Hidden potential of -modern- historic racing cars

[terence]

Originally Posted by Slippy Diff

Didn't whatsisname, the fella who owned all the ex works cars own it? Absolutely beautiful car and should have gone into production.

His name is Arthur Carter,I ran his Resto Shop for 20yrs

[midgetman]

What no-one's picked up on re lap times is the improvement in surface. Tarmac technology has improved massively since the 60s, expecially at the quality circuits. Allied with later rubber developments, lap times are bound to fall.

As far a the "Showroom Shodown" is concerned, if they're genuine showroom cars I'd expect a race car to walk over them. Race your car on standard suspension bushes and you'll soon see what I mean. Seen it loadsa times in testing when I worked at Combe - Johnny Richbod with the latest XRthingummywotnot going home with tail between legs 'cos he'd been beaten up by a better handling battered old racing saloon.

[johnny yuma]

midgetman-agree re tyres and tracks. The Subaru lap was 2000,the Healey lap was 1998- so same bitumen there.Cars of the Healey vintage had mostly metal bushings anyhow except very thin rubbers in leaf spring shackles.Can't see that being of signifigance.Their lap times come from light body,big engine,hard springs,low c of g.Not rocket science but largely forgotten today.A NON-turbo 2 litre scoobie is a very slow car-too heavy.

[Slippy Diff]

Originally Posted by terence bower

His name is Arthur Carter,I ran his Resto Shop for 20yrs

The guy before him, owned and rallied a few of the BMC ex-works cars.

[Slippy Diff]

Originally Posted by johnny yuma

Welch had the pride of all England there done up like Austin Powers,and our own Peter Hopwood[R.I.P.] HAD A 3000 in superb trim.Practice times were nearly identical,they raced with a coat of paint between them

Still have the race on video. But, those two cars may have had an Austin Healey badge on them, but they couldn't have been more different. Denis was running to strict FIA Appendix K regs that included 4½" wheels shod with Dunlop L sections for starters while the Hopwood car was somewhat far removed from Appendix K spec!!

[Peter Mallett]

Off topic comment alert I have to type this or my brain will explode! Happy Birthday Slippy Thanks for reading, you've been a wonderful audience. Don't forget to try the veal and tip your waitress. We now return you to the topic

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by midgetman

What no-one's picked up on re lap times is the improvement in surface. Tarmac technology has improved massively since the 60s, expecially at the quality circuits. Allied with later rubber developments, lap times are bound to fall.

I made these points in another thread. As a f'rinstance, Terence tried my original Mk2 Capri at Mallory in '94(?). The set up was far removed from what we have today on the Mk 3 (lesser cam, crap/heavy suspension etc.) but nonetheless we lapped faster than they went in the original Group 1 races from '75/'76. And we were running on the Dunlop D84's as opposed to the slicks they ran in period.

You can add braking technology too. Even if you run solid discs you can use harder pads which improve braking tremendously.

All legitimate improvements as far as App K goes.

[John Turner]

Yep, all good reasons why historic cars can lap quicker now, legitimately. The purists should not get too hung up about this. There is an irony though that whilst racing cars get quicker as they get older the drivers (eventually!) get slower as they get older!

[esper]

Originally Posted by John Turner

Yep, all good reasons why historic cars can lap quicker now, legitimately. The purists should not get too hung up about this. There is an irony though that whilst racing cars get quicker as they get older the drivers (eventually!) get slower as they get older!

hm thats typical, I felt perfectly in place at Stoneleigh with my almost grey hair now. but I wouldn't say age has to do everything with the hadicap of getting slower in a racecar. .................................

[terence]

Originally Posted by John Turner

Yep, all good reasons why historic cars can lap quicker now, legitimately. The purists should not get too hung up about this. There is an irony though that whilst racing cars get quicker as they get older the drivers (eventually!) get slower as they get older!

Not always! I know of several "Older Drivers",they still take some beating.!

Peter,That was a good day out,can we do it again? Spa perhaps next time

[Slippy Diff]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Thank you. A very nice meal at the Te Whau vineyard restaurant on Waiheke Island was the highlight. Myself and my wife were delivered to the restaurant by a Robinson R44 and returned home the same way. A large quantity of a very agreeable 2003 Shiraz at $85 a bottle topped it off.

[Slippy Diff]

I'm still gonna bang on about tyres. As I said earlier in the thread, all pre 65 cars should run on Dunlop L or M section tyres. No buts. Not sure about anything after 65 but I doubt very much they were the super sticky items everyone wants to run these days.

[terence]

Absolutly agree Slippy,what a lot of people do not seem to realize is that the older car suspension systems were never designed to take the stress that sticky tyres create.We have had several instances over the years where there have been failures of components purely because of the amount of grip developed using them.I personally would prefer to race on "L",s all of the time.

[Peter Mallett]

IIRC Firestone brought out a treaded tyre in around 1967 that was soft enough for the tread to close up when at racing temperatures. It was the forerunner of slicks.

[johnny yuma]

Originally Posted by Slippy Diff

Still have the race on video. But, those two cars may have had an Austin Healey badge on them, but they couldn't have been more different. Denis was running to strict FIA Appendix K regs that included 4½" wheels shod with Dunlop L sections for starters while the Hopwood car was somewhat far removed from Appendix K spec!!

Makes Welch's times even more amazing.I only saw it on TV,the only photo I have seen since[ of
the two cars taken head on just over Skyline,where Denis was surprised to be overtaken by Hopwood],is not really clear but there did not appear to be a vast difference in Rubber on the Road between the two.Denis had more speed down Conrod but entertained the crowd with power slides out of corners so perhaps his rear rubber was inferior.The organisers had difficulties with diverse allowable modifications.Hopwood's car had only one trial meeting after a 4 month adaption from rally use.

[esper]

Originally Posted by johnny yuma

Makes Welch's times even more amazing.I only saw it on TV,the only photo I have seen since[ of
the two cars taken head on just over Skyline,where Denis was surprised to be overtaken by Hopwood],is not really clear but there did not appear to be a vast difference in Rubber on the Road between the two.Denis had more speed down Conrod but entertained the crowd with power slides out of corners so perhaps his rear rubber was inferior.The organisers had difficulties with diverse allowable modifications.Hopwood's car had only one trial meeting after a 4 month adaption from rally use.

To put in one liners. Denis Welch and Mark Schmidt provoced one of the first historic race cars to be developed to the max ; the mighty big 3000 Healey. And then Denis developed this in an allmens friend which is still fast and almost nobody can break............(Slippy got one). After those efforts many cars followed the Lotus Elan by f.e. Tony Thompson. The Cortina , who did those?????? the MGB by f.e. Cambridge Motorsport and now MG motorsport and not to forget one good engine builder on the Continent , Dymotrack . Chriss Schrirle and David Gerald gave the TVR Griffith legs then the Porsche 911 got legs , overhere by Duell. Well and then came other American V8 powered cars like Mustangs, Corvettes so more Guru's to name!!!!!!!!!!

[Slippy Diff]

Originally Posted by johnny yuma

Makes Welch's times even more amazing.I only saw it on TV,the only photo I have seen since[ of
the two cars taken head on just over Skyline,where Denis was surprised to be overtaken by Hopwood],is not really clear but there did not appear to be a vast difference in Rubber on the Road between the two.Denis had more speed down Conrod but entertained the crowd with power slides out of corners so perhaps his rear rubber was inferior.The organisers had difficulties with diverse allowable modifications.Hopwood's car had only one trial meeting after a 4 month adaption from rally use.

Tyres would have made a huge difference. Hopwood was running sticky tyres and whopping brakes with multi pot calipers, IIRC, that's where he had an advantage.

[Slippy Diff]

Originally Posted by terence bower

I personally would prefer to race on "L",s all of the time.

So did I. They may not have been too good in the wet but I finished 4th overall at a wet Eiffel Klassik running on L's in 2000 I think (could of been 2002, can't remember), Jeremy Welch finished 1st overall, both of us in Healey 3000s.

Aaah, those were the days....

[terence]

Originally Posted by Slippy Diff

So did I. They may not have been too good in the wet but I finished 4th overall at a wet Eiffel Klassik running on L's in 2000 I think (could of been 2002, can't remember), Jeremy Welch finished 1st overall, both of us in Healey 3000s.

Aaah, those were the days....

Indeed! We actually have something in common,I did just that in 2004,third in class,should have been second but unfortunatly my other driver thought we were getting low on fuel and eased off,only to let the 911 that I,d had such a battle with get by ,not to bad for a legal MGB I don,t suppose

[johnh875]

I remember the Healey race at Bathurst, and have to disagree with Johnny Yuma, the difference in tyre width was very apparent. It was amazing to see Denis Welch sliding the Healey through every corner. From memory the Hopwood car seemed a lot more modified, eg I recall it pulled some pretty high revs - or do I have it wrong?

[Slippy Diff]

Originally Posted by johnh875

the difference in tyre width was very apparent.

Yep. The difference between a Dunlop L on 4.5" rims and what was on the Hopwood car would of been significant.

Originally Posted by johnh875

It was amazing to see Denis Welch sliding the Healey through every corner.

One of the joys of racing a Healey 3000.

[johnh875]

I don't have to tell you this was more than just sliding, it would not have been out of place in a drifting competition! Hopwood by comparison was taking a more conventional line and attitude on the car

[johnny yuma]

refreshed my memory reading www.myaustinhealey.com including attached race report-Welch had the power,Hopwood the brakes and tyres,both drove brilliant races.

[terence]

The Hidden Potential of all the cars we are talking about seem only to be able to realise the power by overboring/stroking.Some of the "Leading" Healeys are alleged to have stroked engines,a few of the leading MGBs,well ,we all know about them!.I think that in some respects we are missing the point,and that is in order for this potential to be made available do these engines really need to be bent to make them as quick as they are?I think not!

Sorry about the break,the phone would,nt go away! To get back to where I left off,it seem,s that the policing of these cars either need,s to be tighter or we all start doing it.That in turn will increase our racing cost,s etc etc,any ideas as to what happens next?

Edit: Merged by Peter Mallett

[Al Weyman]

Dont they seal them and inspect them?