'02 Astc??

[Robert Ryan]

The legend of this thread lives on, I love it

Super Tourers should be eligible for Historic Racing by now. We are talking of the mid 1990's. Has their been a move to get them included as part of the HSRCA? They would be the newest class and are a superseded category.

[storyline]

They are nowhere near eligible yet - look at the trouble Group C have just had trying to become eligible for Historc Racing.

[SamDale]

As one of the largest entrants of Super Tourers in the Touring Car Challenge, I guess my team can take most of the blame for the cars that were missing at Calder.

My Mondeo was absent because I am concentrating my efforts on Formula 4000 this year. Expect this car to appear again sooner rather than later in the Touring Car Challenge, as we are talking with a couple of drivers.

Neil Byers' Nissan Primera 96B was at Calder, but suffered what we believed was an ECU problem in Friday practice, and didn't take any further part in the meeting. The problem was subsequently traced to an intemittent wiring problem. The car has now been fixed, and will be back in the action at Wakefield Park for Round Two in two weeks.

Adam Proctor's Mondeo has had a change of sponsorship, and his car is currently at the paintshop, undergoing a change of colours. Expect to see this car at Wakefield Park.

Whilst Neil Byers' second Primera (the 95) remains on the market, I understand Neil is considering running a young driver in the car in the near future.

So, the Super Touring contingent in the Touring Car Challenge is far from gone, and will be out in force at Wakefield Park, still going strong. If anyone is looking for more information on our cars, our website is: www.mumboracing.com

As for Group A cars, I believe Richard Prince will be back for Wakefield Park in his Group A Volvo 240T, and the last information I had was that David Towe was aiming to have his beautiful BMW M3 back in action for Round Two.

[Robert Ryan]

[QUOTE][They are nowhere near eligible yet - look at the trouble Group C have just had trying to become eligible for Historic Racing/QUOTE]
End of GroupC is 1983. From memory Super Tourers kicked off in 1990, so they would be next sedan category for consideration, before the current cars become scarcer and scarcer.

[storyline]

When was Group A?

Personally adding these cars (Group C etc) and even thinking of adding ST's to Historic racing is just dragging the historic movement down to sub-basement level.

[GTRMagic]

In Australia, Group 'C' stopped at the end of 1984, Group 'A' went from 1985 to 1992, then we got Category 3A, known as V8Supercar, from 1993 to now.. with all the fudgifications of technical rules as TEGA made adjustments...

SuperTouring did start in Europe in 1990, but we have had class cars in Australia since the '60's, curiously dying around the time that Category 3A came alive.. hmmm a connection??

[racer69]

How many people will be able to afford running Super Tourers in historic competition?

That is one of the problems facing historic competition in Europe with respect to Formula 1 cars, who is going to be able to afford to run cars manufactured in the last 10 or so years with regards to historic racing in the future.


Whilst the 2 litre formula began in the BTCC in 1990 as a class B, it wasn't adopted in Australia until 1993. Presumebly in terms of Australian historic racing, any cars raced in Australia from 1993 would be eligible.....(would you then have a case for making V8Supercar VP Commodore's and EB Falcon's eligible for historic racing.....)

As a point of reference Group A started in 1982, but wasn't adopted officially in Australia until 1985, which is the only date from when cars are eligible to race in Group A historic races in Australia.

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by racer69

How many people will be able to afford running Super Tourers in historic competition?

Is it any different to running them in the Touring Car Challenge?

[storyline]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Is it any different to running them in the Touring Car Challenge?

Well when it appears, from Sam's reply, that the majority (all?) of the ST field in Touring Car Challenge is relying on one person or team to provide the cars, and that person now has a new interest - surely this should be sending up warning bells to anyone thinking of becoming part of this series, shouldn't it?

Or maybe a name change should be seriously considered - something like 'The Second String V8 and (few) Tourig Car Challenge'

[Robert Ryan]

How many people will be able to afford running Super Tourers in historic competition?

Historic Touring Car do not have problems getting fields, so why not there? Do it before the cars disapeear of the scene totally.

[pplater]

Mate, the differences between a Super Tourinng BMW and an old Torana/Falcon/Camaro just arent worth listing.

The price of running a S/T is quite high.

[storyline]

The cars have already disappeared off the scene. And you obviously aren't reading - to suggest that a category that is not even 15 years old be permitted in Historic Racing is ludicrous.

The other question that hasn't been asked - given that Historic Meetings are already oversubscribed, Mr. Ryan - what category would you propose dropping in order to allow ST's (at most a field of maybe 10 or 12 cars) to run?

(And before you answer think about Formula Fords - there should have been plenty of these around to provide decent historic fields - yet thay have to be 'lumped in' with other open wheelers because of lack of numbers)

[SamDale]

Originally Posted by storyline

Well when it appears, from Sam's reply, that the majority (all?) of the ST field in Touring Car Challenge is relying on one person or team to provide the cars, and that person now has a new interest - surely this should be sending up warning bells to anyone thinking of becoming part of this series, shouldn't it?

I may not have been clear: I am the only one changing my focus to Formula 4000. The team supports all the cars in the workshop, which includes Super Tourers, a Future Tourer, Formula 4000 and Production Touring Cars.

[Robert Ryan]

yet thay have to be 'lumped in' with other open wheelers because of lack of numbers)

You just answered your own question, lump them in with other tourers. If there are only 10-12 cars, they are an abandoned category, they qualify. If you do not save them now, there will be no examples available to become historic.

[Dirk]

Good to see this old gem still going! No matter how much changes in this world one thing is for sure this thread will live on...

[stmookeyj033]

So how many ST's are for sale?

[David Towe]

Originally Posted by storyline

When was Group A?

Personally adding these cars (Group C etc) and even thinking of adding ST's to Historic racing is just dragging the historic movement down to sub-basement level.

This is surely a joke Storyline? How can adding genuine touring cars with proven history be dragging the "Historic" movement down to "sub basement level".

The historic movement has many cars that were built up from bits found all over the world, from many different cars and cobbled together to form a "historic" car. The Group A and C cars are far more original than many of the other more traditionally accepted "historic" cars in the movement.

Supertouring cars will suffer the same fate as many Group A and C cars and be b@stardised into sports sedans or sold overseas and turned into what ever the local classes allow and further history will be lost. Do I agree they should be taken into the historic fold? No, but what alternative do we have in order to prevent the loss of these cars?

[storyline]

No joke - where I am coming from is that it appears that these days people are expecting 20 year old cars to be 'historic' - yes, they have some significance, but in relative terms to the 'historic movement', they are modern cars.

I am not saying they shouldn't be showcased somewhere, but at this point in time, not with the HIstoric categories.

As I mentioned in a previous post - historic racing is already well and truly over subscribed in terms of categories that can turn up at an historic meeting - you start adding Group C, Group A and what genuine historic cars start missing out? And once they start missing out they will, in all likelihood, head exactly the way some here are forecasting the Group C/A cars are heading.

I am not denying they need to be preserved, but at this stage NOT with other historics. After all - and no doubt someone will shoot me down for saying this - but Group C and Group A still have their regular race meetings they can compete at - this being the case, should they be considered for historic meetings yet?

As for ST's - I agree with you (and others) that should not be *******ised - this is where CAMS have got it all wrong - instead of allowing the cars to compete as they raced, they are saying 'you have to fit into sports sedan regulations' - isn't this time, then, for competitors to 'rise up and take control'? After all - aren't car club members the people who run CAMS (or so CAMS tell us!)

[David Towe]

Originally Posted by storyline

Group C and Group A still have their regular race meetings they can compete at

Where? With the exception of the TCC (Touring Car Challenge) there is nowhere else to race these cars. Sure this is contributed to by the powers that be in the Group C Association who have a one track mind, ie. Historics or nothing, but who else will take an historic category and offer them a spot on a normal programme?
The TCC is not an option to most who own Group A cars as they have seen the damage that is begining to become a part of the series and have been scared off. Who would put his very valuable car in amongst some of these guys who are out there to win and don't care who they "rub" to do so apart from an idiot like me? Remember a "rub" could cost $200,000. Group C cars have never been a part of the TCC plans and as such are not an alternative for the cars.
We could always go to the traditional dumping ground of cars without a category to race in, Sports Sedans. That would probably anger a few of them, it did when I raced there at state level a few years ago.
Over to you Storyline because I can't think of anywhere that would satisfy the competitors and promoters.

[cavvy]

A good example of what David is talking about is the GrA Schnitzer BMW 635 of Simon Emmerling over in WA - raced at Bathurst & I dont know its Euro heritage, now with a V8 in it - a good example of race cars being work in progress - where do you draw the line? The Super Tourers were an era in Aussie racing, the Audis, the BMWs - be a shame if future generations of enthusiasts were to miss out.

[storyline]

Group C have been included in a number of race meetings - Island Magic, non-state open meetings etc - I will accept Group A haven't been part of this specific category so yes - your point about TCC being the only other viable alternative would hold true for them.

I find it interesting that you say TCC is not an option for most Grp A owners - obviously Dale and Willmington would have everyone believe they are but yet they have expanded TCC to something it was never in the proposal Willmington announced 2 years ago and, it would appear from whispers amongst FT and other Gpr A drivers, seems to be heading in a direciton that only the V8 drivers are happy with.

However - that aside I don;t believe any of these old categories should have to be modified to permit them to run in sports sedans (or any other category for that matter). But I also stand by my previous comment about both Grp C and Grp A being 'too young' to yet be incorporated into the Historic movement.

Maybe this is, yet again, CAMS showing its bias by allowing categories to race in this country and then not wanting to know about them when something else comes along. Maybe this is a time to talk seriously with AASA about the continuation of these categories - because sure as hell, CAMS don't want to know about them.

[David Towe]

Originally Posted by storyline

I find it interesting that you say TCC is not an option for most Grp A owners - obviously Dale and Willmington would have everyone believe

The TCC is obviously still an option, but what I'm saying is that many of the drivers won't choose to take up that option.

[elephino]

Originally Posted by storyline

No joke - where I am coming from is that it appears that these days people are expecting 20 year old cars to be 'historic' - yes, they have some significance, but in relative terms to the 'historic movement', they are modern cars.

So when does a car become historic?

I remember some very similar arguments about allowing the GTHOs and XU1s into historic racing. "They're not historic" "they're modern cars"

The point of historic racing is to keep old cars racing - for the drivers, spectators and anyone else who cares about motorsport. While a BMW 635 shouldn't race directly against a Mini or a Volvo 142, I don't see why they can't be called historic - they are old, afterall

[storyline]

You asked the question that doesn't have an answer.

In a similar vein, when does a car become a 'Classic" (Just ask Holden and the Monaro designers!)

I don;t dispute they should be ket somehow - but not in the sense of letting them join the HIstoric Racing category - as I asked (and no one has answered yet) - what do you drop to fit these new Historic cars into a Historic Racing Program?

[Robert Ryan]

what do you drop to fit these new Historic cars into a Historic Racing Program?

Why do you need to drop anything? 10-12 cars amongst 300-400 on some occaisons is a drop in the bucket.