways they are inadequate.

In Italy they have a hand signal that implies that they need for macho behavior is directly proportionate to size in the under-pant department.

[Ben Shuckburgh]

Originally Posted by compte deGraves

One thing that is abundantly clear is that cheats appear throughout motor racing. For the life of me I cannot understand what pleasure they can get from winning if they have cheated. I suspect that the inadequates cheat because in many other ways they are inadequate.

In Italy they have a hand signal that implies that they need for macho behavior is directly proportionate to size in the under-pant department.

[rbs]

At the end of the day and regardless of the spec of the cars it was a very enjoyable spectacle with lots of big colourful noisy cars, far better than the drab too long under 2 litre race, Silverstone needs big cars and this was OK.

[john ruston]

Agree,but the entrants who pay all the money want a level playing field and spectical doesn't come into it.
If the race generates revenue that the test.20 +thousand pounds a race covers lots of spectators.

[rbs]

I also agree but the car has raced in that guise before so most people knew it was more of a special saloon than an genuine car. HSCC knew the spec and did not turn the entry away at any point. If the entry form did not ban it then it was eligible. Perhaps it was because the driver was not a "big" name that fuss was really about. I was a shame it did not race in the second race, but it was still a great specticle for all.

Bring on big cars next year, oh for a big grid of Can Am/Interserie cars and F5000's to back up the big saloons.

[Rob Bailey]

How bad was the damage to the E-type LWT?
Any photos?

[RacingReturnee]

I get quite upset when the HRSR cars are referred to as 'hot rods' - the rules are there and the weights are a great leveller. My car is being built to their rules as it is a cheaper proposition than FIA - plus the entry fees are around half, or less, of those for Masters or U2TC.

Best way to make a car faster is to change the nut behind the steering wheel - witness Dan Cox in his Dad's A40 at Brands last year.

If you care to talk to the HRSR guys you'll find them a friendly bunch and prepared to listen. The grids are varied and expanding (no mean feat in the current financial climate) and the racing is all pre-66. Not the mixed grids of cars from different periods - which seem to proliferate everywhere outside of the FIA based series - which, incidentally seem to be dying on their feet.