Development in Historic racing and should results reflect history

[Brendan Roberts]

Keep going Simon, I am googling for the titanium main bearing caps and researching the reprofiling of my cylinder head, what about the chassis, after all you once told me at Spa 'we dont do engines'!
In this democratic society of ours we will hopefully have a majority who would simply like to see meaningful policing of the regs, so surely organsiers can find a simple way to do it.

[terence]

Originally Posted by Simon Hadfield

Certainly some things are set in stone - capacity, weight etc, I am talking about the use, say, of Titanium main bearing caps, smaller main bearings, remanufactured reprofiled cylinder heads, recast and reprofiled exhaust manifolds, do I have to go on? (The drivers weight issue should have its own tread!) All the above are or have been used.... how on earth are they good for historic racing?

They are no use whatsoever,bit like re-cast Alfa heads with superior inlet tracts etc etc etc.It still fall's into the checking departments hands,someone has to be responsible for keeping tags,wether thats through taking notice of lap times and if those times look to be too good,then it should be a mandatory thing for that cars engine to be checked,no money changing hands,I think there has been enough of that already!

[Brendan Roberts]

Originally Posted by Simon Hadfield

If you take FJ as an example, no car in the period had an engine as used today. However virtually everybody now has the same engine and thus its a fait accompli, if we now say ok this far but no further there is a chance to regulate everything. When the FIA specified round main bearing caps on twin cams all that happened was that someone forged some round caps in unobtainium and everybody had to spend even more to stay where they were. I am not saying cheating is acceptable or desirable but with a standard laid down and checkable we have at least a "ground zero" for many cars for which homologation forms do not exist - eg Lola T70, Tyrell 008

I think FJ allows Richardson heads in classes D and E and a class C car with a period head stays as class C and with a Richardson head becomes Class D. I also think FJ is probably as level a playing field as you can get other than perhaps HFF (there speaks someone with a car 13kgs underweight last time out, but with a 1960 Cosworth mkIX, or maybe XI!). But where a car is homologated doesnt it make sense to simply enforce that homologation? Where it isnt then Simon's suggestion may be the way forward. But how do you reach a consensus, do you invite T70 owners, for example, to agree the newly 'frozen' regs or appoint a benign dictator? A Tyrrell 008 is I would guess only a handful of chassis so would expect series organiser apply suitable regs, which would apply to other F1 cars in same series.

[Simon Hadfield]

Chassis? Where do you want to start? Honeycomb sir? Optimised pick up points? Engines moved forwards/ backwards/up/down as needed, Tig welded T45 tubes? What I think really amuses me is the fact that people suppose we dont notice.....

[Simon Hadfield]

I hasten to add I use these cars and classes just as illustration, I have nothing against any of them or any class in particular - I could just as easily have picked F2 or Divas - honest!

[simon drabble]

Originally Posted by Simon Hadfield

I hasten to add I use these cars and classes just as illustration, I have nothing against any of them or any class in particular - I could just as easily have picked F2 or Divas - honest!

Simon you will never sort the Diva's in historic racing.........!

[zefarelly]

I can see where your coming from Simon, and it may work for well regulated series with a vast majority of common components ( HFF 711 cranks for example )

FJ is obviously another, but when original components are readily available why allow all the hot stuff . . . . if nothing else slowing cars by returning to correct engine specs would be safer, and should be cheaper

the whole end caps on twin cams issue was ridiculous and still is!

[Al Weyman]

I can't use Chevy aftermarket cylinder heads in our sometimes looked down on Post Historic Touring Cars and believe me there are lots out there that look externally almost identical, made of the same material (or alloy of you want to really cheat) and are very reasonable compared to trying to make the genuine article work as seen from my leaking Chevy cylinder head post.

For example there is an excellent product stocked by Real Steel, the RHS heads from Australia using smooth cast technology that work out the box without even porting and cost under £400 a pair inc. vat. So if in our lowly championship we cannot use them how come you can in these prestigous FIA sanctioned events?

[terence]

Originally Posted by Simon Hadfield

Chassis? Where do you want to start? Honeycomb sir? Optimised pick up points? Engines moved forwards/ backwards/up/down as needed, Tig welded T45 tubes? What I think really amuses me is the fact that people suppose we dont notice.....

You only need walk the pit lane at any Historic meeting for a good laugh,have you heard the one about TVR Griffiths,never competed in an International event in thier lives yet somehow gained FIA papers,the MSA is looking into them now.
Back on thread,I remember back in the Christies days,there were some whispers about a particular Lotus Cortina being"iffy",it was obvious the driver was in a class of his own,the whispers soon stopped.

[Victor Meldrew]

Please bear with me; don't wish to take this off the subject but reading this thread with interest prompts some thoughts.

Having slagged off last night's TG elsewhere on the forum, there was one very good and thought provoking item at the end - the hydrogen powered car in the US and Jay Leno's comments regarding the future and if cars like that will be the saviour of the petrol powered car as widespread use will allow us all to enjoy our 'proper' cars at the weekends.

Going back to the original theme of this thread, the motivation of which appears to be in the interests of having a level playing field and keeping costs down, I wonder if there is a much bigger debate to be had at club level especially with regards to one eye on what is happening in F1 and how / if it could ever filter down to us?

F1 maybe cutting costs in response to the global economic climate but I wonder how soon it will become also a mantra picked up by a number of lobby's who will deem not just speed but motorsport to be socially unacceptable. Seem far off? Stranger things have happened.

So, apologies if have rambled a little but hopefully the relevance to the original subject of this thread is there. Perhaps something we don't wish to face up to but I wonder what sort of debates we will be having this time next year when we can look back and reflect on the 2009 season?

[james c]

We've just had the FJ regs completely re-written, alot of points clarified in an attempt to do exactly what Simon is suggesting, draw a line under what has gone on in development and say no more, this is it.
It's hard to be as specific as FF regs are when your dealing with several types of engines and a diverse range of chassis but the objective is the same.
I'm sure what is being suggested could be done but what a task! The FF regs state valve sizes, camshaft dimensions, minimum weights for components etc as do most regs that use a common engine. It could be done for the DFV for example but surely there would have to be agreed specs for BRM, Matra, Ferrari etc.
With appendix K you have all this in the homologation papers already, as was mentioned earlier you need someone to police it effectively.
With regard to "hot stuff" fitted to FJ's lets not mess with it too much it does seem to work rather well!

[Tom Walker]

Simon, any right minded person would agree with your sentiments. I presume you are thinking mainly about racing cars and their series. It would be difficult with the older sports cars with such a variety of makes ie the Woodcote Trophy, Pre-War cars etc. In fact any series with a big range of machinery would be almost impossible to police, and I cant think there would be anything to gain from trying .

If you're talking T70's etc, I'd LOVE to see them all with identical spec SBC's, but you would have to crawl all over the chassis too !! But then again, the guy with the Matra (for eg) or some other rarified beast turns up and blows all the poor restrcted chaps into the weeds.

Its a great idea in theory, but I just cant see how you make it work except for those series with common (in the strict sense of the word) components.

[john ruston]

Tom ,The Pre War and Woodcote cars need weight and capacity checks,no roller rockers,correct wheelbase,original brakes and ground clearance.Thats half the paddock gone.

[TorqueWench]

[quote=Victer Meldrew]Having slagged off last night's TG elsewhere on the forum, there was one very good and thought provoking item at the end - the hydrogen powered car in the US and Jay Leno's comments regarding the future and if cars like that will be the saviour of the petrol powered car as widespread use will allow us all to enjoy our 'proper' cars at the weekends.
[quote]

I was wondering when this would crop up in this - so far - fascinating thread.
When we get to the Euro agreement of 2020 (20% reduction in emissions for the planet etc) we could all be racing in hybrids... or not at all if the green lobby get to us first. SO bear in mind that we may end up in an "Adapt or Die" scenario.

However, back to Simon's thread - the reason HFF and HFJ are pretty stable in rules is a) they have been going a long time and everybody knows what the rules are, and b) you can still get the blocks and heads (although I'm not sure about these Richardson ones - but I think Brendan's right, you go up a class if you have one fitted, which we do not in our 18). However they are easy to spot.

HFO (or TGP) used to have Frank Dernie as Tech Scrut - and what he doesn't know about those cars in period is not worth knowing. So again, the "cheating" could be regulated (like insisting on shockers being taken apart).

However, when you come to classic sports cars, GTs etcetera, they have ALL been improved during their racing life - you bend it, you improve it or you're an idiot. Once they became "classic" and under regulation by the likes of the HSCC then these rules have to be policed or they are not worth having. Some of you may not approve, but the CSCC has very few rules, meaning that cheating is not easy to do (!), but the Club has the ultimate sanction of not inviting a competitor whose car it does not "like" (this also applies to driving attitudes as well).

Policing, ultimately, costs money (I guarantee the MSA will not offer to do tech scrut/eligibility scrut for free for anyone)

So are we all prepared to pay for it?

[terence]

I really do not see that as being fair,see-ing as there have obviously been a few "Oversights" concerning scrutineering in the past,why should someone else be held responsible? FIA/HTPs are only granted after an inspection of the car has been done by a "trained" inspector.Now if he was armed with a micrometer at the time of said inspection and the head/heads were not bolted down,at least then bore and stroke could have been checked and the engine sealed.

[Brendan Roberts]

So how do you explain that my GTA is given HTP in mid 2007. At Spa 2008 the car fails scrutineering as it doesnt have an FIA badge on the seat, although conveniently a tent about 200yards away is selling an FIA Recaro for Eu1500 (and yes I did ask the scrut if the seat vendor was his brother!) All this happening whilst the man who inspected and signed off my HTP is sitting in a deck chair next to the Belgian scruts and watching. When I asked for his assistance he suggested I fit another seat! The same man was the scrutineer at Dijon and queried my alternator. I am not an expert on alternators other than knowing that they help maintain electrical power but the same alternator was fitted when he inspected and signed off for HTPs and was fitted by an Alfa specialist who preps several GTAs for Appx k events. He reluctantly issued a scrut sticker on the basis that I would investigate the alternator later - which I have since been advised by prepper is 100% correct. The key to all this is that we need accurate and proper scrutineering whether it is to Appx K or to a new variation with 'allowed modifications'. It seems crazy that a technical officer can sign off on Appx k HTP and the same guy query items that havent changed - I wouldnt have minded so much at Silverstone but all the way to Spa and Dijon.... and no it wasnt Jeremy H!

[terence]

Brendan,Dont fit another Glass shell'd seat,If you get one of the classic seats from DT,it is life-less.App K does not need a seat with a date on,you will need the Head rest though. Maybe these scrutineers need memory booster drug's.?

[Al Weyman]

Originally Posted by john ruston

Tom ,The Pre War and Woodcote cars need weight and capacity checks,no roller rockers,correct wheelbase,original brakes and ground clearance.Thats half the paddock gone.

How do you plan to do the capacity checks without removing the heads thats the rub. If there was an easy way of doing this then I think for a lot of championships everything would be so simple. Take our CTCRC rules which may well be a good blueprint for what is being suggested here provided you could do an easy insitu capacity check because basically the engine particularly the block and head(s) have to first be externally identifiable as what was in the car in the first place (easy). No dry sumping (easy). And no over boring and stroking beyond the original capacity +60thou (not so easy).

With the V8's the big power outputs are not coming from Roller Rockers but from aftermarket heads and blocks (both simply externally identifiable) and stroked and overbored engines anything up to 7 litres plus for the small block (not so simple). Find an easy way to test capacity without a teardown and you will crack it plus dilligent external scrutineering of the fitted engine, maybe call in different experts of the particular unit to assist.

[john ruston]

Al its not that difficult to measure capacity in early cars and weighing is easy.

Roller rockers straightforward.Wheelbase,tape measure.

Its cars into the 60's where it becomes more difficult.

I have not known a pre 60 car to be checked for any of the above but have something wrong which is nothing to do with perormance then your in trouble

[Al Weyman]

We get weighed at each round usualy so very much on the ball there, I just wish someone would invent a reliable capacity checker!

[Clive Brown]

I seem to recall that they use a simple displacement pump tester in NASCAR to check capacity at technical inspection . I'll see if I can't find some details .

[rogerwills]

Originally Posted by Clive Brown

I seem to recall that they use a simple displacement pump tester in NASCAR to check capacity at technical inspection . I'll see if I can't find some details .

I've seen one of these in use at Goodwood and at Masters events. It seemed pretty simple except on some engine types. It wasn't very accurate from memory but good enough to identify engines which warranted "further inspection"

[Neptune]

In the USA, SVRA brings a checker called a P&G gauge to measure displacement. Probably the same thing NASCAR uses. I was present when it was used on a Sprite motor I had built and it was pretty accurate.

The biggest part of the tester is a calibrated clear plastic cylinder and I believe the engine is turned over to pump through a hose connected through the spark plug hole.

Roger

[Peter Nightingale]

Originally Posted by Simon Hadfield

With real F1 having seen sense and put a halt to engine development (amongst other things) is it not time to bring a halt to the race for more power, torque etc in historic racing? Would it not be possible to measure engine components, get a set of standard component weights etc and to be able to say this is it? This would apply across the board, a spec for everything from MGBs to DFVs. This is for me one of the great attractions of formula ford - (although I would like the drivers weight included, its sad the lightweight wussies cant agree to it!) - it is terribly difficult to buy an advantage. Again it seems bizarre to wibble on and on about electronic ignition when huge sums are spent having evermore esoteric engine specifications developed. Where series have specified rev limits all the customer/competitor has had to do is buy the engine builders latest cams, trumpets, lightweight crank and port shape and the good intentions of the organisers have gone.

I think you might be dreaming on what you have just written. As an historic engine builder some competitors have an un-limited budget ....

[terence]

Be-ing british,we are all fully aware of that.