2014 - Heritage Touring Cup - Peter Auto

[Peter Mallett]

Fair enough but as Ant and you have suggested, there are few options for slicks for smaller diameter wheels.

Pragmatically does it really matter as long as people can race at a reasonable cost?

As far as I am aware you can change roll bars, camber and castor, not to mention spring rates, providing the homologation cert covers the dimensions, which with the Capri was certainly the case. And I'm sure the period shots of the Rovers show much more negative camber than was available on the road car.

[Duddha]

Just a little word to say that regulations are now available :

http://peterauto.peter.fr/files/Regu...up_2014_V3.pdf

As well as the Index of Performance :

http://peterauto.peter.fr/files/2014...ormance_V1.pdf

And of course the Entry Form :

http://peterauto.peter.fr/files/HTC_2014_Bulletin_d'inscription_Entry_Form-Inscriptible_diffus%C3%A9.pdf

[Clive Brown]

Originally Posted by Mike Bell

As you can't have adjustable dampers, adjustable ride height, adjustable camber etc on a Gp1 car

Are you seriously expecting us to believe that Ralph Broad on his factory-supported Gp. 1 Dolomite Sprints, or the arch-cheat Tom Walkinshaw on his works-supported RS2000s, could not adjust bump and rebound, ride height, or camber?

[Mike Bell]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

As far as I am aware you can change roll bars, camber and castor, not to mention spring rates, providing the homologation cert covers the dimensions, which with the Capri was certainly the case. And I'm sure the period shots of the Rovers show much more negative camber than was available on the road car.

It was the negative camber on the Rover rear axle that was clever!

On some cars just lowering ride height will increase negative camber- or reduce positive. In Gp1, if a car type had adjustment built into the standard suspension then obviously OK to adjust. Moving pick up points was a no-no. Yes, roll bar and spring rates seem to be have been free.

Race cars, road cars- with all of them running costs are part of the equation, and have to be considered when driving or racing either.

Thanks for the links Louis, and apologies for monopolising your thread talking about tyres. On the plus side, it's keeping it near the top of page 1!

[Mike Bell]

Originally Posted by Clive Brown

Are you seriously expecting us to believe that Ralph Broad on his factory-supported Gp. 1 Dolomite Sprints, or the arch-cheat Tom Walkinshaw on his works-supported RS2000s, could not adjust bump and rebound, ride height, or camber?

I'm not saying what actually was the case, but what the regs said should have been! I'm sure you know more about it than me......

And, for example, having a box of different spec non adjustable dampers, is different to having one set of adjustable dampers. First OK, other not. AFAIK Ride height was covered by minimum ground clearance rule, and not car specific?

[AntA35]

And so the arguments for and against, plus period tread requirements and construction go around again…

The period tread thing I've never really understood, especially in this application especially when slicks are allowable (if they are available). A small tread cut into what is the equivalent construction of a period slick touring car tyre is only going to reduce the performance of the tyre, nothing more, apart from not look period. Please correct me if I am wrong here. So I struggle to see why not Toyo R888, Yoko AO48 or Avon ZZR tyres in lieu of slicks.

It's interesting though from the organisers perspective it seems that there is more concern with how the tyre looks than its construction and speed potential (vis a vis slicks).

It's all good stuff though and discussing it will hopefully bring light to an answer, eventually.

As for set up, there are limited things we can do with a Dolomite, but there is enough to be getting on with to make a set of tyres work properly.

[Duddha]

Hello Guys,

as we're just some days before the opening of Retromobile, are anyone of you attending the event in Paris next week ?

If so, let me know and we can meet on the Peter Auto/Le Mans Classic stand !

We've got some good entries for the series with about 10 season entries and more to come

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by Mike Bell

It was the negative camber on the Rover rear axle that was clever!

Yes, it is.

[AntA35]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Yes, it is.

Tell us more...

[Peter Mallett]

Couldn't possibly comment.

[andy97]

Sledge hammer?

[Mike Bell]

Originally Posted by andy97

Sledge hammer?

Far cleverer than that...................

[ken clarke]

Originally Posted by Mike Bell

Far cleverer than that...................

Yes, far more clever

[ken clarke]

Louis, the regulations state that the series is for pre 1985 cars. Does this mean cars of a type homologated pre 1985 or does the car actually have to have raced pre 1985 therefore Bastos Rovers are not permitted.

In the MRL UK series, the model, Rover Vitesse has to be homologated, but can run in its Group A 1986 specification. Advice on this would help.

[Jeremy Hall]

Originally Posted by Mike Bell

I'm not saying what actually was the case, but what the regs said should have been! I'm sure you know more about it than me......

And, for example, having a box of different spec non adjustable dampers, is different to having one set of adjustable dampers. First OK, other not. AFAIK Ride height was covered by minimum ground clearance rule, and not car specific?

Plainly when at some expense a wealthy entrant can get around a regulation to the detriment of a less wealthy one the rule should be modified to accommodate.Hence years ago after listening to this argument the FIA Historic Committee permitted adjustment on anti roll bars for Period F cars- never a period specification .Regulations should always give something back where good sense dictates surely?

[Duddha]

Originally Posted by ken clarke

Louis, the regulations state that the series is for pre 1985 cars. Does this mean cars of a type homologated pre 1985 or does the car actually have to have raced pre 1985 therefore Bastos Rovers are not permitted.

In the MRL UK series, the model, Rover Vitesse has to be homologated, but can run in its Group A 1986 specification. Advice on this would help.

Hi Ken,

unfortunately, we want pre 1985 cars only or at least in pre 1985 specification.

A 635 that ran in 1987 as in DTM can be run BUT it will have to be in 1984 specification or earlier spec if wanted.

No "special" ruling or "special" way. Proper regulations and it will be enforced.

[Peter Mallett]

I'm not entirely certain but I think there are currently 5(?) 1986 Group A Rovers in preparation. As with the tyres, the organisers need to get their heads together and agree on a universal format.

[simon drabble]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

I'm not entirely certain but I think there are currently 5(?) 1986 Group A Rovers in preparation.

is that a pack of Rovers?

[Peter Mallett]

[ken clarke]

Originally Posted by Duddha

Hi Ken,

unfortunately, we want pre 1985 cars only or at least in pre 1985 specification.

A 635 that ran in 1987 as in DTM can be run BUT it will have to be in 1984 specification or earlier spec if wanted.

No "special" ruling or "special" way. Proper regulations and it will be enforced.

I have to say that I am unable to understand the logic behind this, a 1985 Group A Rover was identical a 1984 car in specification apart from having an alloy cage which is now illegal, so subject to the fitting of a steel cage there were no other changes.

At the end of 1985 the regulations were altered slightly to allow a different camshaft. The Rovers ran a deeper front spoiler, twin plenum engine and slight mods to the rear suspension, apart from this, the same car as an '83/4 spec car.

I can fully understand that it is desired to keep out the Sierra Cosworth and M3 era cars however, this cut off date excludes possibly the most competitive era of 'pre turbo' Group A cars.

I currently have 6 Rovers in my stable, 5 Group A cars and 1 Group 1 car, This ruling has excuded 3 of themunless they are modified to pre '84 spec which seeing as they are original genuine works cars does seem illogical.

Ken.

[DAVID PATERSON]

I too fail to see any logical reason to keep 1986 cars out of this series. If you just want to exclude the RS500 & M3 (not that i think you should) why not just make the class pre '87?

1986 was one of the best years of group A with very strong competition from BMW, Rover, Volvo and even Holden.

[AntA35]

I can't but help agree that a 1984 cut off seems a very strange date to set out for this series. 1985 and 1986 saw some of the best cars and best racing of the period and BMW, Volvo, Rover were developing their "big" class category all the way to the end of 1986.

A cut off at 1987 makes most sense when the fabulous M3 and Sierra Cosworths came along. They were in a different class altogether.

Sadly what this currently does is prevent around 5 or 6 cars that I know of who are interested in the series from entering. Grids of proper cars are really important for all involved and this just seems a little illogical.

I can only think this has been set at 1984 as there may have been a difference in the French regulations of the period, maybe Peter Auto do not want the XR4Ti (Merkur) on the grid or there is someone of great influence who wants to protect the competitiveness of a car or type of car that was not developed beyond 1984.

That said Louis is very good at communicating and seeking opinion, so I'm sure he'll offer some further advice on the matter. For my pennies worth pre 1987 makes sense and allow 85 & 86 cars that were homologated and run in competition before 1987.

[AntA35]

Originally Posted by AntA35

For my pennies worth pre 1987 makes sense and allow 85 & 86 cars that were homologated and run in competition before 1987.

Sorry, should have said pre 1986… to exclude M3 and Sierra's that were homologated in 86 and run at the end of 86.

[Mike Bell]

While all the comments regarding 1986 cut off seem to make sense, the 1985 date is same as Motor Racing Legends HTCC. (Although full regs not on MRL website at moment, so only going from memory!) Maybe one organiser has followed the other or have they both come to the same conclusion for the same reason?

Also, would it not be possible to just exclude some models such as Sierra or M3, or would that infringe someone's human rights......

[andy97]

The Historic Rally world has settled on Pre 1986 - wouldn't it make sense for some consistency across the board so that everyone knows where they stand.