Masterful Enforcement - Page 2

bludvl_x19 · 2 Apr 2008, 18:41 (Ref:2168073)

Having read your latest post, I can now understand your confusion. It seems that it is due to my explanation, it was a few years since it was told to me, and I wasn't that mechanically minded then, so various important details, like you pointed out, were ommited accidently.

Cheers,
Mick

Good Times · 2 Apr 2008, 18:53 (Ref:2168078)

And that still leaves the cam timing situation at BDC & TDC.
It's a major hassle, but would be great if someone solve's it, as my club would get one such instrument.

bludvl_x19 · 2 Apr 2008, 18:56 (Ref:2168081)

I will ask the person who told me (might not see him for a while) but I'm sure someone here will know how this one works, or of another way completely.

Mick

esper · 2 Apr 2008, 21:00 (Ref:2168162)

we have a tool where a rod slides in the plug hole and then folds out. If theres play the engine is to big. wont measure an MGB between 1970 and 1880 but a 1950 is clearly identified.
It was made by a dentist I know, Well a dentist knows to work through a small hole into big misery behind so

Al Weyman · 2 Apr 2008, 21:21 (Ref:2168176)

What about measuring a stroker though?

GORDON STREETER · 2 Apr 2008, 22:00 (Ref:2168195)

A pretty accurate way is measuring the difference between TDC and BDC with a burette of paraffin. On TDC fill the cylinder to the bottom of the plug hole turn the engine to BDC, measure the amount to fill up to the bottom of the plug hole and you have the cylinder volume . The only problem is that it wont work with a hemi type head as you can't keep the valves closed on BDC !

Slippy Diff · 3 Apr 2008, 02:42 (Ref:2168297)

I'd remain sceptical until the cheats are actually caught and punished. If it turns out the cheats are the 'names' or in the clique, you may not see a whole lot being done.

**Peter Mallett** · 3 Apr 2008, 02:50 (Ref:2168300)

Remain sceptical if you wish, but there was certainly a different attitude in the paddock on Saturday and Parc Ferme rules were being employed and as such I understand a few letters are being issued this week.

Slippy Diff · 3 Apr 2008, 02:57 (Ref:2168306)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Remain sceptical if you wish, but there was certainly a different attitude in the paddock on Saturday and Parc Ferme rules were being employed and as such I understand a few letters are being issued this week.

Definitely a step in the right direction then. What it needs to do is permeate through all historic competition over the next few years, slowly weeding out the cheats. I was beaten into second place twice at Dijon a few years back by a guy who was blatantly cheating, even after I'd complained to the organisers previously. Their line was that at least 6 or 7 would leave the championship if this particular rule was enforced; consequently the rules were changed to allow the modification. I remain annoyed to this day and you should see the pic of me on the podium, a face like thunder!

bludvl_x19 · 3 Apr 2008, 03:05 (Ref:2168308)

Congrats to the organisers for having the balls to do this, it will take a strong willed bunch of people to penalise any high profile/top running cars, but hopefully they stick to their guns and improve the racing for all those involved. As long as they don't differentiate between the cars at the front and the ones tootling round at the back, cheating is cheating, even if you don't benefit from it.

Mick

terence · 3 Apr 2008, 05:19 (Ref:2168374)

It is some of the front runners who are guilty,they are the very reason for this new tough stance.I think that over all,Masters have got a bit of a fight on thier hands but what with the wording on the Race Entry Form Declaration,and the policing,they will crack it.

john ruston · 3 Apr 2008, 07:04 (Ref:2168420)

The BSCC have a machine that checks capacity and it turned up at one of the Legends races last year.Don't ask me how it works ,it does ,so I am told.

terence · 3 Apr 2008, 07:11 (Ref:2168423)

As I've said else where,the Porsche Owners 924 Series used a Multi Mass Meter,they did know what the factory output was,not that that should cause a problem though.Take average readings from from all cars and put the into thier respective group then you have an idea on whats what.155bhp from a "B" will mean its running 1950,in excess of 150 from an LC should set alarm bells ringing and so on ----------

simon drabble · 3 Apr 2008, 09:35 (Ref:2168498)

Lotus twin cams can happily produce 185/190 legally..... or are you talking at the rear wheels?

terence · 3 Apr 2008, 17:38 (Ref:2168852)

Doubtfull.

Good Times · 3 Apr 2008, 17:53 (Ref:2168858)

M.Wrigley 1360cc A35 that won the Snetterton OBG race & lapped the field.
Legal, I think not! Does this car have to carry extra weight for next event.

zefarelly · 3 Apr 2008, 18:39 (Ref:2168896)

Is there such a thing as a legal A35 ? I doubt (m)any of them would be eligible for anything anywhere

Andy Bacon · 3 Apr 2008, 19:24 (Ref:2168924)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Good Times

M.Wrigley 1360cc A35 that won the Snetterton OBG race & lapped the field.
Legal, I think not! Does this car have to carry extra weight for next event.

The max capacity for an OBG A35 is 1293cc.
To be fair to Mr Wrigley I am not sure his times are that quick (1:31). It is all the others that are slow. I have done 1:36.1 at Snet in my A35 with a 998cc (on Ms though) My 1293cc engine now has another 30HP.
I raced Mr Wrigley at Donington May 06 when we both had new 1293 engines. He was nearly 2 secs a lap quicker and overtook me after the pit stop, he was no faster down the straight, it was all better handling (could n't possibly be driving ability could it!). I had not got the handling at all sorted after having to remove my telescopic shocks and use the original lever arms.

The real mystery is why the self-styled hot shot Davis and the Davis preped Lynch A35 were so slow. And both failed to finish.

Hmmm, Maybe Davis has built legal cars - there is a first time for everything. After all his mate Nogood will have tipped him off about the new no-cheating-regime. It's much more difficult to build a quick reliable legal car. Bet he's got the Hot-Rod version in store for a quick swop at Goodwood.

I and others made it quite plain to Masters that we were not coming out until the cheats were stopped, it seems they are doing this, and I say, well done to them.

And Zef, my A35 is legal.
The reasons they are so quick are the small aerodynamic shape (ish but very good for a 50's car), light and around 130BHP.
Goodwood introduced the 1275 block concession to keep them competitive with the Mk1 Jags after Davis won the race with a 1380cc engine that was supposed to be 948cc. It would have been easier just to make the Jags run at the 2400cc they are supposed to be.

**John Turner** · 3 Apr 2008, 19:34 (Ref:2168934)

Andy, absolutely right about the handling of the Wrigley car; was cornering with virtually no roll and on rails. It was entered openly as a 1360cc, so have the rules been changed? The only car that got close on times was the Richard Postins 1293 cc A40, in the low 1:32's. None of the other A35's finished and their best times were in the 1:39s.

terence · 3 Apr 2008, 19:57 (Ref:2168959)

As I said earlier,Its not only LCs and Bs!!.

Good Times · 3 Apr 2008, 20:06 (Ref:2168969)

The OMG rules in Speedwell class are the same, A35 max 1293cc.
If the car was entered openly as a 1360cc, I would think the 1st step was that it was refused entry.
And this situation would not have come up.

Andy, I hope you get to race this year

terence · 3 Apr 2008, 20:14 (Ref:2168979)

Pigs, flying.

comes to mind on declaring true engine capacity.

Al Weyman · 3 Apr 2008, 22:33 (Ref:2169090)

I have seen a small block chevrolet entered at a declared size of 6.6 Litres when I asked the owner had he gone over to big block 396ci (legal as its a 2nd gen) he looked at me most surprised and said no its still a small block!

The point I am making I genuinely think this guy is completely innocently but prehaps somewhat niaevely (spelling?) entering the car at this capacity (CTRCC rules would not allow it beyond 5800cc with a +60thou overbore max and no stroking allowed) why else would he declare it and tell me what it was certainly was not trying to hide anything, if so I personally think he is being let down by his team of preparers leaving him wide open which is a pity as in his words as he said I just leave it down to them.

rogerwills · 4 Apr 2008, 05:31 (Ref:2169212)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

I have seen a small block chevrolet entered at a declared size of 6.6 Litres when I asked the owner had he gone over to big block 396ci (legal as its a 2nd gen) he looked at me most surprised and said no its still a small block!

Is that physically possible? Mine is a 396cu in = 6495cc. I just can't believe a small block designed to be 5 litres or so can be stretched to 6.6!

Perhaps his naivity was not knowing a lot about his own car......

bludvl_x19 · 4 Apr 2008, 05:42 (Ref:2169217)

A car modification company here in Aus managed to stroke the LS1 engine (small block Chev) out to 6.5, and apparently that was as far as they were willing to go, any more would have comprimised the reliability, so 6.6 at a sacrifice of possible engine detonation could well be possible.

Mick