Development in Historic racing and should results reflect history

[andy97]

Originally Posted by Paul D

Andy - no, I haven't, at least, not in writing officially. But really, that sort of emphasises my point, because I shouldn't have to. Who wants to be seen as the bad guy - a moaner with sour grapes, jealous of the guy with the fancy car? That's how those targeted by such complaints would probably see it anyway.

The fact is, when it's plain to see that a car is 'bent', it shouldn't be allowed to race in the first place, and it's up to the organisers (in this case, the club) to filter these cars out. I don't think it should be a case of "Oh, well, the guy's well connected and well known, so we'll let him race and see if anyone complains." Rather, the case should be "Sorry mate, your car clearly flouts the rules, and we wouldn't let Joe Bloggs race that car in this series, so we can't let you in either, as it wouldn't be fair."

Unfortunately, that doesn't always happen from what I can see, and I'm not sure why. I can only speculate that when owners of said cars are 'VIPs' (for want of a better term!), it seems that a blind eye is sometimes turned that wouldn't happen to a mere 'ordinary' competitor. From a club's perspective, I suppose it's understandable that when said 'VIP' turns up with his glamourous car and wants to race in their series, it brings a certain amount of kudos to the club and may attract others of his ilk, so it's understandable that they won't be keen to turn him away. However, just because something's understandable doesn't mean it's right...

Paul, I can tell you now that, as a co-ordinator, I can't possibly know everything about all the versions of cars racing in any one series and so I did have to rely on the help of others. If someone came to me with a concern I would investigate and do my best to sort things out BUT, even in a series with so few regs as the cscc series it does rely on people to make their own efforts to HELP police the regs.

I can also tell you that the CSCC committee take their responsibilities very seriously and do a hell of a lot of weeding out before cars even get to the race meeting.

If you really think that you should not have to point things out to officials, and that the officials should deal with the issues then you need 3-4 paid eligibility Scrutineers and marque experts for each series, and how much will that cost.

A car may obviously be bent to you, but it may not be to the co-ordinator. Help him out. It's not moaning, it's not sour grapes, it's helping to run the series correctly on as level a playing field as possible.

Sorry, but it's club racing and the club members have to help the volunteer officials as best they can.

If they don't, and aren't prepared to, then they should not raise the issue on forums, because clearly they are accepting of the issue at the race track.

I accept that "proper" historic racing is a different matter but even here, especially here, you have to have eligibility Scrutineers and time to inspect and sort things out.

[andy97]

As an aside, a few years ago, a bunch of competitors complained that many of the Appendix K races were not being policed properly and that some cars were bent. They asked the CSCC to run a proper, policed and scrutineered Appendix K series in addition to the laissez faire Swinging Sixties series. The club answered the demand with "Classic K" and employed an eligibility scrutineer, and at the early race meetings grid sizes were good, but some competitors (the same competitors that had signed up to the policed series idea) didn't really want their cars scrutineered to the level required to establish strict eligibility. Some cars were asked to move over to Swinging Sixties because they didn't comply and their owners didn't like it! Grid sizes dropped and the series was dropped for a short while ; eventually it was agreed that a more "normal" level of scrutineering would be adopted and the series returned!!!!

I think the best approach is, like athletics or cycling, to,assume that everyone is cheating and either find somewhere else to race, take up golf or just accept the fact and enjoy the show. Depressing isn't it?

[chunder]

There is no such thing as fun when very rich men are spending hundreds of thousands of pounds!

In short oval racing I watch, there have been some retro nostalgia type formulas started recently and though some cars are actually from the period, some are new metal, and using current tech in tyres, engines etc which rather detracts from the point.

[Heightswitch]

Originally Posted by chunder

There is no such thing as fun when very rich men are spending hundreds of thousands of pounds!

In short oval racing I watch, there have been some retro nostalgia type formulas started recently and though some cars are actually from the period, some are new metal, and using current tech in tyres, engines etc which rather detracts from the point.

I get the most fun when I beat such cars on my shoe string budget!! There is always someone to race in every grid…You may not always like where you are on the grid but my admittedly limited experience is that there is always someone out there with a similar car and similar ability…Thats where the fun is had….

A dearly missed friend of mine who was a very accomplished racer used to always say….Pots make Pratts….He never forgot what the fun was about. :-)

[GORDON STREETER]

Originally Posted by Heightswitch

A dearly missed friend of mine who was a very accomplished racer used to always say….Pots make Pratts….He never forgot what the fun was about. :-)

I suppose I'm a prat with two to three hundred pots then !
I have always built my own cars and engines on a shoe string budget working in an old leaking chicken shed on a farm !
I absolutely enjoyed my motor racing and I didn't go pot hunting but I beat an awful lot of people that could easily have paid for my entire 47 years of motor racing out of their loose change.
Don't assume that all people that win races are made of money !

[DaveGT6]

Originally Posted by Duddha

control.


If Appendix K didn’t exist or is not applied, it becomes modern racing with cars that tend to look historic.

I think that rather sums it up.

[Heightswitch]

Originally Posted by GORDON STREETER

I suppose I'm a prat with two to three hundred pots then !
I have always built my own cars and engines on a shoe string budget working in an old leaking chicken shed on a farm !
I absolutely enjoyed my motor racing and I didn't go pot hunting but I beat an awful lot of people that could easily have paid for my entire 47 years of motor racing out of their loose change.
Don't assume that all people that win races are made of money !

I wouldn't dare even think that Gordon.. I was alluding to the pot hunter….Not the racer who earns them along the way!! I think we all know and appreciate the difference. :-)
N.

[Paul D]

Originally Posted by andy97

Paul, I can tell you now that, as a co-ordinator, I can't possibly know everything about all the versions of cars racing in any one series and so I did have to rely on the help of others. If someone came to me with a concern I would investigate and do my best to sort things out BUT, even in a series with so few regs as the cscc series it does rely on people to make their own efforts to HELP police the regs.

I can also tell you that the CSCC committee take their responsibilities very seriously and do a hell of a lot of weeding out before cars even get to the race meeting.

If you really think that you should not have to point things out to officials, and that the officials should deal with the issues then you need 3-4 paid eligibility Scrutineers and marque experts for each series, and how much will that cost.

A car may obviously be bent to you, but it may not be to the co-ordinator. Help him out. It's not moaning, it's not sour grapes, it's helping to run the series correctly on as level a playing field as possible.

Sorry, but it's club racing and the club members have to help the volunteer officials as best they can.

If they don't, and aren't prepared to, then they should not raise the issue on forums, because clearly they are accepting of the issue at the race track.

I accept that "proper" historic racing is a different matter but even here, especially here, you have to have eligibility Scrutineers and time to inspect and sort things out.

Andy - I don't necessarily disagree with your observations, and when it comes to modifications on cars that perhaps break the rules in a subtle manner, then yes, I agree that a club official may not necessarily spot that without some help from other competitors.

However, the car in question here - and I'm the first to admit this was an extreme case - was absolutely bonkers and modified to the point that Stevie Wonder could have spotted that it wasn't even close to being a 'standard silhouette'. And I did mention it verbally on the day. If any series co-ordinator couldn't spot that without having it pointed out to them by someone like me, then I'd have to wonder about their suitability for the role. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but I don't see how any reasonable person could see it any other way. I know for sure that several others also voiced concerns about the particular car's suitability that day, and yet, the car was not only allowed to race (and win, I seem to remember), but it was also allowed back several more times before he was finally told he would need to bring it more in line with the regs if he wanted to race again. I don't think we saw it again after that.

Now, I can't explain how that was allowed to happen, and it was all in the distant past now, so it's water under the bridge as far as I'm concerned - but I just used it to highlight the sort of thing that can happen.

I understand that this thread is more about the flouting of rules in bigger events running to FIA rules, but I think it's relevant at every level. Some of the guys running these 'bent' cars in the big FIA meetings may possibly have started their racing in the lower disciplines, maybe even racing in some of the very series that many of us run in at club level. Now, as they have this 'high roller win at all costs' attitude, then they may have been getting away with running illegal cars in those club events, and if so, then naturally they take that expectation with them when they progress onto the bigger meetings.

Perhaps - and I know it's stretch, and I also know a lot of them probably went straight into the bigger meetings - but just maybe, if it was nipped in the bud in the lower formulae, then maybe fewer would carry the expectation of being allowed to get away with it at the high profile end of things.

Or maybe that's just a step too far to expect those guilty of it to actually have any principles?

[Cliff Ryan]

One of the other themes that seem to run & run on here is that there are too many historic events running, which all have their own set of slightly different rules. So that means we as owner / drivers can chose a series to race with and simply ensure that our cars comply to the rules of the series, be it Appendix K or not. I simply don't understand the pot hunting win at all costs mentality, as they should be earned as in Gordon's case, otherwise they can be bought quite cheaply at any trophy shop.
My Mustang was raced in SCCA A Sedan in period and is kept to those specs. I was asked to enter the Small Block Ford race at Goodwood a few years ago, but pointed out the specification of my car and politely declined as it doesn't comply with Goodwood rules. I guess I'm slightly unusual then, but every entry form I've ever signed states that by entering you confirm that your car complies with the events rules, doesn't it?

I don't have the time or ability to rebuild my own engines or race cars, so have to use engine builders and race car preparers for the heavy lifting. My Mustang's engine is being rebuilt at the moment, all I'm saving is the block, so the engine builder asked me if I wanted an illegal stroker motor the same as he has built for others as 'nobody would know' to which I replied that I would know and I don't want to race illegally. He replied that he knew I would say that, but had to ask the question, as it wouldn't cost any more. Apologies for the rant but I had to vent my spleen!

So it seems that over development is not just a UK or European / FIA problem and the best way to stop it is self policing. I'm just off to catch one of Simon's flying pigs for breakfast.

[terence]

Interesting reading through this thread.As an ex race organizers helper,I fully apreciate Louis comment about numbers.
However,if organizers were to stand up against bent cars and send them home,surely it is of benefit to all other competitors who are playing by the rules.
Lets not forget that its only because of those who choose to cheat thier way to the top step are those who are wrecking Historic motorsport for everyone else!
Anyone remember Jeremy Hall telling MGB owners at Silverstone that the engines would be checked after qualifying? Three cars went straight back onto thier trailers whilst the remain four had a very enjoyable and close race.Now,isnt that what it always used to be about??

[PeterMorley]

Originally Posted by zefarelly

Quite possibly Simon, although as the tide shifts, so have, and will the contributors.

More period correct cars will be mothballed in favour of new builds . . . . more traditional thinking entrants will become disillusioned and go and play golf or whatever . . . .

Perhaps if cars had to be genuine/original it might change things a little., another minefield I know, but weren't original FiA papers only issued to genuine cars ? It's no secret a majority of competitive historic race cars are new, which sort of defeats the object, as well as being somewhat fraudulent.

There's even a problem with 'genuine' cars.
Replacing major items like rotten spaceframes has long been acceptable and some of those cars are described as genuine/original etc. even though they clearly aren't original.

Of course if you were to restrict it to only cars with most of their original components there simply wouldn't be many cars to play with.
Many of them would be slower which might reduce the number of accidents and put off some of the more determined drivers, which could be a positive.

However it must be possible to contain some of the modern developments - some formulas use rolling roads to measure power outputs, such checks could be used to limit engine development (and period outputs are widely known).
Restricting rev-limits to those used in period is another possibility.

Suspension and braking developments are harder to determine but they could be policed more rigorously - but expecting the owners to provide period evidence of such things is difficult and already causes enough trouble and expense.

Race organisers who can fill grids and sell loads of tickets don't have a lot of incentive to change things.
When the crash comes they might have to think again but the lack of 'return on investment' will reduce some of the larger 'historic racing development budgets' and the problem might decrease anyway.

[GORDON STREETER]

Originally Posted by PeterMorley

However it must be possible to contain some of the modern developments - some formulas use rolling roads to measure power outputs, such checks could be used to limit engine development (and period outputs are widely known).
Restricting rev-limits to those used in period is another possibility.


.

Yes it is possible but also there are a lot of clever people out there that can alter things via software to circumvent things. Even back in the 90s I remember a certain car that was over the top on noise but always passed the test when checked. I knew the mechanic responsible for the car and having a "pub chat" with him I found out that the car was run by a hidden ECU that could be altered by a switch on the dash that altered the mixture and timing and dropped the DB reading to get it under the limit. I remember one occasion when the driver forgot to switch it back for the race and was going backwards through the field for a couple of laps until he remembered !
An old mate of mine who is a computer designer/developer claims that people like him can get over lots of so called fool proof programs !
it happens in motorsport throughout unfortunately and will be worse as you get towards the moneyed side all the way to F1.

[Jon W]

This is a debate that was started in 2008, it really is time we did something about it.
Having reread the post again all the potential solutions have been put forward.
To incorporate some new technology to reduce costs and to improve reliability should be permitted, ie ignitions, brakes as examples, there are others. BUT non of these should improve performance.

We must accept that tyres have improved as have track surface so there will have been some lap time improvement.

The FIA are involved in every level of motor sport, it is their Logo that must be on dated helmets, belts, Licence and so on, so they DO have a responsibility to take care their brand is not put into disrepute.

Many of you have said that ' we all know who they are' ,
Lap times are the give away, There are people on this Forum who know the history of cars, the lap times possible in period and have a moral code still, these people could determine lap times possible by the aces of the time of the car, take account of the improvements,Tyres, track surface.
If a car goes quicker than this lap time then the entrants statement signed at the time of entry becomes important, it is then up to him to show he is fitter. more able than the aces of the car in period, and had he been driving at the time would have been able to compete against the likes of J Clark, G Hill.
F Gardner, etc.
Simon Hadfield mentions the Golden rule 'those with the most Gold make the rules' No they do not or should not!!!
These rules are already written and not by the 'Those with the most Gold' but by all of us who care.
It is up to us to police our sport, we have the knowledge, we have to work with the FIA,The Organizers other drivers and entrants, who must also be prepared to accept that there is something not right happening and so get rid of these cheats.
What they are doing is a sort of theft.
Come on we have the Bo.....ks to do it surely.

[terence]

Fully agree but the biggest problem lays with the organisers who want full grids.
Spa six hour as an example.Oft over subscribed yet Vincent and Alain still allow ridiculously bent cars to run-dont ask for a list as its too long.Seemingly they as well as most other organisers prefering the wealthier owner drivers to participate rather than the genuine club racer .

[john ruston]

The organisers need the dosh and then some have their mates to include.

Costs of circuit hire are enormous and the major meetings have layers of organisers who all want their margin.

To this end they need revenue so if some questionable cars are allowed in so be it.

All the promotors fall for same fate.Most start off telling us that they will not allow iffy cars to race but after a couple of years realise they need every car they can find.

Pre 63 was a great idea and has mostly stuck to its principles but owners do not back it.Sixteen cars or about that at Spa last year.If I was Carol would have abandoned the project at that point.

It's not only operators,organisers,promotors either.Its us the car owners who are responsible for present mess.

The lap times give the game away.

This bit about the rich buggers are screwing it up is nonsense.Most of new money bods can't drive and are fleased by the middle men of Historic Racing.Flogging them cars which will get them into the best meetings.

The preparation blokes hand them cars that hopefully go a bit quicker than they should but it makes up for the chauffeurs lack of ability.It sells grid spaces and keeps preparation people in business.

The days when the majority turned up to Historic Races and fettled their own cars are over.Look at number of five /six car transporters in paddocks.

Only place that happens is VSCC and they try as hard as possible to screw things up by having an eligibility committee that is a self interest group that does little for the expansion of what should be a good club providing races for all bank balances.

The ones without the budgets whinge about the others but life is not fare and envy gets boring.

Motor racing is expensive and has always been that way.

I have no idea how to solve the problem but having passed seventy will not concern me for much longer!

Another ramble showing my age!

[Colin McKay]

Crickey, that's cheered me up!

[john ruston]

Does cynical and grumpy cover it!

[MGDavid]

when you're 100% correct you're allowed to be cynical and grumpy

[zefarelly]

Where I sit on the ladder is irrelevant, it just ****es me off seing nice old cars irreversably f***ed up.

Carols U2TC and pre63 were both great ideas, but she charges enough to make most question it.

Im 45 ths year, grumpy and cynical already, if I make it to 70 I'll no doubt be intollerable!

[p261brm]

I have no idea how to solve the problem but having passed seventy will not concern me for much longer

You speak for yourself John!
Nice to see this can of worms re-opened , there are some very prominent cars are no longer seen, just because of ''the engine must be exactly as it was in period rule''
I, like many have reservations regarding engines and their ability to produce ultimately lap times, unheard of in period, even in the hands of the hero's past. The 'thirst' to win will all ways be there, and if the expense by some is agreeable to do so, the very un-period engines will continue to be available, one way or another.
As R.J.D Attwood once remarked Historic racing is second only to F1 in expense.