Spa 6Hrs Endurance

[Malcolm Smith]

Another superb six hours meeting, with wonderful racing, cars on display, and mostly great weather. Also an excellent tribute to Barry Sidery-Smith.
A pleasure to meet so many enthusiastic competitors, mechanics, spectators,
especially Mike, Graham and others I have met at previous events. A few photos for Marcos fans and other favourites of mine attached.

[Malcolm Smith]

Spa 2.

[terence]

Originally Posted by FISCracer

It's not the engine that's fragile, it's everything else! Gearbox is always an issue along with diff, brakes and thins like the pan hard rod mounting which broke on Mark Dols' car.

I did not know Roberts engine had been stripped but that gives the lie to those who think the cars are bent. Of course none of the MGBs are 1950s, none of the TRs and Morgans 2.4L and none of the 289s, 302 or bigger.

The FIA have reclassified the 1800GT as GTP despite running in the current spec for almost 25 years. The argument continues as the decision is based on factually incorrect information such as the numbers produced. I look forward to other cars such as 26Rs, SLRs, TVRs and lightweight E types being reclassified as they were not produced in sufficient numbers.

Robert?

[one-two]

Well done for mentioning the tribute to Barry - I thought it was very nice

[terence]

Quite surprised bu the diversity of Griffith shapes at this years meeting.Had to have a double take of the dark grey one up in the F1 garage close to No1 pit garage!
So low and wide even the roof looked wider!bonnet would have looked more at home on a Modsports car.
Have the regs for period lighting been dropped now btw?

[Mike Bell]

Originally Posted by FISCracer

The FIA have reclassified the 1800GT as GTP despite running in the current spec for almost 25 years. The argument continues as the decision is based on factually incorrect information such as the numbers produced. I look forward to other cars such as 26Rs, SLRs, TVRs and lightweight E types being reclassified as they were not produced in sufficient numbers.

An ongoing debate, but just to pick up on the Morgan SLR, of which there were 3 built, it is actually an alternative body on a +4 chassis, which means it shares the +4 homologation. Can't speak for the others! And don't feel victimised, the 3 Morgan owners have spent tens of thousands on their cars after the MSA decided their specification wasn't proven to be period. After all that expense they don't go any slower.......

[Peter Mallett]

I'm sure there were only 500 Lightweight E types built in period and they are all running now.

[356sc]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

I'm sure there were only 500 Lightweight E types built in period and they are all running now.

O

[zefarelly]

Like these ones, original 1964 Lucas pathfinders

Originally Posted by terence

Have the regs for period lighting been dropped now btw?

[356sc]

Pretty sure the regs still say period lighting...clearly not enforced at scrutineering?!

[zefarelly]

If you need that many extra lights I'd be more concerned about the drivers eye sight.

[Mike Bell]

Actually lamp pods are something that I get wound up by. ABSOLUTELY not period, but I suspect that it is the lamps themselves that are scrutineered rather than the mounting method. An Elan had a row of oblong units in a bonnet pod and it looked hideous. Also LED strips all over the car are hardly 60s!

We had two small Lucas fogs (as well as Halogen headlamps) that were supposed to be aiming across to light kerbs. They weren't aimed correctly, but during the last stint, Rick set the car's fastest lap of the race in complete darkness.....

[FISCracer]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

I'm sure there were only 500 Lightweight E types built in period and they are all running now.

Quite

[FISCracer]

Originally Posted by Mike Bell

An ongoing debate, but just to pick up on the Morgan SLR, of which there were 3 built, it is actually an alternative body on a +4 chassis, which means it shares the +4 homologation. Can't speak for the others! And don't feel victimised, the 3 Morgan owners have spent tens of thousands on their cars after the MSA decided their specification wasn't proven to be period. After all that expense they don't go any slower.......

So if you spend thousands of pounds it's acceptable to have HTP for a car that was not homologated in period and not built in sufficient numbers? And why is a kamm tail Grantura not acceptable as an alternative body if an SLR is?

It's all ****** given that most of the GT40s and Daytona Cobras did not exist 5 years ago. I gather that 'period' carbon fibre was recovered from the track at both Goodwood and Spa

[Mike Bell]

Originally Posted by FISCracer

And why is a kamm tail Grantura not acceptable as an alternative body?

In reply to your last sentence, I have absolutely no idea! Perhaps the MSA or one of their Inspectors could provide the answer.......

[MGDavid]

update from the HSCC via Facebook earlier this evening:

Further update on John Rees after his accident at Spa last weekend:

John was repatriated on Tuesday by air ambulance and is now recovering at home.

After having a CT scan at CHR Verviers Hospital it was clear that John has a compressed fracture of the vertebrae L1 which we believe will simply require rest flat on his back for 4-6 weeks.

It would appear that the front right hand lower wishbone failed and someone says that it appeared that the front wheel buckled and a loud cracking sound was heard.

We would like to thank everyone for their good wishes.

Message from Janet Rees

[grantp]

Originally Posted by FISCracer

It's all ****** given that most of the GT40s and Daytona Cobras did not exist 5 years ago. I gather that 'period' carbon fibre was recovered from the track at both Goodwood and Spa

Clearly then there was some seriously expensive rule bypassing going on back in the 60s!

Or maybe the rule makers had not heard of Carbon Fibre back then so they did not know to check for it?

[grantp]

Originally Posted by MGDavid

update from the HSCC via Facebook earlier this evening:

Further update on John Rees after his accident at Spa last weekend:

John was repatriated on Tuesday by air ambulance and is now recovering at home.

After having a CT scan at CHR Verviers Hospital it was clear that John has a compressed fracture of the vertebrae L1 which we believe will simply require rest flat on his back for 4-6 weeks.

It would appear that the front right hand lower wishbone failed and someone says that it appeared that the front wheel buckled and a loud cracking sound was heard.

We would like to thank everyone for their good wishes.

Message from Janet Rees

In the circumstances that sounds like very positive news for John.

[james s]

In 1990 I sustained the same injury when I crashed my formula first at Lydden hill I spent 2 weeks flat bed rest in hospital (after which I had to learn to walk again). Recovery consisted of a lot of swimming etc but I was racing again a year later and my back is now better than before the accident because I learnt to use and protect it better than before.

[Mike Bell]

Originally Posted by MGDavid

update from the HSCC via Facebook earlier this evening:

Further update on John Rees after his accident at Spa last weekend:

We would like to thank everyone for their good wishes.

Message from Janet Rees

Thank you David for passing this on. Very positive to hear. Best wishes to John for a speedy recovery.

[Simon Hadfield]

The issue of replicas and re bodied cars in period are two different things.The ability to "evolve" bodywork and specification is very clearly laid out in the appropriate period Appendix J and was legally done by Shelby, by Chris Lawrence, by Ferrari (sometimes actually not so legally by them too!), by many people in the periods that allowed those changes.
As far as I am aware virtually all period Appendix J (and C where appropriate) regulations are now easily accessible on the web, it would help sometimes if people actually read the period regulations before getting so excited.....
Appendix K today then lays out the basis on which those period regulations can be interpreted. One clear fact is the qualification of period freedoms - that clearly does not mean everything is free today but only permits cars, parts and developments used legally and provably under those freedoms in period. What it also clearly lays out is the point about cars having to have raced Internationally - again legally and provably - in period. That means that the car ran conforming to the appropriate version of Appendix J. This is the basic building block of the structure in which we compete.
The point of replicas can be debated to death, there are surely many pros and cons, but without them the events like the Spa Six Hours meeting would be a pretty small onanistic meeting of staggeringly rich people - it most certainly would not exist in the form we know and love it so much.
Replicas, which in fact were allowed long before Max M made the whole concept so much bigger (people were building GTS Elans and MGBs etc 30 years ago) have allowed a huge number of people to be involved in Historic Motorsport who are not millionaires.
Now whether that is a good or bad thing is another discussion altogether!

[andy97]

I would say that there is a big difference in building a compliant MGB from an existing road car than building brand new cars (continuations) evennif to the same spec as in period.

I tbink it was Zef who said that "the 6 Hours is no longer a place for old cars"!!!
If more people were racing MGBs, etc and the 6 Hours was an event that encouraged such participation then even more people who are not millionaires could race..

I still think there is a place for a separate race for under 2 lire cars but then we will all be moaning about Spyder chassied Elans and brand new Marcos etc lol!

[delta]

Originally Posted by andy97

I would say that there is a big difference in building a compliant MGB from an existing road car than building brand new cars (continuations) evennif to the same spec as in period.

I tbink it was Zef who said that "the 6 Hours is no longer a place for old cars"!!!
If more people were racing MGBs, etc and the 6 Hours was an event that encouraged such participation then even more people who are not millionaires could race..

I still think there is a place for a separate race for under 2 lire cars but then we will all be moaning about Spyder chassied Elans and brand new Marcos etc lol!

Yep I will second that.Well said.

[Simon Hadfield]

Ok, but, a GTS specification Lotus Elan which is new - soup to nuts - and has been built that way for at least 30 years is a "better" replica than a new GT40? I can't see the difference.
Then there is the discussion about the piecemeal replacement of components of a real authentic car - if anyone is really struggling with sleeping I can heartily recommend the philosophical tract about the Ship of Theseus - even the ancient Greeks were discussing these issues!
I suspect the lower budget Six Hours idea and support for that could be usefully debated with Clare......

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by Mike Bell

Thank you David for passing this on. Very positive to hear. Best wishes to John for a speedy recovery.