Eligibility issues (trying to eliminate cheating)

[Brendan Roberts]

Get it super lighweight, oversize engine, go frighten the Mustangs and then refuse checks in Park Ferme and remove it without consent - you still dont get a penalty!

[Jeremy Hall]

Originally Posted by Brendan Roberts

Get it super lighweight, oversize engine, go frighten the Mustangs and then refuse checks in Park Ferme and remove it without consent - you still dont get a penalty!

Brendan how could you say such a thing-even if you are quoting another source.
Shame I wasn't there.

[simon drabble]

it is a shame - sounds like all sorts of jiggery pokery was going on......

[Brendan Roberts]

I was all agog over my lunchtime read! Results stand yet DM excluded for an incident described as much the result of a short wheelbase as 'minor' contact - seems a trifle unfair to me.
Roller rockers etc on GT40s, big V8s, I think you should have been there - you would have had a busy weekend! Given the perpetrators it suggests that such activity is spread far and wide! Now working on the 2.7FPF for my Elite!

[simon drabble]

and it might explain that super quick E Type as it comes from the same prepper......

[Brendan Roberts]

I dont know who you could be referring to!
Perhaps they should make more use of the weigh bridge.
Seems to give the wrong message to let the results stand tho'......

[terence]

GT 40---Roller Rockers? Sounds like Spa all over again!!.Jeremy enjoyed that weekend,it did,nt do me any harm either,gained another two place,s,,,,after the race,

[terence]

Originally Posted by simon drabble

and it might explain that super quick E Type as it comes from the same prepper......

How do they get an E-Type out to six litre,s.

[terence]

Originally Posted by Brendan Roberts

I dont know who you could be referring to!
Perhaps they should make more use of the weigh bridge.
Seems to give the wrong message to let the results stand tho'......

I heard that Lord March was applying for the Event to be FIA sanctioned next year.

[simon drabble]

mate of mine came second that year and when he was elevated to first asked the owner of the GT40 if he would give him the Rolex the winners were given and never heard back from him....

[Brendan Roberts]

Does that mean that without an FIA sanction oversize engines and a GT40 with roller rockers etc is OK after all?

[terence]

I would have to check with his Lordship before I could possibly answer that one.Not knowing anything about the reg,s that is.

[John Turner]

And these last 13 posts (thank you, Brendan ) were all on the wrong thread so I've moved them here!

There is now a certain irony about Ray Bellm's comments (before the race was restarted) about having to follow that Lola (Frank Sytner's) with all those 'illegal parts' apparently sticking out of it! Of course, there is no reason to assume that Bellm knew about the 'special' parts in the engine of the GT40 he was driving!

Marcus Pye has raised this issue in Humble Pye this week and also refers to the failure of the two V8 saloons to comply with scrutineers request. All very disturbing, frankly.

[zefarelly]

To be fair to Goodwood I thought the St Marys trophy was a lot better this year than it has been in recent years, it is however glaringly obvious that there are still some anomalies, a 4.6 v8 totally pi55ing all over a 7L one is a tad on the strange side is it not ?

one might also recall a race, and published picture recently of the Barraccuda being one of the only cars to keep up with a certain LV in his Falcon . . . . and he wasn't invited back.

whether running Sanctioned or requested FiA it is appalling behavior to refuse scrutineers requests, and removing vehicles from the bay is even worse, one would suspect that evading checks as such is as blatant an admission of cheating as you will find and will not be looked on favourably.

The cads will not be asked to return !

I use cads in the loosest possible sense, other C words are not cricket, especially from one in my position

[zefarelly]

Originally Posted by John Turner

, there is no reason to assume that Bellm knew about the 'special' parts in the engine of the GT40 he was driving!.

I disagree . . .you either employ the services of a reputable mechanic/engineer/technician/wizard or you don't drivers have no excuse for driving bent cars, either they ask or the deal with the consequences.

Michael Schumacher seems to have benefitted well over the years however

[terence]

This only goes to magnifie the current problems in Historic Racing,you let one person get away with it for what ever reason,then the next driver ,then the next, someone Has to step in and say that,s enough cad,s,now we need to look inside you,r engine,it is that simple,it is not a case of"Oh well he is so and so,we,ll let that one go."The tough approach doe,s work as we have seen in the past!

[Slippy Diff]

Originally Posted by terence bower

The tough approach doe,s work as we have seen in the past

Where, Terence?

All I've ever seen is organisers, scrutineers, promoters etc etc, letting the known and regular cheaters get away with it. THROW THEM OUT OF THE MEETINGS. Or simply don't let them enter in the first place. I can remember standing in earshot, while Jeremy had a go at a certain GT40 owner at a Spa 6 hour a few years ago, telling him quite loudly "do you think we run these meetings for just your benefit?". Didn't do any good though.

[simon drabble]

Originally Posted by Slippy Diff

Where, Terence?

All I've ever seen is organisers, scrutineers, promoters etc etc, letting the known and regular cheaters get away with it. THROW THEM OUT OF THE MEETINGS. Or simply don't let them enter in the first place. I can remember standing in earshot, while Jeremy had a go at a certain GT40 owner at a Spa 6 hour a few years ago, telling him quite loudly "do you think we run these meetings for just your benefit?". Didn't do any good though.

yes it did - he went off and started doing modern stuff ;-)

[terence]

There was also the Silverstone/MGB thing did the trick!.If this approach were to be implimented more ,then the message has to get through to all involved.The responsibility is higher up the order,unfortunatly the person responsible for these past act,s,cannot be at all of the event,s.

[zefarelly]

well it would appear that everyones is in agreement re the bent cars issues, and I'm glad to hear MP has had the balls to say something about it in print also.

Maybe we need to take a few lessons from Ragbags FJ series and actually eliminate the perpetrators and start self regulating a little better, If you excluded half the field there'd still be another 50 worthy cars queueing up for a go.

as a minor side issue, why are cars still allowed out with stickers all over them, non period wheels and no bumpers or interior . . .the invite is pretty clear, surely it should be a scrutineering failure for Goodwood ?

[terence]

Again,If these people were made an example of------.When this kind of thing starts to happen,if it,s nipped in the bud etc etc. Get tough policy NOW !!WHAT DO WE WANT??

[Brendan Roberts]

Until the powers that be take meaningful action I guess the situation wont change. Personally I think 'name and shame' drivers and preparers is the way to go and apply penalties. Rio Ferdinand suffered a lengthy ban for 'forgetting' a routine drugs test, so surely removing cars from Park Ferme in direct contravention of instructions of the authorities should carry a severe penalty IMHO...........sadly it seems that the actions of those at the pinnacle of any sport these days seems to filter down to the lower divisions, be it Footie or F1...........winning at any cost is a recurring theme.

[Jeremy Hall]

Lets try this.
Engines to be sealed before the event either by an MSA scrute, and FIA scrute, any person acceptable to the organisers BUT at that point the sealer is responsible for the sealing and that sealer is liable to the organiser and the entrant of the car if the bore/stroke and valve sizes are different from those signed for,civil liabilty in place for damages and fraud.
Replicas, no problem BUT all replicas must have the date of build stamped into all tubes in the case of a spaceframe or all alloy panels in the case of a tub.No one has any doubt about those replicas now or in the future-mark you I have always though the best way was to insist replicas could only run if painted dayglow pink.
Cars failing scrutineering before the event will be subject to a pit dolly on the grid with a sign ''failed scrutineering'' and a published list of failures would be put into every programme as it was sold, plus list published in a public arenas plus holes in the paddock with a notice declaring same.
It would take one year.

[Brendan Roberts]

Carol Spagg has a very good policy in U2TC requiring the engine builder to formally sign off that the supplied engine is correct to appx k regs for the car concerned. If this policy was to be widely adopted and where performance gave reason for a capacity or spec check and revealed an 'illegal' tweak then just bar that engine builder engines from th eseries. The engine builder would be more reluctant to 'cheat' (with or without the owners knowledge) if he stood a real chance of losing significant business if caught.
Scrutineering needs to be a far more rigourous process to create a level playing field and ensure detailed compatibility with regs (not just engine size and spec) and this will inevitably add costs and timetable issues at race meetings.

[zefarelly]

money talks, there must be a select few who virtually finance some series, they sit there like Ferrari and virtually dictate what goes and what doesn't

and theyre unlikely to choke on their viagra even if a minion does report on what he gets read out to him from here