Historic Racing

[John Turner]

Yes, great idea Al.

Peter, as far as I am concerned special saloons were a genre of cars on their own and definitely part of racing history. They provided great spectacle, and as you know, there are threads covering these cars on this forum.

[krt917]

As John has said, we seem to be talking about more than one issue here:
1. What defines a historic race or championship;
2. How to determine and name various periods or racing in the past, such as Veteran or Vintage, which have specific date allocations;
3. What constitutes whether an individual car is a 'classic'. This is always open to debate. In these terms, an Austin Allegro would (normally!) not be considered a classic, but that would not necessarily prevent it from competing in a historic championship which might or might not be called a 'Classic.....' event.

Chiefly, I think Peter's opening question related to point one. May I start by trying to create a definition for a historic race which can be modified/added to, depending on people's thoughts?

Don't know why I asked, as I'm going to anyway!

I think of a historic championship or event as one in which the age (or newness) of the participating cars is restricted, i.e. are new, contemporary cars, eligible? In ff1600, the 'Historic' and 'Classic' championships are clearly historic because they limit the participating cars to certain periods, whereas other series (such as last year's MSV) are contemporary because you can turn up with a current car (the fact that you can enter an older one does not, I think, change the status of the event).

Similarly, series which allow people to build up 'new' race cars to previous rules (e.g. Appendix J), but only using cars from the 'correct' period, are also historic.

Of course, some series are greyer than others:

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

And when did we decide that club racing was really “Historic” racing (the TRC championship is perhaps the one true “modern” club racing championship in terms of machinery and regulations). That is a growing perception among many including me. My point being that clubs like the MG Car Club ran meetings catering solely for MG for many years, it was club racing in its purest sense but of course the cars were getting older until eventually there was nothing less than 15 years old racing on the bill.
[/font]

In these instances, maybe we should ask, can I bring a contemporary car along? If no, it's a historic race.

I know this definition isn't complete. Any thoughts on refining it?

[John Turner]

Originally Posted by krt917

1. What defines a historic race or championship; ............
.....................

Chiefly, I think Peter's opening question related to point one. ...........
......................

I think of a historic championship or event as one in which the age (or newness) of the participating cars is restricted, i.e. are new, contemporary cars, eligible? In ff1600, the 'Historic' and 'Classic' championships are clearly historic because they limit the participating cars to certain periods, whereas other series (such as last year's MSV) are contemporary because you can turn up with a current car (the fact that you can enter an older one does not, I think, change the status of the event).

Similarly, series which allow people to build up 'new' race cars to previous rules (e.g. Appendix J), but only using cars from the 'correct' period, are also historic.

Of course, some series are greyer than others:

In these instances, maybe we should ask, can I bring a contemporary car along? If no, it's a historic race.

I know this definition isn't complete. Any thoughts on refining it?

Well, with the formation of the new forum, you can see why Peter's thread question was posed. Yes KRT, it was your point one which was of particular interest to us and whilst there will be the occasional blurred edge, I think your definition is as good as any in identifying a thread that fits here.

[krt917]

Thanks. And, as there are no other reponses, I'll assume that noone disagrees with the definition!

[Al Weyman]

I suppose it depends on your definition of contemporary krt.

[John Turner]

It's a moving target though every year, isn't it? For the purposes of this forum, I have in mind a figure of (but not a rigid adherence to)15 years, although that is, of course an arbitrary figure. So anything older than that which is raced is a historic racing car and any grid containing predominantly cars of that age or over are historic races. Certainly, Al, I reckon you should get all your fellow CTCRC racers to post here, even the new pre 93 class that Stacy and others have been discussing.

[Al Weyman]

15 years, that makes my 1987 IROC Z/28 Historic. I suppose it is really, it was a current model when I built it the early 90's, time and tide wait for no man I guess. Oh and I would say the beasty is definitely not contemporary what ever that definition may be

As for being a moving target that was something I never understood with Pre 66 historics, why don't they roll over a year as time goes by. Another idea (maybe) take a cue from DVLA i.e anything pre 74 (74?) does not need road tax as it is concidered 'Historic' and can also run on black and silver number plates. Mind you more the pity that is not a rolling date either.

[Tainan]

Most historic championships have a fixed cut-off date, rather than rolling so that cars don't become less competitive as the years pass.

[krt917]

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

I suppose it depends on your definition of contemporary krt.

Yes, that's true. My idea of contemporary is that it is in production now. Or, putting it another way, can someone design and build a new car to enter the series? Generally, I would have thought that if you can, it isn't a historic season. The new batch of Lola T70s are quite tricky here. They are newly built (so contemporary), but to an old design (so historic). I believe they are being produced to take part in historic racing, which I suppose is just about right, providing they stick to the original rules/design.

Originally Posted by Tainan

Most historic championships have a fixed cut-off date, rather than rolling so that cars don't become less competitive as the years pass.

Yes, and I think that eminently sensible in most cases. The 1960 cut-off date for Historic GP cars exists due to technical reasons. Firstly, it was the last season in which a fornt-engined GP had a genuine chance to win a race, and it was also the last season of the 2.5-litre forumla. To allow such a cut-off date to change would not make sense.

[John Turner]

Ok, but let's not get the two issues confused again. Yes, there are cut off dates for different Historic classes; that's agreed. We also get new historic classes and championships added to the historic scene as the more recent cars get older. A good example would be the GroupC/GT cars, a relatively recent addition to the Historics field. Then there is the new pre 93 class of the CTCRC which I referred to above. However, the issue I was addressing when describing a rolling date was simply to emphasise that any racing car becomes 'historic' in the fullness of time. Yes, Al I would regard your car as historic, as I would Peter Mallet's Capri! There are posters on this website who weren't even born when they were built.

[zefarelly]

Originally Posted by John Turner

There are posters on this website who weren't even born when they were built.

thats youthful me !!!!

my car was built 8 years before I was born

difficult to say whos aged better really

[Steve Wilkinson]

Originally Posted by Tainan

Most historic championships have a fixed cut-off date, rather than rolling so that cars don't become less competitive as the years pass.

Quiet right!

What is the point of buying an old car to race when 12 months later it has been overtaken by technology! Admittedly dated technology.

The best way to set the parameters is to do it by dating within Formula. You cannot have a blanket F3 category, for example, as the old 1 litre screamers would be outclassed by the 1600cc and 2000cc cars that followed.

The concept of a rolling fixed number of years is great where the technology has never moved on. However formula like that are few and far between.

[bauble]

Remember, the VSCC was formed originally to cater for a select list of 'vintage' cars not everything from a certain era. To differentiate between really old cars and merely vintage, the term Veteran was used for London to Brighton types. Once people started to race 250F's and the like they were termed Historic. So far so good but then when cars from the 60's became (shall we say?) outdated and were still being raced they became Classics! The problem is that we are begining to run out of appropriate terminology.
Why not simply classify everything by it's particular decade, ie fifties sports, sixties saloons, seventies GT's etc?
Obviously there will be cross over problems at ?9 to ?1 but at least there would be a clear understanding of roughly how old each category was.
For promoters, they can run races for Single seaters from 1960 to 1979 for instance.

The current situation is most confusing and only those involved can tell a Top Hat from a Classic Saloon. I can't.

Still! It keeps John Turner busy.

OOH! I can feel his reply already!!!!

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by bauble

The current situation is most confusing and only those involved can tell a Top Hat from a Classic Saloon. I can't.

Easy.

Classics (CTCRC) are the Oldies But Goldies - Same basic regs.
Top Hat are Appendix K (these run as a separate class in CTCRC Hitorics).
Groovy Baby are CTCRC Group 1/Post Historic (Same basic regs). The confusion comes here when you get the Group 2 cars but they will gradually move away.

[krt917]

For fear of incurring John Turner's wrath again, I'm going to pick up on the cut-off dates again, especially seeing as this thread is meandering (happily) along anyway:

Originally Posted by bauble

everything by it's particular decade, ie fifties sports, sixties saloons, seventies GT's etc?
Obviously there will be cross over problems at ?9 to ?1 but at least there would be a clear understanding of roughly how old each category was.
For promoters, they can run races for Single seaters from 1960 to 1979 for instance.

I think you would come up against technical issue here. I think the cut-off points for various series should be determined by the 'before' and 'after' periods of a technical innovation (such as the move to rear-engined GP cars) or rule changes (such as the banning of the Big Banger 5-litre sportscars after 1971 in World Sportscar racing). In terms of meetings though, it would be great to see, say, sportscars or single seaters of 1960-1979 at one event, split into different races using the cut-off principles described above (rather like the Goodwood Revival or old Coys events).

[Peter Mallett]

Cut off is determined by the regulation changes as you suggest Krt. The problem comes with the contemporary interpretation of those regs whereby you had anomolies such as Porsche 911's running as saloon cars in 1968(?).

[johnh875]

I agree that there are usually natural "class/era" divisions due to changes in regulations or technology. Anuauto with the rally Historic 1 date being 31/12/67 that would allow the Datsun 1600 (P510) in, which should be as significant as the Escort I think.

One example of how things can be dealt with in practice is the historic touring cars here in Australia, there are three classes Na (pre 1958), Nb (pre 1965) and Nc (pre 1973). The classes are often/usually combined at meetings, as a few years ago there were few Nc cars because the pre-65 class has been going for 25 years, these days the Nb cars are less numerous. Na cars are very thin on the ground as the regs are quite restrictive.

To get to the point, at the big historic race meetings there are 2 fields worth of cars with say 2/3rds coming from one category. Some events split the cars into under and over 3 litres capacity which gives a pretty even division, while others simply use qualifying lap times to have a "fast" and "slow" race. Both methods produce perfectly good racing from a spectators point of view and I suppose the competitors who are affected by the difference (fast small cars & slow big cars) might appreciate the variety.

[zefarelly]

those dates are generally dictated by major rule changes in period, and therefore stick ( good IMHO) when it gets grey is for example a 1964 anglia thats been ultra prepared to race competitively in a late 60's/70's spec, and then pupports to be a pre66 car, therefore being over prepared and very very competitive against seemingly better opposition. hence the requirement for some rules and regs to be enforced. or a MK1 Jag running a 3.8/4.2 E type race engine, or an Alvis Grey lady that only has the original grey paint !!!

[krt917]

Yes, Zef, I have had similar reservations concerning the two cars you mention. Both are entertaining to watch, but do seem extremely competitive. Of course, they are passed as legal, so they are. The point comes at what you should make legal. Should the mods be to period? I would have thought so, but even then modern experience with set-up and materials (all parts, of course, need replacing eventaully) means cars can be a lot quicker than they were in their heyday. Drawing the line between a well-set-up period car and a car which has been developed with parts that came out subsequently is something the rule-makers (should) do, if it's possible.

As an side, Peter Hardman's DBR1/300 is considered as an original, but now produces more power than any of the DBR1s did back in the 50's (JT will be able to give you exactly how much more!).

[HiRich]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Cut off is determined by the regulation changes as you suggest Krt. The problem comes with the contemporary interpretation of those regs whereby you had anomolies such as Porsche 911's running as saloon cars in 1968(?).

And the solution, at least at club level, is a flexible approach like the VSCC - also known as "making it up as you go along". In the vast majority of cases, absolute authenticity (of the grid) is less important than the enjoyment of the drivers.
- If the 911 is too fast, leave it off the proscribed list of eligible cars
- If someone really wants to run a 911, let them run it temporarily as an invitation-only, while you assess performance. If they are that keen, they will accept the risk, provided you make it clear.
- Put in provisions for tweaking the regulations (perhaps asking the 911s to run narrower than original tyres)
- If enough people want to run them, create a sub-class.

Few historic championships run to the exact period regulations (our series specifies non-standard tyres, and only pure methanol rather than nitro doping). So in most cases a little more tweaking is no bad thing.

[HiRich]

Sorry for the duplicate post

[simon drabble]

the 911 is an interesting analogy as a true FIA 911 is not that quick - however few FIA 911's are legal!

[Peter Mallett]

I was scaring one at Spa last year and either I'm quick or he was slow...................................................... QUIET in the back there.

[simon drabble]

that must have been a legal one ;-)

[Peter Mallett]

Y'know I could sooo delete your post.