FIA Regs The Case for or Against?

[Peter Mallett]

From the discussion in the Top Hat Races thread its clear that we have some confusion. The problem appears to be the interpretation of App J Group 1 and that can be difficult because it went through much iteration from its inception in 1967 before it was finally replaced in 1982 with Appendix J Group A.


For example the 1967 requirements called for production of 1000 units to qualify for homologation. By 1975 this had risen to 5000 units. Also standard fuel tanks were replaced in 1972 (?) with race fuel systems.


The CTCRC runs a Group 1 Championship and whilst some of the regs are there to allow the continuing use of the cars in question (e.g. over boring to +.0060”) the main thrust is to comply with the post 1975 regs.


Someone pointed out, in reference to the Escort RS 2000 that in Group 1 you can put bigger valves in the standard head but you can’t gas flow or polish the head itself. And yet if one looks at the homologation certificate there are measurements for you machine to, thus allowing you to improve the article.

Companies became very competitive thus through the life of a car (Ford/Rover whatever) developments were homologated to provide what was perceived to be an advantage. In the case of the Capri (and my certificate is some way from here at the moment) I recall they homologated larger carburettors. These were not to be found on any standard road car in the UK but were for “export” use.

The valve sizes were increased over a period of years, as were the inlet and exhaust manifold sizes.


So it would appear that whilst the FIA laid down the rules, as with everything there was space for development and at that time the carmakers took every advantage. So does this create a problem for those of us who insist upon FIA regs?

[zefarelly]

this whole appendix J seems very vague, for a start it covers a huge span in time (just think of the difference in pace between 1966 then back to 1951 ! as an example of a 15 years span) and whilst cars in 67-68 may have been fairly standard by comparison to the early 70's, some cars mid-late 70's don't seem to be heavily modified at all ? in short it looks like if you have a very heavy wallet you can legally have a very fast and rare car, the playing field seems very very wide.

as an example, late 60's a MK1 escort was light and nimble so a 1300 was class competitive . . . . .an RS 1600 has a BDA (very expensive) an RS 2000 runs an american pinto lump (weighs a ******* ton, put quite powerful) there must be loads of rs2's about, and very few of either other

Capris came in 1300, 1600 and 3000 . . . you do see a few 3000GTs racing now, but the famous racers where heavily modified . . . ie unataneable

BMW's are hideously expensive so theyre out of the equation !!!

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by zefarelly

as an example, late 60's a MK1 escort was light and nimble so a 1300 was class competitive . . . . .an RS 1600 has a BDA (very expensive) an RS 2000 runs an american pinto lump (weighs a ******* ton, put quite powerful) there must be loads of rs2's about, and very few of either other

Capris came in 1300, 1600 and 3000 . . . you do see a few 3000GTs racing now, but the famous racers where heavily modified . . . ie unataneable

BMW's are hideously expensive so theyre out of the equation !!!

Hmm,

You are confusing Group 1 with Group 2. Also the "Pinto lump" is the four pot two litre single overhead cam engine not the small Mustang engine.

There was no point in racing a 1300 Capri because the car could not be made light enough. The 1300 Escort was highly modified to Group 2 regs.

If you look at App K it calls for the cars to be built in accordnace with the regs of the period, thus you can use Pre 75 Group 1 or 2.

However the thing that started this was the 70's Saloons and there you can run to App J Group 1 or 2 pre 1980. So your pre 74 car can be built to pre 80 regs.

[Anuauto]

Not sure its a new topic because the previous thread was about eligibility for a series that clearly embraces previous categories that were or are misleadingly titled! (a lighthearted, not malicious, comment but nevertheless true!).
The FIA Appendix J Group 1 that was introduced wef 1.1.66. always required 5000 in one year. Whether some of the models so-homologated "in period" met this criteria is a separate issue! The new Group 2 introduced at the same time required 1000. Nothing really changed in FIA Group 1 until its demise 31.12.81. Confusingly, Gp2 (and 4) were permitted to continue in specific International events for 82 and 83. The whole reason for the change to Gp N and A was the widescale homologation in Gp1 of "alternative production source" and "optional variant" parts. "Evolution" was mainly confined to "minor" (!) bodywork changes, for which at least 10% of the original 5000 had to be built but only after production of the earlier version had ceased (an example: Mk2 RS2000 on same Gp1 homologation papers as Mk1, then "flat front" RS2000 Mk2, built in Australia from imported parts as an "Escort 2 litre" on same papers) . There were very few chages to the basic Gp1 regs (eg.originally one alternative final drive ratio could be homologated but towards the end more were allowed).
It is virtually impossible to run rallying or racing to these exact regs now because it would require re-manufacture of exact spec halfshafts, gears etc. The 2001 proposed "Classic Group One Challenge" was a good attempt to keep the fundamental requirements without the impossible ones. It was clearly way more restrictive and closer to the original than what is being called "GP1" in classic racing now! It would have meant the same models of car as "in period" were competitive and it seems that is exactly what CTCRC seeks to avoid with much freer regs that in mechanical detail have little in common with FIA Gp1. No criticism intended of the concept, merely the totally misleading use of the term GP1! Lets not even go into the BTCC's "Gp1 and a half"...
Gp2 (which did change significantly - at one time reaching virtually what is now remembered as "Group4" and then "rolled back" in late 70s) can sometimes defy belief as to what was permitted. "New" models were homologated as (100 off) evolution under existing homologation numbers that bore little commonality eg. only 100 (actually 104?) 1840cc alloy block single carb MK2 Escort RS1800s were built to secure Gp2 homologation as follow on from 1601cc iron-block twin carb MK1 RS1600.
Where we may be equally at cross-purposes is over current racing and rally series that require a spec to have been used "in period", internationally or otherwise rather than merely to have been homologated for use?
Probably good regs/racing - but Group One it aint...

[Peter Mallett]

I've tried to get the regs from the FIA site but the links are dead. However I do understand that the numbers were 1000 in 1967.

[Peter Mallett]

Anuauto you've missed my point about the homologation certs. That is where the mods come from. Also your point about modern materials applies to many forms of motorsport.

As far as I'm concerned if you could do it in period you can do it now.

Can you provide links please? As I said above the FIA links are "dead".

[zefarelly]

Pete, thats what I meant the pinto 4 pot lead block is American isnt it? surely no european would make anything that heavy !

this is very confusing, but as I read that above if you build a late 60's saloon to period app J spec you'll be slow in the field, if you use later regs you'll be a bit quicker but in the grey areas . . .

whats a retro racer to do a MK2 Lotus Cortina springs to mind as an option thats a little different and cheap . . . .funny that they race MK2s in Aus with 1600 crossflows but not here, I guess theyre accessible and affordable and the entrants arent as fussy !

[Peter Mallett]

So if I understand you Zef there is little case for running to FIA regs.

I agree it is confusing but I reject the theory that to run a 1968 car built in accordance with 1979 regs is wrong. The reason cars didn't do this was because homologation expired and they had to use later models. Or the manufacturer decided to upgrade the range thus dropping the previous models.

This is why the regs in Top Hat are split between pre 1967 and post. The tyres are different for the two periods too.

For me if you run a car that is built using the homologation certificate mods in accordance with the championship regs then there is no problem.

Didn't realise the Pinto engine came from the states.

[Dave Brand]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Didn't realise the Pinto engine came from the states.

It was designed in Germany. Its first application was the US Pinto, released about a month before the European TC70 (Mk3 Cortina & Taunus). Engines were initially supplied to the US from Europe - I'm not sure whether later engines were US-manufactured. Apart from the Pinto, the engine was also used in the Mustang & Fairmont (together with their Mercury equivalents).

[zefarelly]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

So if I understand you Zef there is little case for running to FIA regs.

For me if you run a car that is built using the homologation certificate mods in accordance with the championship regs then there is no problem.

Didn't realise the Pinto engine came from the states.

I didnt realise it was built in Germany !


it seems post 66 FiA is a bit of a joke anyway judging by the amount of specials so I don't see theres much point no, as you say, if you comply with most regs it gives you the most options to use the thing

[Peter Mallett]

Its not a joke just that they allowed the goalposts to move.

That's why you can't say that a particular car fails to comply with FIA regs. As I said in another thread App K now covers Group 2 to 1974 so you can see that any car built post 1966 can be modded to suit 1974 regs.

[Anuauto]

1.1.66. to 31.12.81 Appendix J Group1 5000 off within one callendar year, Gp2 1000 off. Group 3 GT category 500. Always same. Group 4 varied, was 400 at end (but much lower in Porsche 917 era? - 20? 40?). Dont have "Yellow Books" now or links, just lived through it!
One of first events under the new 66 Gp1 was the infamous "lights exclusion" Monte Carlo Rally. 1275 Cooper S and Lotus Cortina were accepted into Group 1 just before. I've seen the Cooper S papers for the 5000 but never seen the Lotus Cortina ones (which just might have been more diffficult...).
Plenty of cases in internationals of Gp1 exclusions at post-event scrutineering for the slightest machining or "fettling" of heads and manifolds. Top Gp1 engines could only be built by people with access to inexhaustible supply of components to select those at maximum tollerances from.

At start of new Appendix J 1.1.82 GpN and GpA both 5000, GpB 200. Later GpA 2500.

Cant confirm pre 31.12.65. Appendix J minimum quantities as too busy at school then! Pre-66 may well have been 1000 (for saloons Group 1 was standard, Group2 some mods, Group 3 free mods).

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by Anuauto

1.1.66. to 31.12.81 Appendix J Group1 5000 off, Gp2 1000 off. Group 3 GT category 500.

Which differs froim something I read today but fair enough.

Originally Posted by Anuauto

Plenty of cases in internationals of Gp1 exclusions at post-event scrutineering for the slightest machining or "fettling" of heads and manifolds. Top engines could only be built by people with access to inexhaustible supply of components to select those at maximum tollerances from.

Not denying that but as you say if you "blueprint" the engine you can use the best tolerances.

Originally Posted by Anuauto

At start of new Appendix J 1.1.82 GpN and GpA both 5000, GpB 200. Later GpA 2500.

Cant confirm pre 31.12.65. Appendix J minimum quantities as too busy at school then! Pre-66 may well have been 1000 (for saloons Group 1 was standard, Group2 some mods, Group 3 free mods).

Thanks.

So where do we go from here then?

Should FIA regs be mandatory or indeed can they actually be applied?

[zefarelly]

so your saying post 66 you can't modify cylinder heads ?

as an example, pre66 MK1 Cortina GT docs state a throat diameter and manifaold face diameter, and valve diameters, theyre clearly not standard dims, and you tune accordingly as its way beyond any manufacturing tolerance.

[Peter Mallett]

My point exactly. Only by the 70's they were putting the info into the Homologation certs.

[zefarelly]

my papers show quite a few different mods, sizes of valve, head dims and carb chokes, lists lots of mods, and a list of std stuff at the end in case you wanted to race straight from the box. In fact its pretty clear what you can do, although very vague as to what you can't

[Anuauto]

Confused?....you soon will be....
By "Homologation Certificates" you are not referring to original FIA Appendix J Homologation papers but to something issued by UK race series organisers? One or more of those series organisers may call there regs "Group 1", just as the BTCC in the 70's called its regs "Group 1". Except it wasnt at all: it was something far more free/flexible than genuine FIA Gp1.
Cant post pictures here without a site but, although I couldnt have any doubt, I did take a look at the front page of the Cooper S Gp1 papers in Bill Price's book on the BMC Comps Dept. It shows the dates over which 5000 were produced to get the Gp1 papers stamped by 1.1.66.
Minis, Escorts, Healeys, Triumphs,MG's all have a book on the works competition cars. Competition Cortinas only have a chapter in Graham Robson's book on the road car and a fair bit in his book "Ford in Touring Car Racing". I started logging some records of works Cortinas once but only Graham Robson would be able to tell the full story and some of his books could do with more technical detail on homologation etc? Will we ever read the full story??

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by Anuauto

Confused?....you soon will be....
By "Homologation Certificates" you are not referring to original FIA Appendix J Homologation papers but to something issued by UK race series organisers?

Agreed except the certificate I received from the MSA is a book in which each page is stamped by the FIA. So as far as I'm concerned it is an FIA record.

And yes Group 1.5 was different in allowing certain mods re bushing etc.

In fact the famous one for the Group 1 Capri is the 48IDA carb. This does not appear in the Certificate but was used in Europe and the UK.

[Al Weyman]

Just to get back to the Pinto engine the American lump is different than the European model being 2.4 litres for a start. The parts are mostly not interchangeabe and the engine block is taller. Thiis was fitted in the Merkur a two door Sierra XR4 bodyshell sold in limited numbers in Switzerland and badged as an XR4Ti to allow Rouse to compete in the BTCC pre Cosworth, but mainly made for the American market. I was going to build one once for ModProds and had commissioned Roland Hayes to prepare the engine and actually had a shell and the 2.4 American lump so I know it looks outwardly similiar but is actually quite different and a lot heavier than the Euro Pinto.

Back to Top Hat I must say I am a little bit confused now. Can someone here just confirm that if my Mk2 1979 Camaro is elligible if, (as it is) prepared for CTCRC 74 Touring cars.

Also on the Group 2 homologated cars of the 70's can someone answer me how was Frank Gardeners Mk 2 Camaro fitted with an all alloy big block V8 ever elligble, I think they made at the time something like 5 if that it certainly never went into production.

[Peter Mallett]

I think you'll find that Pre 74 Post Historics are eligible. Certainly there will be at least one Dolomite built to those regs at Combe.

[Al Weyman]

Thanks Peter, just spotted a mistake in my previous queston, that should have read 1970 camaro not 79, makes a big difference to the question, sorry for confuson.

[ken clarke]

Having read this thread & the previous Top Hat thread I beleive some of you are wrong about the interpretation of rules & what Group 1 allowed, most components in Group 1 were either production or homologated. It was however very easy for manufacturers to homologate new parts for their cars. Whilst it was necessary to produce 5,000 identical units to gain initial homologation for that model in theory, in practice this was not always done. Lotus Cortina 1 & 2 were homologated in group 1 but less than 3,000 of each model were produced. Parts could also be added to the homologation of a model, this called for 200 models to be made available with the upgraded components. British Leyland in the 70's supplied 200 Triumph Dolomite Sprints with twin 48 Webers & fitting kit in the boot. In Group A in the 80's Volvo homologated the 240 turbo and could only find 30 models when asked by the FIA. Inlet & exhaust manifolds were not standard units, most ran tubular headers, pistons were special, inlet & exhaust ports were opened out, camshafts were specially developed to optimise the engine performance, in many cases blocks & cranks were specially cast or forged out of higher quality material. Obviously to source or have remade any of these components now would be tremendously expensive, however the main reason that the current 'Group 1' regulations have more freedom built in to them is a scrutineering issue. We are all club racers, if we insist on original components with only certain specification parts allowed, who would enforce these rules & who would pay for that enforcement.

Before you all rush out & spend millions building your 'Group 2' specials for Top Hat, the 70's 'Groovy Baby' series, this is mainly for 'Group 1' cars. However, cars that do not comply with the 'guidelines' issued by Top Hat may compete alongside the 'Group 1' cars for the time being. If anyone requires a copy these guidelines, contact Julius at the Top Hat office.

[Anuauto]

Original Pinto blocks...dangerous ground! Historics can be all OK now if +60 is allowed in historic racing as it is now in historic rallying. I doubt whether a single Pinto in all the other branches of the sport is a genuine 1993cc (1st rebore goes above 2000) in a 2000 capacity class needing "original block, externally visible etc..." - all either overbored beyond 2000 or are a later, different externally, block - but no one will either enforce or change the regulations and that shows a lack of integrity...
US Pinto was 2.3 but would bore to 2.4 in same way 2.0 bores to 2.1.

[Anuauto]

They didnt have to supply the Gp1 optional parts with the cars, fitted or in the boot, eg. Avenger 2.0 "Brazilian block", RS200 "emission control kit" 44IDFs etc. etc.
All were exactly specified however, and no general freedom to re-work etc existed, only selection within max tollerances. So we are all agreed its not a "formula" that should be resurected unchanged?!!

[Slippy Diff]

Originally Posted by zefarelly

In fact its pretty clear what you can do, although very vague as to what you can't

At the end of most sets of regulations there will be a small sentence that says "if in these regulations it does not say you can do it, then presume that you can't". Simple.