Top Hat Regs & CTCRC regs. (Spin off from Mallory Park thread)

[Peter Mallett]

No the support plates are in the wrong place and you have to drill the chassis legs too. But yes you do need a different cross member.

[COLIN STUBBS]

yes pete i know!!i have a spare mk1 shell [1300] and decided to use all the bits alan didnt have off me to build a bit of a saturday night special....you have to drill the chassis for the 6 bolt xmember and chop lots out of the front for a rad to fit.all i need now is a wiring loom

[COLIN STUBBS]

Originally Posted by johnw

Just to squash some of the tosh above.
Nobody has lobbied the CTCRC for bigger wheels in period.
We are considering letting the older cars that enter Pre-93 races use larger diameter rims, so that they can take advantage of newer list rubber at sensible prices.

so just to confuse everyone even more, are we going to get group1 cars on big diameter wheels,with massive brakes,blowing off all the pukka pre 93 cars? perhaps toyo would sponsor that and we could call it mod prods!! wouldnt it be better to try and fill up a grid with some propper in period pre 93 cars and let anyone else that wants to race in it stick to the regs? running phtc cars without bumpers against group1 which have to have em sure is confusing for spectators,and theres no rulling stop anyone running an older car in group1 only.will we get some pre93 only specials??ctrc have always run it so you can race in the next newer series and thats good,but they have never massaged the regs to benefit anybody.carefull writing of the rulebook needed here methinks.hope it dosent scare too many prospective pre93ers off from next season.

[Peter Mallett]

Also let's not get confused about who's regs are who's.

The CTCRC Group 1 regs are being used by TH for Groovy Baby and as long as the two series/championships don't clash I don't see an issue.

However I do hope there's no issues arising out of this (I'm sure the CTCRC Committee are ok with it).

Colin.

Your points are well made and yes IMHO there could be some 70's/80's pre 93 specials but that is no different to Classic Thunder surely? Hmm, perhaps I could pick up a cheap Metro Turbo and enter?

The PHTC and Group 1 regs do differ slightly but that only reflects what was extant in period. You can run with no bumpers etc. in PHTC but you can't run a larger carb. Its the opposite in CG1.

[Al Weyman]

but that is no different to Classic Thunder surely?

That argument does not wash with me Peter as Classic Thunder is a law unto itself and the rules are definitely not adhered to as there are I'm afraid out and out hot rods competing. Pre-93 is far more like the rules I build my ModProd IROC race car to, no lightweight panels, all original glass etc etc. I know my car would be on the pace in pre-93 but by virtue of the way it has been built it would not in fact I have tried it and it does not, hold a candle in the winds chance in CT.

Personally I think Colin has some good points and if I had to vote one way or the other I am with him on that. I have suggested to John that any cars that do move up and change wheels to race in pre-93 should still be able to bolt a standard wheel on to stop the massive brakes scenario. However this is all well and good if the car is still to be raced in the historic period races but for a special its not on and I fear what will happen is that RWD powerful 70's and 80's cars like Capris, Rovers, RS2000's with big wheels bolted on and big brakes built specifically for pre 93 will dominate.

I will cite one example. There is a guy racing the ex-Alan Pond TT Vittese front wheel drive Rover in pre-93 and I think we all agree, great to see some different metal out there. Now let an SDI RWD in with big wheels and he is wasting his time. Another, one advantage I have if I enter pre-93 is my IROC came with 16" rims and although a shorter wheelbase and not as stable as the earlier cars this helps but that advantage will be eradicated at a stroke by this, I could also add any FWD Mk 3,4 or 5 Escorts would not be worth racing as RWD early models on big rims will always beat them no I'm with Colin on this one.

PS Finally I will add that I think pre-93 if not fiddled with too much will make it big next year so why risk alienating a lot to accomadate a few. If it aint broke leave the damn thing alone:-) This constant fiddling is what ruined ModProds and I guarantee if they had stuck to my original draft regs (similiar to current Pre-93) it would still be healthy today. Oh and it may also have stopped guys wasting many thousands of pounds trying to do things with cars that would never work (eg running Cossies as non turbos).

[Al Weyman]

One other thing I will add, it was the tyre availability from the current sponsor (Falken) argument that allowed bigger rim diemeters in ModProds and this one rullin in my opinion was the start of the rot as 18" rims became the must have and this was meant to be a budget race series. If a manufacture wants to sponsor I think they have to accept that if they cannot supply the required size even if it is standard fitment then any tyre from List A or B must be allowed. If their tyres are that good then what better way to showcase them, against the opposition's.

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

That argument does not wash with me Peter as Classic Thunder is a law unto itself and the rules are definitely not adhered to as there are I'm afraid out and out hot rods competing. Pre-93 is far more like the rules I build my ModProd IROC race car to, no lightweight panels, all original glass etc etc. I know my car would be on the pace in pre-93 but by virtue of the way it has been built it would not in fact I have tried it and it does not, hold a candle in the winds chance in CT.

But IIRC this was the old Classic Touring Cars championship and they are allowed to run lightweight panels, perspex etc. No issue there methinks.

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

Personally I think Colin has some good points and if I had to vote one way or the other I am with him on that. I have suggested to John that any cars that do move up and change wheels to race in pre-93 should still be able to bolt a standard wheel on to stop the massive brakes scenario. However this is all well and good if the car is still to be raced in the historic period races but for a special its not on and I fear what will happen is that RWD powerful 70's and 80's cars like Capris, Rovers, RS2000's with big wheels bolted on and big brakes built specifically for pre 93 will dominate.

If they are built to the Pre 93 regs they can't drop back to their original series. That defeats the ethos of the CTCRC but I see no fundamental problem with it. Yes your point about wheel sizes makes sense.

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

I will cite one example. There is a guy racing the ex-Alan Pond TT Vittese front wheel drive Rover in pre-93 and I think we all agree, great to see some different metal out there. Now let an SDI RWD in with big wheels and he is wasting his time. Another, one advantage I have if I enter pre-93 is my IROC came with 16" rims and although a shorter wheelbase and not as stable as the earlier cars this helps but that advantage will be eradicated at a stroke by this, I could also add any FWD Mk 3,4 or 5 Escorts would not be worth racing as RWD early models on big rims will always beat them no I'm with Colin on this one.

PS Finally I will add that I think pre-93 if not fiddled with too much will make it big next year so why risk alienating a lot to accomadate a few. If it aint broke leave the damn thing alone:-) This constant fiddling is what ruined ModProds and I guarantee if they had stuck to my original draft regs (similiar to current Pre-93) it would still be healthy today. Oh and it may also have stopped guys wasting many thousands of pounds trying to do things with cars that would never work (eg running Cossies as non turbos).

Not sure of your point here Al. Either the cars run to the regs for pre 93 or they run to regs for PHTC/CG1 etc.

[Al Weyman]

But IIRC this was the old Classic Touring Cars championship and they are allowed to run lightweight panels, perspex etc. No issue there methinks.

Like I said Peter I do not want to be specific but trust me I am not just talking Fibreglass and Perspex which I am OK with. I was going to lighten my car and have already cut the polycarbonate for the rear hatch but I now will not bother as it still would not be on the pace.

If they are built to the Pre 93 regs they can't drop back to their original series. That defeats the ethos of the CTCRC but I see no fundamental problem with it. Yes your point about wheel sizes makes sense.

As long as they run the standard diameter rims no problem.

Not sure of your point here Al. Either the cars run to the regs for pre 93 or they run to regs for PHTC/CG1 etc.

100% agree but were discussing the implications of changeing the rules and allowing in bigger wheel diameters and all the relevant bigger brakes and expense that goes with it.

[Peter Mallett]

To your last point I think that's covered by the above.

I thought this thread was more about the use of the CTCRC regs in Top Hat/Groovy Baby.

However there are some cars like the BMW1602 running a 2 litre engine in CT. That is allowed by the regs.

[Al Weyman]

1602 is only a badge is'nt it identical in every other way to the 2 litre, I dont think 1602 had anything to do with cc a bit like the VW Beetle 1602 that was also a 2 litre. Germans like to confuse us.

Pete with respect the thread title does not make that clear. If this is the case please change the title and delete all my posts if they are irrelevant but I thought wheel diemeters were in the discussion.

[Peter Mallett]

Nope it was a 1600.

[Al Weyman]

But was not the body the same as a 2002 in whichcase if the only differnce was a 2 litre engine then its just a badge and a bit silly entering it as a 1602! I will stick a V6 badge on the back of my car and entre it as a 3.6 do you think anyone will notics:-) If its an interely differnt biody shell then yes yet again according to the regs (standard production block for the model) its illegal in CT but no one takes any notice of that rule:-)

[Peter Mallett]

If you enter it as a 2002 you'd presumably have to adjust the weight. Entering as a 1602 the weight is lower. Good eh?

[Al Weyman]

According to a discussion I had in Parce Ferma at Brands when I won my class in CT, CT cars do not need to be weighed?????

[Peter Mallett]

fair enough.

[Al Weyman]

I don't mind all this I really don't as long as its set out clearly so you know what you are up agianst and can make an informed decision whether to participate or not.

[COLIN STUBBS]

here here al i agree!!iv already had one false start with the old pre90 series as it was. my own fault in a way but i prepped the car and didnt realise they only marketed it as a 5 door before 90. so i got moved on.now pre93 is more or less up and running with a few pukka cars im not sure what to next year if its going to be a mix up of proper looking cars and a few on carlos fandango wheels!looks like there might be a few super coupe cars looking to run and as far as im concerned it will be nice to race with them,and the ctcrc again. iv missed seeing some of the friends i had from phtc.as iv said in another thread i cant work out where all the old golfs/astras etc have gone. maybe rallying?,but i bet there are lots of cars laying about. pre93 never seems to get much publicity so do people realise its a nice place to come and play? or is it just about filling grids up??

[Tim Wilkinson]

I can understand that people would want to take advantage of modern rubber and that that might not be possible on period rims, and I think that it's a good idea to allow that BUT it has to be properly regulated - possibly limited to an increase in wheel diameter of 2", and as Al suggested the brake used should fit under a rim of the original diameter (and perhaps the car should be presented on those rims, on the front at least at scrutineering, along with the larger rims off the car?).

I'd like to run in pre-93, and i'd like to do it with full grids (preferably other cars of the 83-92 ilk, but anything to get a good spectacle), but those grids shouldn't come from older cars being given performance concessions. The place for "specials" is in Classic Thunder (or whatever it becomes); there might not be anyone currently in CTCRC who wants to race an older car in pre-93 on a permanent basis, but all it takes is one person to take advantage of a loop-hole in the rules and suddenly everyone can be off the pace!

[johnw]

I think that you'll be pleased then teej and Colin, to hear that Pre-93 will be properly regulated and not there to provide a home for older cars running oversize wheels and brakes.

We are looking to have regs which entice more 83-92 cars into the series,and not looking to take cars away from their period championships.
However, we would like to give the older cars the option of running a more competitive tyre, if they want to enter Pre-93 as a second race. Patently the historic Dunlop is no match for a list 1 B tyre.
No compulsion though, so the choice will be the competitor's.

Not quite sure what is behind your last question Colin, but we are indeed looking to have full grids across the club.

There is a deal of interest in Pre-93 from across the spectrum, so I'm expecting a large increase in proper period cars, along with the visiting Capris, Rovers Beemers and a Mazda. Hence taking time to get the regs in a position to encourage the majority.

Discussions like this are helpful. Regs will be completed very shortly.

[Tim Wilkinson]

Thanks for putting our minds at rest (well, mine at least); Can't argue with trying to cut costs - i'm lucky enough to have a 15" wheel homologated for my car, so economical rubber isn't a problem, but i've spoken to drivers who've had trouble in the past so understand that it's an issue.

John, out of personal interest, are there any plans to change the rule allowing cars that were produced with fuel injection to run carbs instead?

[Peter Mallett]

Sounds good. Thanks John.

[COLIN STUBBS]

ye thanks john. my last question was meaningless really! i think i meant are we struggling to find "correct" pre93 type cars so much that the idea was to let more modified older ones in.ed is right.if a group1 car is on its correct spec brakes then its not so much of a problem.it just sounded so open ended allowing someone to build a group1 look alike pre93 car which could have started a trend which might have stopped a potential say,golf or astra coming in.still no cossies then??

[Peter Mallett]

I was wondering doesn't the Escort Cosworth fit into this?

[Tim Wilkinson]

IIRC the Escort Cosworth, Sierra Cosworth and Nissan Skyline are not allowed to race in pre-93. I think they'd be fine for Classic Mod-Prod Thunder, tho.

[johnw]

Originally Posted by teej

John, out of personal interest, are there any plans to change the rule allowing cars that were produced with fuel injection to run carbs instead?

No plans to change that teej.

Thanks Colin, no we didn't want highly modified older cars with 20" wheels and touring car brakes, as they will fit perfectly into the new CT/Modprods championship.

No plans to allow currently restricted cars into Pre-93 either.