Historic race cars

[brickkicker]

This weekend at Donington on the campsite we had a bit of a discussion about safety in historic racing cars. I know I will probably be burnt at the stake for this but I thought id throw it out and see what everyone else thinks about it.
I think that all race cars should conform to modern requirements in the sense of roll cage seat and belts. You see some who have no cage but belts (this is even worse because if it rolls your stuck). Or the old junior ones with a roll cage and belts but there head is way above the hoop.
I know that you all what to preserve the historical look of the cars but lets face it there was a lot of serious accidents in the older days.
What do you all think? Should they conform or just be left as they are.

[chezza]

I have to say that I have been quite concerened about the amount of historic and vintage cars that do not have some form of roll cage, especially as i saw one that almost rolled, if it had done the roll cage would have been the drivers head.

A hoop is not gonna completely destroy the look of the car and racing would be safer for it. Lets not have a serious accident where a roll cage could have prevented serious injuries before the rules are changed.

[Andrew Kitson]

They should leave them as they are!!
If you think it is too dangerous - don't do it!

[gfm]

Andrew, I'm absolutely with you on this, BUT
BUT if you organise a race meeting and a guy goes upside down and suffers serious injury or worse, where are you now in this day and age? If it's too dangerous and they don't do it, then there maybe no racing. Serious problem/dilemma of responsibilities.

[Andrew Kitson]

I once saw a 250F with a roll hoop. Horrible.

[Dave Brand]

I have mixed feelings on this issue. Roll hoops, etc., spoil the looks of old cars which originally didn't have them. However, as a marshal, I wouldn't want to deal with the consequences of a rollover with a car without a roll hoop.

[DarrellB]

I have dealt with several rolled historics in the past and either the driver is thrown clear or shelters in the footwell of course there is still the potential for injury. The concerning thing is the idea of wearing belts but having no rollover protection this could only lead to serious injury. They would be better off without belts or to fit proper roll hoops.

[chezza]

I have to agree with u there darrell.

[Andrew Kitson]

It's like trying to fit a modern ejector seat into an old WWII Spitfire for airshows.

Yes they are dangerous from the days when men were men and the guys who race them know the risks - just ask Nigel Corner.

However my view is that the absolute priority should be the safety of the spectators and marshals who choose not to step inside a racing car.

If a driver feels they are unsafe then don't drive, but gfm is probably right, the world has changed and safety is everything.

Goodwood would not be the same if we were looking at a grid full of 1950s single seaters with big ugly roll hoops. It would certainly take some getting used to.

[TimD]

To be honest, it just wouldn't happen though, would it? The owners of these cars are prepared for the occasional bit of tinwork repair in the event of an accident to their precious cars, but they're not going to take the tinsnips and welding torch to a 250F or a Dino Ferrari due to retrospective legislation. The cars will be tucked up safely in museums and won't turn a wheel in anger again.

I'm not being callous - just stating the fact that most of these chaps and chapesses are prepared to take on the risk of racing without belts or roll protection, but aren't prepared to modify an old car.

This is quite apart from the fact that retro-fitting rollover protection may not be feasible. A Maserati is designed so that a significant part of its roadholding and handling is derived from the inherent flexibility of the structure. To massively stiffen one part of that structure will inevitably change the driving characteristics of the car, and may even place unforeseen strain on other components, perhaps even leading to catastrophic failure.

I'm coming at this with my eyes open. I've been going to historic car races since I was in a push-chair, and I've seen the consequences of a bad accident. I saw the aftermath of Roger Joice's accident in the Frazer Nash, and will take with me to my grave the vision of the accident which befell Stephen Langton in front of me. But Roger and Stephen both accepted the risks. So too Colin Cowdery and Trevor Swete, who have both had big rollovers just recently and walked away from them.

I must confess to a certain heart-in-mouth sensation when I see something very old and with a high centre of gravity cornering hard, but to be honest, if I wasn't prepared to witness something going wrong, I wouldn't go to the meeting, and I think that by and large, the statistical chance of an incident involving enthusiasts racing vintage racing cars which they cherish is always going to be less than the chance of something horrendous going wrong when young chargers with an eye on their careers go racing against one another. Is there a case to be made that modern cars have solid safety systems because it's more likely that they're going to be needed...?

[Andrew Kitson]

Yes Tim, good point. Modern career drivers are prepared to risk more although that said, the racing at Goodwood and other VSCC/HSCC/AMOC etc meetings can be VERY close. I guess I'm just a purist and would hate the thought of any FIA / Europe legislation on this should it happen from the 'do gooders'!
I certainly don't know how I could bring myself to paint an ERA with a roll hoop!!

[bcobbus]

Just like the guys who raced the cars back in their original eras, the guys who race them now know the risks involved. If they want to install modern safety features themselves to their cars, then so be it, otherwise let them assume the rasks they have chosen.

Ironically at the Goodwood Race Revival a few years back, at the start of a race for GP cars of around the late 50's early 60's there was an accident where two cars collided and touched wheels. The fella driving a 1960 Ferrari had his car thrown in the air and flipping several times. Ironically him not wearing any seatbelts may have saved his life as he was thrown out during the airborn roles before the car starting rolling on the ground! Also that year Jack Brabham had a large smash-up after colliding with one Jackie Oliver!

[gfm]

It’s interesting to note what you guys are saying.
The fact remains that if Brabham had been killed at Goodwood in that clash with Oliver, an absolute ton of protesters would be given so much ammunition that I should be surprised if the new circuit would survive. Or am I being too pessimistic? I am not normally.
However horrible the prospect, I totally agree that it is better that historic cars stop racing rather than be remade to include modern basic safety kit. And maybe sometime in the future, that’s the way some historic racing will have to go. Fast parades rather than flat out racing.
As much as we adore passionately what happens at Goodwood, modern race organisers will have serious legal positions to defend when things go badly wrong.
I used to think the same about rallying. I worry the day a car goes into a crowd at high speed is the day it will be stopped (in it’s present form).
Mind you, Brazil reminded me that two GP cars tangling on the entry to Copse at 180 with the crowd 50 feet away isn’t a comfortable thought either.
This isn’t something that will go away. Sporting drivers may well close their mind to it (as I would), but sooner or later the legal implications will need to be faced.

[verglas]

This is indeed a fascinating thread, and one which I have wondered over for a long time. I would hate to see historic cars spoilt with the addition of roll over bars, and TimD has some very interesting and valid points. HOwever one area that does concern me, and where I will probably be castigated for ever, is circuit safety, specifically Goodwood, which, it seems to me has been revamped with limited safety provision, almost 1960's safety for the present. Run off areas are relatively short and the banks are extremely sturdy, with earth filled tyres in front of them. I have tested there a few times and always come away relieved that I have still got a car in one piece at the end of the day. We are all involved in a dangerous sport, and for it to remain viable we must be seen to minimise the risks as much as possible..

[DarrellB]

Ok lets stop all types of motorsport as it is all far too dangerous and just sit in bed and twiddle our thumbs instead (o no can't do that might get RSI!!!)
These people know the risks and are prepared to accept them let them get on with it, it's called excitment and some people still enjoy it. Otherwise life could get very boring

[gfm]

You silly arse. If you want a future, you need to be responsible about it now.
Goodwood doesn't appear any safer today than when it was closed, the racing faster and closer I agree.

[TimD]

Well, I appreciate that one must take all possible precautions, but I wonder if historic cars are being singled out because of their high-profile prestige status.

I wonder - how would people feel if the same equipment that people are talking about being retro-fitted to historic cars - namely seatbelts and rollhoops - were to be applied to some other form of motor sport which presently does without them - namely racing motorcycles.

Do you see where I'm coming from? It's inappropriate given the dynamics of a motorcycle accident when it arises to ask the rider to stay with the bike until it stops. The design of the machine simply cannot accomodate such a requirement. In the same way, an ERA, for example, which has a driver sitting exposed to the wind aboard it, is no more inherently dangerous than a new superbike (and a good deal slower) but is deemed somehow less acceptable because its incident-absorbing potential is not comparable to a modern racing car, which will have been built on completely different design principles.

Given that Goodwood circuit revival, the last I heard, was dramatically oversubscribed for drivers wishing to take their cars to compete, has no apparent trouble recruiting marshals, and attracts bigger crowds of spectators every year, I would suggest that there are a lot of people for whom the rewards of seeing the cars in near to their natural habitat outweigh the perceived hazards involved.

As John says, one must not be irresponsible about this. Lives do depend on it, and the worst accident is one that involves the onlookers as well as the participants. But a greater level of acceptable risk should not be confused with lack of foresight or responsibility. I for one, if taking a car to a track day, would probably not relish taking it to Goodwood for precisely the reasons Verglas has put forward. The banks and tyre walls are too close for anyone who is not supremely confident in what they're doing. But they are to FIA standards - make no mistake about that. I have read Doug Nye talking about the approach to St Marys, and the FIA representative who certified the Goodwood circuit for competition did insist on changes there, and as it turned out, the banking was moved back precisely at the point where Jack Brabham subsequently went off...

[zefarelly]

its interesting that at Goodwood you get a blend of hoops, belts or nout in the old ERA's etc . . . .its basically down to the driver, the guy that went flying was undoubtedly better off than if hed been belted in the car with no hoop . . . .if your going to have a hoop it needs to be an integral part of the cars structure to be of any use, if it is does it contribute to the chassis dynamics??? its an unanswerable dilema . . . .for my tuppence worth, I think its up to the competitors/individual . . . .all I want to see is these remarkable pieces of motoring history being used correctly, not wrapped in cotton wool in a show house on a huge country estate

keep em racing

[klaus]

original historic racing cars have their real work done and should be preserved in their characters.
the attitude of the keepers / drivers should be changed.
it is a real pitty to see cars beeing destroyed by "old men", only to get a silly golden pot ,fighting for ridiculous "glory" , they really can not earn in this way.
this means not: to drive a historic racer like grandmother on sunday.
look at american events, especially topless cars show their monstrous cages, some keepers even seem to be proud of that heavy metal and paint it in thrilling colours, oh god!! And spectators go to events for getting an idea of the good old days....what a fake at all.
what a chance was missed, when the Lola MK 6 was "restored" to death, a ridiculous result, having nothing to do with "history" (otherwise this word is wrong), showing in every detail, that this car is brandnew and far away from the real mk6, yes it is safe, but not historic at all.
it is the decision: to go real racing, or to keep a historic racer.
Couls you imagine jim hall´s chaparrals ,competing at goowood, beeing prepared to take the glory and therefore converted to modern safety standards?
one month ago, at mallorca several original cars were completly destroyed, they have gone for ever, because a rebuilt one will never be a authenic one, it will be a fake, even if the chassis plate, around which brand new sheets of alloy panels are fitted ,is still the old one.
klaus
historic racer with passion

[gfm]

Thank you Klaus. Interesting views again.

[D-Type]

Personally I believe in originality. The replica D Type Jaguars forthis new series look awful.
Admittedly they did use rollover hoops in the USA. I have seen photos of Austin Healeys, TR2's and the like with them.

[gfm]

Serious posters to the board maybe interested to know that the FIA (sharp intake of breath) are very interested in the progress of historic car racing. Last year, we were talking to their number one historic commissioner Jurgan Barth and they are intending to look at the racing in two forms.
Firstly, they will keep a category for the fully original, highly valuable and cars which modern modifications would be regarded as sacrilege. Most of these cars will be ‘registered’ much as they are at they are listed at the moment, but events for them will have to pay regard to their irriplac-ibility and probably a little ‘softer’ with the competitive element.
Then there’ll be a second class where‘re-made’ historic racers can compete. I can’t remember the criteria that they are thinking of for this class, but I seem to recall that simple replicas, much as they are today, will need to be very close to the original spec in order to qualify.
So ultimately, those lucky enough to enjoy original early race cars will be able to choose the direction they may take with their cars. It was reasonably reassuring to hear that the international top bods had the problem identified

[David McKinney]

Another can of worms
How do they define "original" - if it has FIA papers it must be OK?
No change there then

[gfm]

I don't think it is a can of worms. To get your FIA papers, all you have to do is prove beyond reasonable doubt it is what it's claimed. It seems a very fair assimilation proceedure and inspection system via extremely professional people.

[David McKinney]

I don't want to start another FIA Paper argument. The system in the UK does indeed seem to work fairly well, but other ASNs have widely differing interpretations of what is required.