So just how does modern technology improve old engine BHP

[zefarelly]

My Flow bench was one of the best things I ever bought.

not only can I prove what I do, I can explain and prove why other peoples engines are crap when they come to me complaining about trailing round at the back after spending a fortune on shiny **** from snake oil salesmen etc.

Al, anyone who races a proper engine needs/uses proper fuel. pump fuel is for shopping.

Sunoco is readily available.

[Cliff Ryan]

So it appears that all the unobtainium internals etc are not necessarily worth the £100 per HP cost for a front running engine.

I think I'm going to have a go and have a perfectly legal FIA 289 engine built for a realistic amount of money and see how it compares, as I personally get a lot of satisfaction from racing against others whose engine cost more than my whole car

[Heightswitch]

Originally Posted by Cliff Ryan

So it appears that all the unobtainium internals etc are not necessarily worth the £100 per HP cost for a front running engine.

I think I'm going to have a go and have a perfectly legal FIA 289 engine built for a realistic amount of money and see how it compares, as I personally get a lot of satisfaction from racing against others whose engine cost more than my whole car

agree with this as well..Over the years I have been starstruck at many so called legends of motorsport or celebs within the race preparation world...in time you realise that a lot of it is hype and actually i can do just as much if not better in my garage at home..Many of the bits I contracted out on my griff have been done again by me properly..

engines are simple and not difficult to build with a bit of a methodical approach...the machining bit is the key...a good machinist makes you power..as does a good pair of heads.

Its nce to know that my car turns up, doesn't drop oil and goes home at night in one bit and I built it.

N.

[Al Weyman]

I think there are two types of hype. (1) as above and (2) "ah its a stock engine I bought in the scrap yard" then go and blitz everyone so you think my God he is good! Not aimed at you Cliff as I know your engine is a stocker cheapie but you are also not right at the front and are where one would expect a good driver to be with a basic stock engine.

As far as fuels go what happened to the standard roadside pump fuel rule, is that no longer relevant?

And Wayne ''use stock/standard component'' to my eyes that means what it says not some trick piece costing 20 times more than the standard one. Wasn't Walkingshaw's Rovers slung out one meeting because they used standard Volvo Rockers and that was Group A I believe!!!??? That seems like a lesser crime to me.

[Clive Brown]

Walkinshaw cheat? Surely not....

[Cliff Ryan]

No offence taken Al, I know what you mean & that we are on the same page on this topic.

[GORDON STREETER]

Originally Posted by Clive Brown

Walkinshaw cheat? Surely not....

I don't think he was alone in "bending the rules" as others had to follow to keep up

[PeterMorley]

Originally Posted by midgetman

depends if you want to win or not. I've no doubt the £35k engines also stick to the rules. Getting close to the front is cheap. Continually setting the pace costs money.

mind you, often these fabled ultra-powerful engines are just that: fabled or gossip. Well set up cars, well-practiced drivers, more talent, call it what you will. It's easier to cry "he's got more power than me" than it is "he's better than me".

Going back to your original point, oils and fuels are more efficient than they were in period as well, leading to an increase in power across the board and the more powerful an engine the more dramatic the increase in number terms. E.g. Shell used to claim an extra 10% efficiency from Optimax.

I was talking to someone the other day (well known, experienced, raced in all the top events in period) who was racing a car that had just had an engine rebuild, 217Bhp on the dyno compared to 220 Bhp quoted in period.

He said that he came out of a corner alongside a similar car and the other car just disappeared into the distance.
As he said no amount of ability can make a similar car accelerate quicker, it simply has a much more powerful engine (and possibly some lightweight materials).

Someone else told me a similar story about racing in period F.Ford against a driver who went on to be an F1 world champion - cheating is nothing new and rather less important in historics (since the races don't matter).

Modern oils definitely reduce friction, likewise modern fuels are better (recent F1 fuel supposedly had the same octane rating etc as pump fuel but gave far more power), modern pistons seal better, cylinder head flowing is much better, camshaft design has improved, con-rods & cranks are much stronger, valves & springs have improved etc etc
Which of those items can be incorporated in a particular class varies but there will be some modern advances that can be applied to any class.

Consider DFVs, when the current rev limit was reduced (introduced?) to limit the power and increase the life of the engines an engine builder came up with a new bore/stroke/valve combination that was better suited to the new rev-limit, result = extra cost in reconfiguring existing engines, more power and so on...

[john ruston]

Think you could cross reference this thread with the Alex Buncombe one.

More or less the same thing.

Next week at Sillystone the Cortina at the sharpe end will have 200 + bhp and twin cams towards 215+.

Rest of the car is that much more advanced.Cheque book motoring and bugger me the best drivers still win!

What a waste!

[soupdragon]

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

I am curious, I keep reading time and time again about mega horse power engine outputs for 'Legal' Group 1 cars and FIA Apps K cars and the fact its not cheating but down to 'Modern Technology'. I personally question this and someone posted recently somewhere that someone or other was coming out in the Classic with a 'Legal' Apps K 450bhp 289ci Ford V8 engine!

How is this possible and keeping within FIA's criteria for such an engine? The Ford 289 small block back in the day would have produced as a high performance factory option in a road car 275bhp (with factory Tri Y headers) so lets say with blue printing and a careful build give it the benefit of doubt another 50bhp say 325. The cylinder heads on this engine never favoured high bhp outputs so unless they were changed I cannot see how 450bhp can ever be achieved by modern technology especially with pressed steel rockers and a flat tappet camshaft presumable to an homologated specification also I presume using the standard ignition system, standard cast crankshaft, rods and probably factory spec forged pistons and a 650cfm carb.

So my question is what precisely has modern technology changed that can produce these figures in what is meant to be a reproduction of a period engine without bending the rules?

Firstly, you need to read & absorb Appendix K because you can run a lot more stuff than you are suggesting; steel cranks etc are permitted, for example. Also, if you look at what you can't do, you are pretty much beaten; you need to look at what you can do.

Then: 50 years of knowledge & development has flowed under the bridge since these cars were raced in period. It would be a pretty poor state of affairs if literally 1000's of hours of track & dyno time hadn't brought performance levels up in that time.

Knowledge can't be unlearned. So power, handling, lap times, will always go forward. You can police anything, but you can't take away knowledge.

[midgetman]

Originally Posted by john ruston

Cheque book motoring and bugger me the best drivers still win!

What a waste!

Not at all John. It keeps the recipients of the cheques in gainful employment, they in turn use other services and so it goes on.

Our motor sport industry is a (unsung?) success, thanks purely to people wanting to go as fast as their cheque books allow.

[john ruston]

Why development in Historics?

No point.

Get the cheques from the modern gang and there lots more of them.

Can't see your point.

[midgetman]

The day I stop wanting to make my car faster is the day I hang up my helmet. As long as it's legal I'll do what I can to beat my mates. I don't see any difference between historics and moderns, you're not a racing engineer if you don't want to beat the rules.

I can't understand your contention to the contrary. Is this motor racing or some kind of automotive Sealed Knot Society cruising the tracks of the world holding re-enactments?

[john ruston]

So historic racing should have nothing to do with correct historic cars.

Just specials that look similar to cars of yesterday ?

[midgetman]

My contention is "Within the rules" as I italicised above.

For better or worse, we have a set of rules within which we operate, Appx K. If we think that those rules are not strict enough then that is a different question, but if the cars are developed within those boundaries then I see no problem.

If we don't like those boundaries then some lobbying the FIA must take place. In the meantime it is the nature of the beast that clever and competitive people will find a way to improve things - as they did in period.

If i understand you correctly your're proposing freezing car specification to how ot was in period. If we freeze development of original cars e.g. D-Types, where do we freeze it? What is the perfect moment to say "this is original"? Not many racing cars at the end of their careers end up the same as they left the factory, but all variants are historically "correct".

Equally if we are talking modern builds - e.g. jim Clark Cortinas - then the very act of fitting safety equipment and modern components "develops" the car along the lines of Al's original question.

I'm not advocating some kind of silhouette formula, just an acceptance that the very nature of motor racing is "Improving the Breed". If Appx K needs to be revisited, then it should be in which case this discussion goes away.

[john ruston]

That is a reasonable thought.

Unfortunately things like the quick C Type which is probably built to FIA regs turns history on its head and proves that historic racing has very little to do with history!

[Paul D]

Perhaps we should be thinking of it more as 'racing old cars' rather than 'historic racing'?

It's true that the modern historic racing scene (there's an oxy-moron for you!) probably doesn't much resemble what happened in period. Some cars have become very popular (or fashionable) in modern historics, to the point that they are very well supported and catered for by specialists. Ultimately this leads to improvement of the breed, better knowledge base, parts supply, etc. This, perhaps, allows such fashionable models to perform better - relatively - than they did in period, thus skewing the results of modern events compared to in-period results.

I'm no expert, but it seems to me that it's pretty much impossible to halt the effect of modern technology, and those with the wherewithal to pursue that advantage will do so. Time marches on and we can't 'turn back the clock'.

Whether or not that's a good thing is another matter...

[terence]

Time does indeed march on.Ten years ago Mass Racing considered 420 to be the norm for a 289 Ford.They were being run on quad 50ida's (lconforming with fia) slight problem with Griff bonnets but not incurable! So, what will a reliable 289 give these days? Bearing in mind that both of the Griffs that won at spa 6hr had the aforementioned power.?

[Heightswitch]

Originally Posted by midgetman

My contention is "Within the rules" as I italicised above.

For better or worse, we have a set of rules within which we operate, Appx K. If we think that those rules are not strict enough then that is a different question, but if the cars are developed within those boundaries then I see no problem.

If we don't like those boundaries then some lobbying the FIA must take place. In the meantime it is the nature of the beast that clever and competitive people will find a way to improve things - as they did in period.

If i understand you correctly your're proposing freezing car specification to how ot was in period. If we freeze development of original cars e.g. D-Types, where do we freeze it? What is the perfect moment to say "this is original"? Not many racing cars at the end of their careers end up the same as they left the factory, but all variants are historically "correct".

Equally if we are talking modern builds - e.g. jim Clark Cortinas - then the very act of fitting safety equipment and modern components "develops" the car along the lines of Al's original question.

I'm not advocating some kind of silhouette formula, just an acceptance that the very nature of motor racing is "Improving the Breed". If Appx K needs to be revisited, then it should be in which case this discussion goes away.

I agree with all this..
If you are racing you are racing...there will always be someone to race against...I also take the view that we are racing old cars..
historic racing in America has become little more than a track parade of old cars in my opinion.

at club level there will always be a disparity of speed related to budgets..generally the rules make it harder for a fettler to compete against a limitless budget...Thats a whole other story again.

Personally I am out to have fun..in a car i have always wanted.
N.

[terence]

Originally Posted by Heightswitch

I agree with all this..
If you are racing you are racing...there will always be someone to race against...I also take the view that we are racing old cars..
historic racing in America has become little more than a track parade of old cars in my opinion.

at club level there will always be a disparity of speed related to budgets..generally the rules make it harder for a fettler to compete against a limitless budget...Thats a whole other story again.

Personally I am out to have fun..in a car i have always wanted.
N.

In the perfect world; everyone would share your view, and there would be no pot hunting win at all costs super rich "racers" who are ultimately responsible for the mess that historic racing is now!

[Cliff Ryan]

Originally Posted by Heightswitch

I agree with all this..
If you are racing you are racing...there will always be someone to race against...I also take the view that we are racing old cars..
historic racing in America has become little more than a track parade of old cars in my opinion.

at club level there will always be a disparity of speed related to budgets..generally the rules make it harder for a fettler to compete against a limitless budget...Thats a whole other story again.

Personally I am out to have fun..in a car i have always wanted.
N.

I also agree with all this, apart from your idea that historic racing in America is little more than a track parade as it is far from a parade in my experience, it's just that they take a very dim view of contact & quite rightly so in my opinion.

[Al Weyman]

Originally Posted by Cliff Ryan

I also agree with all this, apart from your idea that historic racing in America is little more than a track parade as it is far from a parade in my experience, it's just that they take a very dim view of contact & quite rightly so in my opinion.

Agreed and seen it with you!

[Mike Bell]

From what I have been told some of the West Coast events are less 'racey'?

Certainly at Sebring last year everyone was pushing their cars as hard as most do in UK...

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

.........

As far as fuels go what happened to the standard roadside pump fuel rule, is that no longer relevant?

The rule is something like "available in the market", which means that you can still allow 105 octane fuel.

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

And Wayne ''use stock/standard component'' to my eyes that means what it says not some trick piece costing 20 times more than the standard one. Wasn't Walkingshaw's Rovers slung out one meeting because they used standard Volvo Rockers and that was Group A I believe!!!??? That seems like a lesser crime to me.

That was 1983 when the teams decided that they didn't like TWR for whatever reason. The regs permitted the rockers but the ASN decided after 6 months that it would disqualify the team. It lead to BL pulling out of the BSCC. The following year Andy Rouse won in his ICS backed Rover.

[Normal Bloke]

Just registered purely to add my contribution to this fascinating thread....
my personal problem is that I am unable to voice my true opinions (even via anonymous forum pseudonym) for fear of being cast out of the "old boys club". In a nutshell, a certain engine builder has recently managed to get the FIA to change the rules to his advantage. The result has been that if you wish to win, you either have to use his products and services, or accept mid-field finishes. Good business for the engine builder and great entertainment for the crowds but "Historic Racing"? Hardly.