Goodwood Revival 2022

[chunterer]

I don't think it's 'pedantry' at all!.

I got hooked on racing in the early 80's by big noisy cars in the BSCC. In period Capris, Rovers,(and Camaros in Europe) battled it out.
Mini's whilst ace little legends they are, never bothered the bigger stuff so I see it as a bit patronisimg of the organisers to expect knowledgeable fans to put up with some of the nonsense we get.

[coppice]

'The past is a foreign country, they do things differently there ' , in LP Hartley's words. And you can't visit the past , only try to evoke the best bits , leaving the bad bits where they belong . Goodwood does that brilliantly and while I may purse my lips at the surfeit of fake Wing Commanders and Marilyn Monroe lookalikes the racing makes up for it.

I've watched racing since the Sixties and the inconvenient truth is that as far as the cars I see at Goodwood are concerned, in most categories the racing I see now and the standard of driving and preparation are better now than then.

As for money men ruining it , when historic racing started most of the cars were just old racers nobody wanted. And not even that old - often only 15 years or so - but how folk now wrinkle their noses at the idea of Supertourers from the best part of thirty years ago , let alone 15 year old LMP cars. Go to a HSC or CSCC meeting and there's still plenty of folk racing for relatively modest amounts

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by coppice

I was around when E-Types didn't pull away from Cobras. But Goodwood isn't a historical re-enactment any more than a Forties weekend or a Beatles tribute band . If it were there'd be dreadful food, an all pervasive smell of cheap cigarettes , a crowd dressed in cheap and nasty clothes, frequent injuries , amateur marshalling, non existent medical care and your ticket would cost 10 shillings.

It's a pantomime where reality takes the weekend off and a good time is had by all. Old racers can never be period correct and it's disingenuous to think they can be , or should be. It's a fabulous event which offers fantastic racing and the opportunity to see some extraordinary drivers from past and present . And if an A 40 is faster than it really has any right to be , or an E-Type has nearer 400bhp than 300 I really don't lose any sleep about it .

Absolutely spot on.

[Peter Mallett]

The show is always impressive and I think the quality of the grids has improved, as long as you drop the "FIA Historic" pretence. Let's face it most of us who complain are those who have raced or do race FIA compliant cars, that are built at great expense to do so. This applies to the MM as much as the Revival.

I think the professionals, or has beens, enjoy thrmselves as much as any enthusiast which is a good thing IMO. However the revival has led to the problem I see in historic racing, in that now the whole thing is much more professional and thus exorbitant.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

The show is always impressive and I think the quality of the grids has improved, as long as you drop the "FIA Historic" pretence. Let's face it most of us who complain are those who have raced or do race FIA compliant cars, that are built at great expense to do so. This applies to the MM as much as the Revival.

I think the professionals, or has beens, enjoy thrmselves as much as any enthusiast which is a good thing IMO. However the revival has led to the problem I see in historic racing, in that now the whole thing is much more professional and thus exorbitant.

And if I can add my opinion to what you have written, Peter, is that many of the cars are just not "prepared and/or built" within the "spirit" of the rules, and for me, whilst the racing can be really good, it takes the tarnish off the proceedings.

Possibly this is because being an old fart and having actually raced in period and watched close up these type of cars racing back when, we didn't witness some of the minnows able to compete on level terms with the giants. For example, at one of the fastest tracks in the UK, Nick Swift in his Mini should not be able to lead a race for quite a few laps against the Yank tanks or even a Lotus Cortina. Yet he did just that a couple of years ago. Yes, it was certainly entertaining but really it shouldn't have happened.

[tocatrucky]

As an outsider looking in and watching the livestream not completely au fait with historic racing since about 2005 it did seem to me that each race posed an identical question.

What car will be the flavour of the year this time? Year after year someone works out how to make something fly and you can guaretee the front of the grid will be full of similar examples.

[coppice]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

And if I can add my opinion to what you have written, Peter, is that many of the cars are just not "prepared and/or built" within the "spirit" of the rules, and for me, whilst the racing can be really good, it takes the tarnish off the proceedings.

Possibly this is because being an old fart and having actually raced in period and watched close up these type of cars racing back when, we didn't witness some of the minnows able to compete on level terms with the giants. For example, at one of the fastest tracks in the UK, Nick Swift in his Mini should not be able to lead a race for quite a few laps against the Yank tanks or even a Lotus Cortina. Yet he did just that a couple of years ago. Yes, it was certainly entertaining but really it shouldn't have happened.

Why not? Is very car to be given a BoP in order to be a closer facsimile of a past fewer of us were even there to witness ? Any historic recreation can only take inspiration from the past , not replicate it . We should cherish the fact that after the loss of so much serious modern racing (especially single seater series ) we have a wonderfully entertaining historic racing scene - and if some cars are more equal than others , does it really matter ?

[justracing]

You start to get an inkling when you spot a 40mm thick anti roll bar hanging underneath an A30 and thinking I'm sure mine didn't have one like that!

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by coppice

Why not? Is very car to be given a BoP in order to be a closer facsimile of a past fewer of us were even there to witness ? Any historic recreation can only take inspiration from the past , not replicate it . We should cherish the fact that after the loss of so much serious modern racing (especially single seater series ) we have a wonderfully entertaining historic racing scene - and if some cars are more equal than others , does it really matter ?

I don't wish to labour the point or argue with others with whom I don't share views. All I will say that if these recreations, as you term them, are permitted to rule the roost, then the meetings/races/cars should no longer be called historics, because the cars just ain't, no matter how entertaining the races are or may be.

[coppice]

You may well be right - perhaps we need Historics and Evocations ? Certainly Goodwood , away from track action , is a wildly , hilariously inaccurate portrayal of a Sixties' race meeting . But its cherry picking of the past's best bits make it a hoot to attend.

[midgetman]

Personally I think the Revival is a pastiche of the past, drawing on WW2 and the 60s in equal rose tinted measure. As such the cars are perfect for the pantomime, fast, fun and not quite as they should be. Let it be.

Those of us who care will go to other race meetings. Goodwood is historic racing for the "Drive to Survive" demographic and shouldn't be changed. It works.

Sent from my AC2003 using Tapatalk

[coppice]

You are right - except about DtS folk. Like many, they think motorsport begins and ends with what I call Grand Prix racing and they call EffOne. Oiks .

[Derwent]

As a child attending race meetings in period my main memory is of the toilets, I hated going to them! Perhaps Goodwood should recreate them?

[Adam43]

Are we talking about when the Goodwood and the Revivals band became too successful and sold out on their indie routes? They've gone too corporate. Not as much as the supergroup Formula Ones - none of the cool kids like that.

Well, I've seen your old ID, you're all dressed up like the Cure.

[hanuman]

Originally Posted by Duddha

The new generation doesn't know and does not care, it reflects our time, it's no longer about racing a historic car or even replicating it, I mean clones have been around forever. Today it's about winning the Goodwood Revival. It's horse racing and there are clear owners, jockeys and the people that make it all go round.

If people are dumb enough to believe an E Type can pull away from a Cobra in a straight line, well I bet they've never looked at an old Autosport or have any interest in the historic part of the sport!

Have to say this is total unmitigated nonsense. Drivers wanted to win the JCB historic races in the 1970's and the Lloyds and Scottish ones in the 1980s just as much. Neil Corner and Willie Green drove as fast and competitively as the drivers in the TT today. ERA's in the 1960s had telescopic suspension systems and GTO's had super wide tyres and flared wheel arches. I was looking at photographs the other day of Colin Crabbe driving Aston Martin DP214 in the late 60's and it looked heavily modified. I think the idea that historic racing was once a pure experience with fields full of highly original cars just doesn't stack up.



It's quite possible to enjoy watching a former Formula 1 World Champion driving an E Type superbly, even if one knows that the car in question has been highly developed since it raced in period. There's probably a point at which things cross a line, and it's a shame that a lot of the more thoroughbred cars (GTO's mainly) no longer enter the TT Celebration but that's a product of financial values rather than the spirit of historic racing. Funny too that the Newey E Type is a genuine Lightweight, far more original in that sense than many of the recent winners of that race, and yet it has got a lot of people riled up.

[john ruston]

Originally Posted by hanuman

Have to say this is total unmitigated nonsense. Drivers wanted to win the JCB historic races in the 1970's and the Lloyds and Scottish ones in the 1980s just as much. Neil Corner and Willie Green drove as fast and competitively as the drivers in the TT today. ERA's in the 1960s had telescopic suspension systems and GTO's had super wide tyres and flared wheel arches. I was looking at photographs the other day of Colin Crabbe driving Aston Martin DP214 in the late 60's and it looked heavily modified. I think the idea that historic racing was once a pure experience with fields full of highly original cars just doesn't stack up.



It's quite possible to enjoy watching a former Formula 1 World Champion driving an E Type superbly, even if one knows that the car in question has been highly developed since it raced in period. There's probably a point at which things cross a line, and it's a shame that a lot of the more thoroughbred cars (GTO's mainly) no longer enter the TT Celebration but that's a product of financial values rather than the spirit of historic racing. Funny too that the Newey E Type is a genuine Lightweight, far more original in that sense than many of the recent winners of that race, and yet it has got a lot of people riled up.

So a response to the expert in Historic Racing!
It’s surprising that operations like Peter Auto who run the best historic series in Europe certainly police their competition cars scrupulously and cars like the Goodwood Jag would not be allowed to run.
Goodwood allows specially developed cars .
That’s the bottom line. Certainly a car like the Jaguar in question would not stand scrutiny for papers but if the operators at Goodwood want that type of event it’s their decision and nobody else’s .
Not sure it does much for Historic Racing overall but that’s not the name of the game in many peoples eyes.
About twenty GT40’s at Spa at weekend! Wonder where they came from
One was pretty quick for top speed! Seems to be more Racing Cobras Daytonas GT40’s Listers E types etc etc being built these days than in period
Imagine how difficult it is to police this situation should you want to!

[morninggents]

Originally Posted by hanuman

Have to say this is total unmitigated nonsense. Drivers wanted to win the JCB historic races in the 1970's and the Lloyds and Scottish ones in the 1980s just as much. Neil Corner and Willie Green drove as fast and competitively as the drivers in the TT today. ERA's in the 1960s had telescopic suspension systems and GTO's had super wide tyres and flared wheel arches. I was looking at photographs the other day of Colin Crabbe driving Aston Martin DP214 in the late 60's and it looked heavily modified. I think the idea that historic racing was once a pure experience with fields full of highly original cars just doesn't stack up.

I think the recent criticisms relate to the cars, not the celebrity drivers. Jenson Button is a class act and would have put a far less modified car in a competitive position.
It's the cars (and their owners' 'must win at any cost' ambition) that are the problem. Race cars have always been modified as they get older to keep them competitive and that is the nature of the game. But putting telescopic suspension on ERAs and wide tyres and arches on GTOs can no way compare with the monstrous creations around today.

[Mike Crow]

Why the obsession about the TT and St Marys Trophy? They are but two races in a whole cornucopia of historic racing available in the UK.
They are what they are and they are enormously entertaining examples of great cars being driven by great drivers. They have their audience and that audience comes every year to see them.

If you don’t like them then there is no need to complain. There is plenty to watch almost every weekend in the season with enough variety from strictly original to highly modified to please all of us.

[justracing]

Originally Posted by Mike Crow

There is plenty to watch almost every weekend in the season with enough variety from strictly original to highly modified to please all of us.

Absolutely spot on, along with a few others on here, I travel around to all manner of events throughout the year and recognize the difference in the way that various series are run and respect them as such.
I seem to remember Doug Nye having a similar disparity discussion some years back on the same subject as being tossed back and forth on here, it's all been aired before. As to the rights and wrongs I don't think there is a conclusive argument, the Goodwood Revival and the MM's are what they are - tongue in cheek reminiscences and very entertaining.

[Mike Crow]

I actually got a letter published in Motor Sport in reply to Doug Nye’s article on the same subject. I was irrationally pleased with myself.

The gist of the letter was that he was at the top looking down and saw only the upper layer and I was at the bottom looking up and saw all the multiple and beguiling layers.

There is still much to enjoy

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Mike Crow

I actually got a letter published in Motor Sport in reply to Doug Nye’s article on the same subject. I was irrationally pleased with myself.

The gist of the letter was that he was at the top looking down and saw only the upper layer and I was at the bottom looking up and saw all the multiple and beguiling layers.

There is still much to enjoy

Once again, I completely agree.

[justracing]

Originally Posted by Mike Crow

I actually got a letter published in Motor Sport in reply to Doug Nye’s article on the same subject. I was irrationally pleased with myself.

The gist of the letter was that he was at the top looking down and saw only the upper layer and I was at the bottom looking up and saw all the multiple and beguiling layers.

There is still much to enjoy

Pleased for you and even more pleased that it wasn't my memory failing again, I knew I had read it somewhere!

[hanuman]

Originally Posted by john ruston

So a response to the expert in Historic Racing!
It’s surprising that operations like Peter Auto who run the best historic series in Europe certainly police their competition cars scrupulously and cars like the Goodwood Jag would not be allowed to run.
Goodwood allows specially developed cars .
That’s the bottom line. Certainly a car like the Jaguar in question would not stand scrutiny for papers but if the operators at Goodwood want that type of event it’s their decision and nobody else’s .
Not sure it does much for Historic Racing overall but that’s not the name of the game in many peoples eyes.
About twenty GT40’s at Spa at weekend! Wonder where they came from
One was pretty quick for top speed! Seems to be more Racing Cobras Daytonas GT40’s Listers E types etc etc being built these days than in period
Imagine how difficult it is to police this situation should you want to!

Interested to know specifically why the Jag would not pass scrutiny elsewhere. I can see that it's running lower to the ground than an original Lightweight and some people have already commented that the bodywork has been smoothed off (in the Red Bull wind tunnel) but on the other hand it is a genuine Lightweight (ex-Phil Scragg etc). At Silverstone Classic, for instance, there are a number of 'new' cars running in the same category such as the Daytona Cobra which don't run at Goodwood. So which events are more strict? The Members Meeting seems to me to be more relaxed in this respect than the Revival. Genuine questions....

[Mike Harte]

I would assume that it is very likely unable to obtain an FIA HTP certificate because it has been so heavily modified since being owned by it's current owner. I can only imagine what work has been done to the car that cannot be seen by just looking at it.

[Peter Mallett]

It's probably got an HTP but may have been modified since it was issued. If the bodywork doesn't match the profile of the original build then it is unlikely to comply. Up to period D, cars must have 100mm clearance, 60mm for period E onwards. Any suspension component must be as per the original and located in the original position. I'm not suggesting it is non compliant, but from comments here it does appear to be different from the original.