Eligibility issues (trying to eliminate cheating)

[Steve Hill]

Hi all, this is my 1st post so please bear with me. What is the general thinking / feeling on the fitmment of hi torque starter motors instead of originals, alternators instead of dynamos, and alloy radiators instead of originals

[terence]

Totally agree Jeremy,it,s the only way to go.

[terence]

Ally Rad,s ? NO. High Torque Starters etcdo not make you go faster but they are a Grey Area.

[PeterMorley]

Originally Posted by Steve Hill

Hi all, this is my 1st post so please bear with me. What is the general thinking / feeling on the fitmment of hi torque starter motors instead of originals, alternators instead of dynamos, and alloy radiators instead of originals

I was looking at Appendix K the other day and alternators are specifically banned. What I immediately wondered is what about the alternators you can buy that look like Lucas dynamos - clearly illegal but can you spot them?
Personally if they look original but work better then that is reasonable and no different to fitting a modern electronic rev-counter that has an old style face.

Pre-engaged starter motors rather than inertia are visually very different, and a bit lighter, so there is an advantage to fitting them - but the advantage is minimal and surely it is better to see a car race than watch people trying to push start it (plus the inherent danger) because the Lucas starter has died.
And for the concours enthusiasts, on most cars it doesn't take long to remove and fit the old spring operated starter!

Alloy radiators have been around for quite a while, my Lotus 8, 9 & 10 price list from Otober 1955 offers one as an option.
As long as you don't mean those crappy modern road car ones with plastic side caps, a proper all alloy radiator could have been fitted in period - and having just been faced with the option of spending over 4 grand on a brass radiator or a mere 2 grand on an alloy one guess which I bought!

Personally if peripheral components look period then why not, as I said modern instruments with old style faces look right and work better which should help protect the engine.

If Stretton had been running a 50 quid points replacement in his Elan at Goodwood he wouldn't have dropped out of the race, given such a part is invisible to the spectators (who were deprived of seeing a popular driver finish) I think there is a good argument for allowing such invisible reliability improvements.

There is an issue with "safety features" like roll cages, some cars have quite substantial cages that must increase the stiffness considerably. And open cars with ugly great roll over bars look dreadful.
Given some of the driving standards I'd suggest that only period protection is allowed, that might help save a few cars and reduce the number of un-necessary accidents (but then I also believe a spike in the middle of a steering wheel will prevent more accidents than an airbag!).

[zefarelly]

starters motors I don't have a problem with, if it means a car starts and doesn't catch fire starting, no performance benefit to be had, I use a brise one because its reliable and it works, no other reason ( ok its 1-2kg lighter, but the cars 40kg over!)

I have a brass and an ally rad, both exactly the same size/capacity, as original, I can't tell the difference performance wise and both have been around since before the car was built. capacity and size are more the issue here than the material of construction to my mind.

alternators are allowed in App K ? they where when my car was checked, and its also on the homomlogation papers, again just a reliability issue, not a performance issue ?

I disagree with electronic ignition, that is a performance issue, higher revs with more accurate/stronger spark, end of. also act as a goof rev limiter for bent engines, I saw lots of electronic ignition last weekend

[PeterMorley]

Originally Posted by zefarelly

alternators are allowed in App K ? they where when my car was checked, and its also on the homomlogation papers, again just a reliability issue, not a performance issue ?

I disagree with electronic ignition, that is a performance issue, higher revs with more accurate/stronger spark, end of. also act as a goof rev limiter for bent engines, I saw lots of electronic ignition last weekend

Perhaps it depends on the period, I was looking for a 1952 car and I'm sure it said no alternators.
Either way I agree it is a reliability issue and something that means a car is more likely to finish while not going any faster has to be OK if it looks the same.

I agree about electronic ignition systems being wrong (where it wasn't available in period - e.g. it is OK for 1½ litre F1 cars) when you are talking about a system with an external box that can generate a more powerful, more accurate spark (but those don't fit in with being externally visually identical anyway).

But I think the systems that replace the points with a magnetic pickup and still use the same coil should be OK.
The only performance increase would be from being more accurate rather than a stronger spark (e.g. small increase as with the starter motor's weight!).

Would it not be the same as using one of the new electronic SU pumps?

[midgetman]

>>>>>>>>If Stretton had been running a 50 quid points replacement in his Elan at Goodwood he wouldn't have dropped out of the race, given such a part is invisible to the spectators (who were deprived of seeing a popular driver finish) I think there is a good argument for allowing such invisible reliability improvements.

Aye, and there's the rub between the hard line of competitiors and the soft line of organisers. Old cars always were unreliable, and organisers want close racing to bring in the punters, hence the blind eye to parts that "improve reliability" and the "spectacle". The usual conflict of interests, what follows is the "salami principle".

[zefarelly]

I disagree, points is points, if you select decent ones and maintain /check regularly they're not a problem, contactless triggering systems are a performance benefit albeit small, and non original or period, therefore illegal. theres no argument there at all as far as I'm soncerned

most twinks run contactless as they've been tuned so much they rev really high and owners are too lazy to fiddle under the inelt manifolds and check the points.

[PeterMorley]

Originally Posted by zefarelly

I disagree, points is points, if you select decent ones and maintain /check regularly they're not a problem, contactless triggering systems are a performance benefit albeit small, and non original or period, therefore illegal. theres no argument there at all as far as I'm soncerned

most twinks run contactless as they've been tuned so much they rev really high and owners are too lazy to fiddle under the inelt manifolds and check the points.

Some people claim modern replacements aren't as well made/reliable as the originals, but given the price of a set of points compared to everything else in racing I guess they should just replace them more often.

Presumably the fact they are hard to get at on a twin cam means the authorities are less likely to find them, hence their proliferation!!

On our Connaught they originally had two magnetos on the back of the camshafts under the bodywork, you need to remove and refit them every time you adjust the valves (e.g. every race), to time them you need to use a mirror and have very bendy arms!

So everyone runs two distribtors mounted on the oil/water pump block at the front of then engine because they are easier to get at and don't need to be removed with the rocker cover.

Given it runs on methanol a magneto spark is preferable so performancewise this is not an improvement, but it is a hell of a lot easier!
And Connaught did test engines with the distributor mounted in such a way so it is a period setup

[Jeremy Hall]

[quote=PeterMorley]I was looking at Appendix K the other day and alternators are specifically banned. What I immediately wondered is what about the alternators you can buy that look like Lucas dynamos - clearly illegal but can you spot them?
Personally if they look original but work better then that is reasonable and no different to fitting a modern electronic rev-counter that has an old style face.

Pre-engaged starter motors rather than inertia are visually very different, and a bit lighter, so there is an advantage to fitting them - but the advantage is minimal and surely it is better to see a car race than watch people trying to push start it (plus the inherent danger) because the Lucas starter has died.
And for the concours enthusiasts, on most cars it doesn't take long to remove and fit the old spring operated starter!


So when you throw it off the island and stall it its starts just like that.40 years ago you were stuffed.They are a performance enhancement -you do not have to drive as carefully

[PeterMorley]

[QUOTE=Jeremy Hall]

Originally Posted by PeterMorley

So when you throw it off the island and stall it its starts just like that.40 years ago you were stuffed.They are a performance enhancement -you do not have to drive as carefully

In period were marshals not known to occasionally push start stranded cars (possibly dependant on the nationality of the driver and the location of the circuit)?

Given they didn't have kitty litter etc., when they went off a car was more likely to be unable to continue. If it could continue didn't they usually try to do so?
By the time a car has been dug out the driver has already suffered a time penalty, given that historic racing is not rewarded surely it is reasonable to allow someone to continue rather than see their expensive weekend finish because of a mistake?

Seatbelts, roll cages etc also encourage people to try harder, and are visibly wrong, what about them?

Of course where pre-engaged starters really help would be if the compression of the engine was much higher.....

[terence]

Peter,I agree that Roll Hoop,s are unsightly, something I would never have wanted to see on an earlier car,untill a very good friend of mine very very nearly died at Silverstone a couple of years ago.He was not a front runner,just bad luck realy,the car started to slide and dug in,over she went trapping him under it as it slid along the tarmac!!.We cannot afford or want more people to suffer the way he has these last two years if they happen to be so lucky to live.
As for Alternators,if they were not fitted in period,then it,s not unreasonable to rule that they are not allowed?

[esper]

Originally Posted by zefarelly

Terry
thats makes 2 of us . . . there are still a few of us who own, build, prepare AND race !
If there where 1 in 5 in any race who would volanteer their services, it could solve the problem

If cheats got fined, the fine could be shared between the volanteers who do the eligibility work, and maybe the marshalls fund? they deserve it and they have to pick up the roller rockers, fibreglass shards, and amex black cards that get strewn about when these cars crash, as well as having to put their backs out levering some of them out of their hotrods!

the responsability of the entered car is the driver!!!!!! If wrong, -first ferry home- . the problem goes to the organisers wanting to listen to the big bucks. just go to those who don.t ............sadly enough its a "market" thing.

[PeterMorley]

Originally Posted by terence bower

Peter,I agree that Roll Hoop,s are unsightly, something I would never have wanted to see on an earlier car,untill a very good friend of mine very very nearly died at Silverstone a couple of years ago.He was not a front runner,just bad luck realy,the car started to slide and dug in,over she went trapping him under it as it slid along the tarmac!!.We cannot afford or want more people to suffer the way he has these last two years if they happen to be so lucky to live.
As for Alternators,if they were not fitted in period,then it,s not unreasonable to rule that they are not allowed?

I agree, we must try to avoid injuries - but there have been some big accidents recently and something should be done to prevent them happening (rather than just reducing the consequences).

Some recent driving has been pretty appalling and you can't help but think that those involved must be assuming they are safe.
Perhaps something as simple as bans for those who have accidents might cause them to think twice?

I do agree that if a component such as an alternator was not available in period then it shouldn't be allowed now. But I find such things less offensive than clearly visible items like aerodynamic &/or chassis modifications.

Problem is the policing of such items seems to be very variable, officials like Jeremy Hall clearly know what they are talking about/looking at and do their best to make sure everything is how it should be.
But it appears that some events tend to overlook a lot of modernisation, and if one person has something then everyone else tends to follow.

[Al Weyman]

All this is all well and good but It's no good waving a rule book at an empty paddock. That is why I think you should concertrate on visable infringements and let them get on with what they want internally as long as the block numbers etc check out, just do whats achievable on the day at least then it would be the same for all.

[john ruston]

Check weight and Capacity first and that will sort most of the problems

[Al Weyman]

When I was in charge of ModProds I tried to find a reliable device that would tell capacity at least within 20cc that could be done externally preferably by sticking something in the plughole and measuring displacement by cranking the engine but I was unable to find such a device (pre internet days) maybe something like this is now on the market???

[john ruston]

Understand they use that type of devise in British Saloon Car Championship and one of the old crock organisers borrowed it for a round of his Championship.Interesting results(is overbore 5 or 50%)

[zefarelly]

I didn't start this thread to get into a lengthly debate about driving standards and (in my opinion) the sensible insistence of better safety measures, I agree they can lull some people with a lesser share of grey matter into driving like idiots etc, but its another subject.

we're supposed to be discussing the issues of cheating, and over preparation of certain cars by certain people/teams etc. the recent posts seem to be taking on 2 themes, Reliability and performance enhancement.

to my mind starter motors and alternators do not make a car faster

electronic ignition can and does, higher revs over a longer sustained period, I fail to see any valid argument against it ?

as for specific cars, ie the connaught, then a minor addendum to regs, provided its agreed as period correct shouldn't be a problem, you see similar in regs often.

[Al Weyman]

A high torque super magnet modern starter motor will allow me to fire up a hot V8 when I inevitable spin it off the track (last two meetings!) the standard motor will not cut it, sensible to allow IMO they are lighter but if you have an overall weight limit and you are removing weight from a low centre of gravity point what the problem.

[john ruston]

Mr Hall you have the answer.I left Goodwood last year when a very special Sprite spent the weekend trying to wipe out the rest of the grid and I was not prepared to pay for the damage.He crashed in the race and hit other people.

[PeterMorley]

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

When I was in charge of ModProds I tried to find a reliable device that would tell capacity at least within 20cc that could be done externally preferably by sticking something in the plughole and measuring displacement by cranking the engine but I was unable to find such a device (pre internet days) maybe something like this is now on the market???

It can't be too difficult if the spark plugs are on the top of the engine.
Fill the bore with oil when it is at TDC (turn the engine over a few times to make sure you've got the minimum volume).
With the engine at BDC use a burette to fill the cylinder with more oil - that gives you the swept volume of that cylinder pretty accurately (oil shouldn't seep past the piston rings too quickly).

Or something like a plumbers waterlevel gauge - connect a tube to the spark plug hole, fill it with fluid and then read how much the fluid moves as you turn the engine over.

I'm sure there are more sophisticated ways of doing so - an endoscope with measuring capability for example, or using gas?

If competitors knew the organisers were likely to measure the capacity then it would surely discourage cheating.

Of course the organisers have to decide to inspect the cars and one accusation is that at some meetings the more famous drivers tend to be allowed to stretch the rules more than others.

[JRTM]

Personally i think the Goodwood issue is slightly different to elsewhere. Large numbers of cars at the Revival dont even pretend to be truly period. Just think of Gerry Marshall and the saloon he raced a couple of years ago, the A35's and several highly dubious GT40s. Personally I dont mind about these folks there because it is an all round strange meeting where the show is everything and true level racing is not really the point for the most part. If it was, why was Martin Walford using 13" wheels on his Elva 200 whereas Chris Drake was still on the period correct 15" wheels for his Elva 300?

In the last ten years I have personally never seen an engine checked for capacity at any HSCC meeting although several cars appear to have startling straight line speed. More likely there will be a fuss over some non performance enhancing but reliability boosting kit such as CV joints.

We all know what really makes a tru difference to speed and a ot of it goes on. Similarly, I am all for stuff that makes cars either reliable, safer or cheaper to run. MSD ingnition on a F5000 car instead of magnetos would be a good example. Most people run an limited budgets with limited time. They want to race safely and with relability and most of these little mods will not change their speed. you could give me another 50BHP and I still would not beat Simon Hadfield but maybe I might luck into a win one day if the car does not break down - big deal!

Competitors mostly know who is cheating or who might be. Lets start with blatant stuff like and extra litre capacity - easy to check and easy to police.

[terence]

.You,r absolutly right Zef,it does seem to be straying a bit.On the Ignition front,most electronic systems have two wires into the dizzy,if the scrutineer/inspector IS fully aware of such thing,s,then he should be asking for the cap to be lifted.A Reciprocating Mass Meter will show up discrepancy in engine outputs,O.K so the owner/engine biulder is going to say something like"We retimed the cam",retiming a cam will not realise the kind of increase,s that have been seen. Silverstone Classic,E,Type outrunning a GT40 along the pit straight! could it have been done in period?As I said earlier,we either need inspectors who are up to date with what is happening,or the present ones need training.{I,m not including Jeremy in this statement} As for the more "Famous",what,s writen down in the Reg,s is good enough for those who want to do it clean,then it,s good enough for everyone!

[zefarelly]

agreed, I've seen cash changing hands to get 'celebs' to vouch for period spec, it was written then and its still written now, no change, and its black and white.

I find it hard to believe people don't know whats going on, perhaps its just the time and hassle factor people don't want ? failing cars isn't goiung to a make you mr popular with some people, but then passing hot rods doesn't either, its just the more honest are generally more polite with it.