Are there too many muscle car classes???

I know I'll probably get flamed........anyhow

Who else thinks there are too many muscle car classes in NZ and Au? (CMC, Historic, Northern, the possibility of a south island muscle car class, as well as Aussie trans am)

I have had this discussion with a couple of muscle car racing mates, seems that it would make a lot of sense to work towards having one set of rules and merging all the current classes.

If the NZ classes were to use the rules of the Australian touring car masters, I think it would hold a lot of merit for the future of the sport ( big picture) and create some really good trans Tasman clashes.

The TMC rules make lots of sense, sensible displacement rules, control parts, and the developed cars are quick!

I'm sure it could me a lot of flow down used parts / tyres for the budget racers in the class, produce large grids of really cool looking vehicles.

Could allow the possibility for kiwis to get to race at iconic tracks such as Bathurst ect.

Interested in others thoughts

Hi Richie, as far as HMC goes, it`s probably better for Dale or Steve Holmes to explain their thoughts on it. As for looking at it from an HMC competitor point of view, I got involved with HMC as I could see the fundemental difference between sinking megabucks into the `the other class' and that of running with a bunch of likeminded guys - still in good cars - which although a relatively new class is rapidly gaining popularity. In the last fortnight alone, three more complete racecars have been bought out of the US, with several others under construction over the winter. The Aussie TCM and ATA are both points based championships, like CMC is here, where HMC is more about period correct guidelines and the emphasis is on social enjoyment rather than all out egos. This may seem a one sided view for those on the outside looking in, but from the inside looking out, the growth of HMC is relative to guys wanting to enjoy their `later years' rather than be in a continual shitfight. The two race meetings we are about to compete in over in Queensland, will also give us a gauge on the publics interest in these cars over there. Ticket sales for both meetings are going strong and the 8 of us HMC guys taking our cars over are all looking forward to it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fullnoise68

Hi Richie, as far as HMC goes, it`s probably better for Dale or Steve Holmes to explain their thoughts on it. As for looking at it from an HMC competitor point of view, I got involved with HMC as I could see the fundemental difference between sinking megabucks into the `the other class' and that of running with a bunch of likeminded guys - still in good cars - which although a relatively new class is rapidly gaining popularity. In the last fortnight alone, three more complete racecars have been bought out of the US, with several others under construction over the winter. The Aussie TMC and ATA are both points based championships, like CMC is here, where HMC is more about period correct guidelines and the emphasis is on social enjoyment rather than all out egos. This may seem a one sided view for those on the outside looking in, but from the inside looking out, the growth of HMC is relative to guys wanting to enjoy their `later years' rather than be in a continual shitfight. The two race meetings we are about to compete in over in Queensland, will also give us a gauge on the publics interest in these cars over there. Ticket sales for both meetings are going strong and the 8 of us HMC guys taking our cars over are all looking forward to it.

---

Hi,

No disrespect to Dale and Co, they have done a fantastic job in what I can imagine is a very difficult environment, plenty of individuals with the own agenda's.
Yes I do understand the points/ championship situation and the concept of HMC.

Guess for guys ( Like me) with new builds and living in the South Island, there are difficult decisions to be made on what rules its best to build my car to.
Love to run with HMC, am in agreement with most of the rules of the class, but does look unlikely that there will be many if any south island rounds.....so this means the only option is to head North.
With a business and other financial/ time commitments this will seldom be a option for me.

There is some talk of a south island Muscle car class, albeit most probably with yet another set of rules....

If I build to HMC and only use my car locally, it really in kind of no mans land with most of the other available classes down here with out going into details.


My thinking was if everyone worked towards having common set of rules, it would make the cars versatile being able to compete in more than one series ( points / competitive and historic)

At the present all the different rules are too far from each other to make a easy cross over between series, but if all the classes had a basic common rule, save for perhaps tyres ect......sure you can see my point.

I am aware it a concept that will never happen, but I am interested to see if anyone else shares my view point

Cheers Richie

This will be an interesting discussion! As a total outsider, I totally support Dale/Steve/Tony with HMC and I am glad that you started the discussion. I also see CMC and other Muscle car classes with good strong grids, racing hard, where points are a major issue. So much so that one could question some of the egos and driving behaviour.

I think above all else, it comes down to:

a) What degree of purity for the cars. Not all share the Schedule K/CoD/HMC philosophy.
b) Whereas purist cars are generally accepted at less pure events or within less pure classes, the reverse isn't the case.
c) As in any classic racing, driving standards need to be high to respect the other machinery and particularly when grids are mixed with cars with different characteristics ie. better cornering and braking, but slower on the straights.

My biggest concern within some sectors of classic racing would be driver behaviour as I do not subscribe to the level playing field mantra. That means that any series that is totally scratch race based is going to have an inevitable outcome, whether there are choccy fish or megabucks at stake.

Some drivers just want to win, whether their car is an older muscle car or a modern V8 or a classic single seater or anything inbetween. They are not really suited to the classic environment at all as they don't respect what we are all about.

Back to the original point. Different series spring up as offshoots, as the drivers are not happy with the philosophy and there is nothing you will ever do to prevent that. They either survive or fail, depending on how many others share their philosophy or whether or not there are active promoters. In that, HMC has a firm philosophy that you cannot argue with, so there will always be the purist groups and dare I say it, ideally they should be the strongest, but there are also the pragmatists and I really don't need to defend them!

Racing as I was growing up was always class based, with up to 4 classes on any grid. I see nothing wrong with that, even now. What is so wrong with mixing grids/classes, just as long as the driving is acceptable?

Thats a good question Richie, and I've wondered the same thing myself. Breaking each class down, it does appear there are a lot of classes, its not really for me to say if there are too many or not. I feel each class offers something unique, that will appeal to different people. Just because two different people want to go racing in 1970 Camaro's, doesn't mean those two people want the same thing from their racing.

Firstly, I'd say break the classes down into historic racing classes, and non-historic. There are people who are only interested in going historic racing, while others want to chase points and appear at high profile modern racing events as Touring Car Masters and Central Muscle Cars do. You'll find, speaking with people from either TCM or CMC, that they really have no interest in the historical side of racing. They just want to chase points and go as fast as possible. So you could say they're very different people to those who want to just go historic racing and slide around having fun with like-minded enthusiasts.

Therefore, I guess you could say Historic Muscle Cars is a bit different in that respect, because the class was only ever created to appear at historic events, with no points racing, and with the emphasis being on getting the cars as historically correct as possible. For some people racing muscle cars, thats an incredibly unappealing scenario. I've spoken to people who just can't understand why you wouldn't want to race for points and a championship, and make your car as fast as possible using all modern technology. So the different classes appeal to different types of people.

Breaking the remaining classes down further; In Aussie there are Touring Car Masters and Australian Trans-Am. In NZ there is Production Muscle Cars, Northern Muscle Cars, Central Muscle Cars. Both Northern and Central grew from Production. This happened because Production require that the cars retain a vast amount of original road car parts. This appeals to many people, but others want to go faster, and fit stronger parts. So Northern was created as a breakaway from Production, but was largely Auckland based. Central Muscle Cars was created by a group of people in the central and lower North Island, who wanted to race outside of Auckland. CMC and Northern do seem to have quite similar rules, and do race together at some events, but they're run separately from each other.

As for Touring Car Masters. This would be the most expensive of all the classes you've mentioned Richie. Part of the reason its so expensive is because of the travel around Australia, as it supports V8 Supercars. But its expensive because of the freedoms it has and the parts that are allowed. Don't be fooled by the 15" wheels into thinking these cars are historic based. They're not. If you really examine closely the parts fitted to a TCM car, break down the cost of things like the brakes and suspension, they're pretty high tech cars. Australian Muscle Car mag did a feature about 18 months ago on Jim Richards' AMC Javelin, and the parts that went into this car were pretty impressive. Also, the TCM cars run radials tyres which are almost a slick. The TCM cars are actually the fastest of all the groups you mentioned. They're even faster than the CMC cars. Also, to compete at any TCM races, you need a TCM licence. Those are expensive. Check out the For Sale page on the TCM website. The cars listed here are for sale at a fraction of their build cost. This is great for people who can afford it. Cars for sale here: http://touringcarmasters.com.au/trade.php The TCM has a cut-off date of 1974. That means no cars newer than 1974 can compete. But each model that does race is there only after a committee has allowed it in. So you can't just show up with anything.

Aussie Trans-Am was created because, in Aus, you have a choice of either Historic Group N, or TCM, and these guys wanted something different. Most of the cars that race in ATA aren't accepted in either Group N or TCM. For example, you can't race a 1970 Mustang in either, nor a Pontiac Firebird.

I do agree that it would be neat to see a one class fits all, and this is much more the case in Aus than it is in NZ. CAMS Historic Group N is used right throughout Australia, so if you happen to live in Perth, and want to build a '69 Mustang to Group N rules, if you take your Mustang to a Group N event in NSW, or Vic, the other '69 Mustangs in your race will be built to the same set of rules as your car. I really like that, and find it really appealing. But again, there are those in Aus who feel the Historic Group N rules are too restrictive. Car makes and models that race in Group N are only those that started an Australian Touring Car Championship through to the end of 1972. 1972 is the cut-off date for Group N. Therefore, a 1969 Mustang is eligible, but a 1970 Mustang isn't. A 1967, 1968, or 1969 Camaro is eligible, but a 1970 Camaro isn't.

So, essentially, what I've just said above is that different people want different things from their racing, and just because two people might be enthusiasts of the same make and model of car, doesn't mean they want the same thing from their racing. I know I've been of no use to you Richie, but I'm just trying to explain why there are so many different classes. Are there too may? Possibly. But the flip-side is that you have so many options when building a car.

I don’t believe we have too many Muscle class’s Richie, we live in a “free” democratic society so anyone can start any group they so wish, and all the more for them. Lot of the problem I see is the use of the word “Muscle” as this seems to spread from a “historically correct saloon” rite out to late model slick shod turbo Porsches, it seems in SI the event organisers use the work Muscle for just about anything presumably to pull the punters though the gates!! But if one was to look at some of the class’s that call themselves “Muscle” and then look at the gridded up vehicles used, they are probably more along the lines of All-Comers or Sports Sedan vehicles(based on motorsport history), but are still considered Muscle by some and that’s OK. With that in mind I guess most GT1 tube frame Trans Am cars are muscle cars as well, infact any performance type vehicle whether new or old can be considered “Muscle” but to use the words “Historic” and “Muscle” in the same sentence that does have a different meaning and should be recognised.

I believe CAMS Australia have got it right with their pre 72 Group Nc saloon class and sure wish we had this in NZ, they only allow vehicles that actually race period in Australia but more importantly one can build “today” an old saloon race car to a standardised set of rules without allowing too much technology and as Steve mentions, be able race anywhere in Australia amongst those groups!! But what they have really done rite over the last 30 years is have a strong constitution, a firm set of rules and constant “Eligibility” checks to keep their fleet aligned, something we are about to implement in HMC with the help of MSNZ Historic and Classic Commission. Which brings up another point, some think I’ve/we’ve just invented HMC in our heads when infact all myself, Steve H and Tony R have done is use what they’ve been doing overseas for years, nothing new at all.

The postings from Ray(ERC) Steve H and Steve E pretty much nail it, Ray you are so rite about driver standards but that’s for another post!! but like anyone else Richie, you can build YOUR Camaro however you want, you don’t have to build it to HMC or anyone’s rules as I’m sure(especially down south) you will always have somewhere to race it!! but if you do this and decide to come north you won’t be eligible for HMC events but this may not concern you. For me personally, short of turning your Camaro into a Tube Frame, NASCAR engine money pit? you’re still struggle to beat those late model twin turbo factory Porsche’s race cars that you’ll be racing with hence why I don’t come south anymore!!

The one regret i have with HMC was we probably called it the wrong name, should have been called “Historic Racing Saloons” or similar especially with the over use of the word “Muscle” as mentioned above, but anyway we’re stuck with it and are pressing onwards and now have a “Historic” saloon class that can’t be stopped, im sure this will eventually spread south. As for the other class’s good on then, to me the best race series in NZ is CMC, the show those boys put on is beyond belief!! they talk about Supertourers, V8 supercars, etc which I wouldn’t cross the road for but those boys in CMC are worthy of the entertainment and long may it continue. I see in England they have a similar class called “Thunder Saloons” and I believe that’s very popular over there as well, but certainly NOT Historic.

So, too many Muscle car class’s, hmmm!! All I can say is that the money been spent and the new cars been built there ain’t no recession that’s for sure!! and like they often say in an old western movie “choose your weapon of choice” and live with it.

Dale M

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kiwiboss

I don’t believe we have too many Muscle class’s Richie, we live in a “free” democratic society so anyone can start any group they so wish, and all the more for them. Lot of the problem I see is the use of the word “Muscle” as this seems to spread from a “historically correct saloon” rite out to late model slick shod turbo Porsches, it seems in SI the event organisers use the work Muscle for just about anything presumably to pull the punters though the gates!! But if one was to look at some of the class’s that call themselves “Muscle” and then look at the gridded up vehicles used, they are probably more along the lines of All-Comers or Sports Sedan vehicles(based on motorsport history), but are still considered Muscle by some and that’s OK. With that in mind I guess most GT1 tube frame Trans Am cars are muscle cars as well, infact any performance type vehicle whether new or old can be considered “Muscle” but to use the words “Historic” and “Muscle” in the same sentence that does have a different meaning and should be recognised.
Dale, you are probably correct, personally I am passionate about (in my opinion) the purists muscle car era of mid to late 60's.
You are correct, a factory built German turbo charged sports car is a different animal, from a different era.



I believe CAMS Australia have got it right with their pre 72 Group Nc saloon class and sure wish we had this in NZ, they only allow vehicles that actually race period in Australia but more importantly one can build “today” an old saloon race car to a standardised set of rules without allowing too much technology and as Steve mentions, be able race anywhere in Australia amongst those groups!! But what they have really done rite over the last 30 years is have a strong constitution, a firm set of rules and constant “Eligibility” checks to keep their fleet aligned, something we are about to implement in HMC with the help of MSNZ Historic and Classic Commission. Which brings up another point, some think I’ve/we’ve just invented HMC in our heads when infact all myself, Steve H and Tony R have done is use what they’ve been doing overseas for years, nothing new at all.

Agreed, group Nc make sence. \
Guess the question I was asking with out getting involved with driver standards, philosophy of the class, points ect, is would it not make sense to work towards a common set of technical rules, save for a few minor bolt on components..... as several of the classes are not that dissimilar ( if the rules were enforced), so cars could be run in different " classes" of muscle car racing, depending on the personal preference of the owner driver.


The postings from Ray(ERC) Steve H and Steve E pretty much nail it, Ray you are so rite about driver standards but that’s for another post!! but like anyone else Richie, you can build YOUR Camaro however you want, you don’t have to build it to HMC or anyone’s rules as I’m sure(especially down south) you will always have somewhere to race it!! but if you do this and decide to come north you won’t be eligible for HMC events but this may not concern you. For me personally, short of turning your Camaro into a Tube Frame, NASCAR engine money pit? you’re still struggle to beat those late model twin turbo factory Porsche’s race cars that you’ll be racing with hence why I don’t come south anymore!!
No desire to build a tube chassis car to run with a GT2 Porsche, more that I need to be able to use the car locally with the other similar cars ( Camaro's, mustangs and alike). Its a shame that CMC or HMC don't come South, as it was the best local event I had been to.

The one regret i have with HMC was we probably called it the wrong name, should have been called “Historic Racing Saloons” or similar especially with the over use of the word “Muscle” as mentioned above, but anyway we’re stuck with it and are pressing onwards and now have a “Historic” saloon class that can’t be stopped, im sure this will eventually spread south. As for the other class’s good on then, to me the best race series in NZ is CMC, the show those boys put on is beyond belief!! they talk about Supertourers, V8 supercars, etc which I wouldn’t cross the road for but those boys in CMC are worthy of the entertainment and long may it continue. I see in England they have a similar class called “Thunder Saloons” and I believe that’s very popular over there as well, but certainly NOT Historic.
Love CMC, just budget does not allow to build and maintain a competitive car.

So, too many Muscle car class’s, hmmm!! All I can say is that the money been spent and the new cars been built there ain’t no recession that’s for sure!! and like they often say in an old western movie “choose your weapon of choice” and live with it.

As I have said above, think what you and HMC has done is great, bringing out old "historic racing vehicles" is great, was only putting the question out there if anyone else in all of the classes I mentioned though working towards technical parity would make sense???

Dale M

---

Thanks Richie

Richie, Murray Brown's 70 Camaro is an excellent example of a person that built or put his car back to HMC specs and with just a wheel change they can race with the other "Race Series" type muscle car groups. This allows him to race at "Historic" events like the Festival of Motor Racing and then race with any other non rule controlled modernized race groups such as NZGT or GT1, its the best of both worlds.

You see, when one understands the build cost and all the other related parameters involved in going fast you can soon surmise that sometimes no matter what you build or how much you spend(using you Camaro based vehicle) you just ain't gonna win anyway!! short of building a tube frame GT1 Camaro you will never beat a late model twin turbo Porsche, it just ain't going to happen!! so when you realise that there's no chance of been competitive when the cards are stacked against you, you may as well just build your Camaro to HMC specs and continue to race it where-ever, have FUN and be happy with the results, and then one day when you do come north and slot in HMC for that one event, you'll know you're with like mined people with vehicles all built to a standardised set of rules!! isn't this the "Technical Parity" you're talking about? because technical parity is what HMC is about.

Another excellent example is Invercargill based Rodger Cunninghame's 65 Mustang, he originally built his Mustang as a classic to MSNZ T&C rules except for the aluminium cylinder heads, he changed to cast iron heads to be HMC legal and to race at this years festival, his mustang went no worst but is now 100% HMC and T&C correct. He still continues to race it in all manner of "muscle" groups and events down south without having to feel the need to modify his car beyond these rules!! im sure others will do the same and this will also stop the constant "Money Bleed"!!

Steve's posting really says it all, its individual and personally based, some think HMC is the last place for them and on the other hand we have historic racers coming at us that can't think of a better place to be!! we removed the points, trophy, championship status in HMC to help eliminate those with the competitive need to win at all cost, some people just wanta "bring a gun to a knife fight" and i can tell you its currently working but im sure in the future we'll be tested!! anyway, i don't believe we have too many Muscle car class's, just lots of class's with the word "Muscle" in it, but only one is built around a "Historic" set of rules.

Dale M

Ah! I used to live in this world! Back when I was railroaded into becoming the Group N manager for Queensland. First I had to try and convince the owners to bring the cars out. Then I had to convince the promoters to give us a race, Then I created the group N Queensland cup. Next i got Cams to give us a championship. I think I deserved a medal! lots of egos here. Then we had to deal with the win at all costs guys who would drive into everyone and think that was OK. Then their were the cheats....................... I think I said it once before, I possibly made a mistake creating the Queensland State Championship for group N. I personally loved driving my XY GTHO which was a blast to drive. It was within the rules and we did not develop it any further as no one could beat it around Lakeside. Some of the people who came into this class were the wrong people for historic racing in its pure form.
Alas, I don't think you will ever get everyone to agree. You should remember that many historic types are just people that can afford these neat cars. Ability is not a factor. Then we have the serious guys who are only looking for a class they can do well in. I came to the conclusion once Lakeside closed down, that I could not be bothered anymore. The car sat in my shed for years. I would just like to know that it was there. I loved driving it, loved owning it, made lots of great friends, but...........................................................
Some people try to talk me into returning, but I think that is unlikely at the moment. Best of luck with the rule/class issue. My only advice is enjoy the cars!! If you are not,then get out. There will always be someone in historics that will outspend you.

Well said Steve, I couldn't agree more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kiwiboss

Richie, Murray Brown's 70 Camaro is an excellent example of a person that built or put his car back to HMC specs and with just a wheel change they can race with the other "Race Series" type muscle car groups. This allows him to race at "Historic" events like the Festival of Motor Racing and then race with any other non rule controlled modernized race groups such as NZGT or GT1, its the best of both worlds.


You see, when one understands the build cost and all the other related parameters involved in going fast you can soon surmise that sometimes no matter what you build or how much you spend(using you Camaro based vehicle) you just ain't gonna win anyway!! short of building a tube frame GT1 Camaro you will never beat a late model twin turbo Porsche, it just ain't going to happen!!Dale never mentioned trying to compete against the turbo porsches, not sure where this came from?? so when you realise that there's no chance of been competitive when the cards are stacked against you, you may as well just build your Camaro to HMC specs and continue to race it where-ever, have FUN and be happy with the results, and then one day when you do come north and slot in HMC for that one event, you'll know you're with like mined people with vehicles all built to a standardised set of rules!! isn't this the "Technical Parity" you're talking about?Nope not at all, was talking of technical parity with other classes running in as stated above, TMC ect because technical parity is what HMC is about.

Another excellent example is Invercargill based Rodger Cunninghame's 65 Mustang, he originally built his Mustang as a classic to MSNZ T&C rules except for the aluminium cylinder heads, he changed to cast iron heads to be HMC legal and to race at this years festival, his mustang went no worst but is now 100% HMC and T&C correct. He still continues to race it in all manner of "muscle" groups and events down south without having to feel the need to modify his car beyond these rules!! im sure others will do the same and this will also stop the constant "Money Bleed"!!
Again, was not talking of extremely modified cars, more so small differences such as cylinder heads materials, brakes, tire sizes, light weight panels.

As a matter if interest, if non competitive Historic racing is the goal, and presenting the cars with a period correct look, what does it matter to the modifications that are not visable ( ie painted alloy cylinder heads? just a thought

Steve's posting really says it all, its individual and personally based, some think HMC is the last place for them and on the other hand we have historic racers coming at us that can't think of a better place to be!! we removed the points, trophy, championship status in HMC to help eliminate those with the competitive need to win at all cost, some people just wanta "bring a gun to a knife fight" and i can tell you its currently working but im sure in the future we'll be tested!! anyway, i don't believe we have too many Muscle car class's, just lots of class's with the word "Muscle" in it, but only one is built around a "Historic" set of rules.
As per you statements concerning the definition of "muscle" with respect to HMC, the original question I proposed it not applicable to HMC anyhow?
[COLOR="#0000FF"]I feel you have really missed my original question and perhaps taken this as an attack on HMC rules of which it never was intended to be!



Dale M

---

The question I was putting out there was members involved in all the classes ( yes I appreciate this forum is historic based)if moving to common rules would be a good idea ......... apparently not .....

Richie, No, No, No you are not attacking HMC at all, I understand that!! I mention the turbo Porsches because this is what you’ll have to race with at events like the Skope seen you’re in Christchurch!! they seem to chuck all the V8’s in with anything considered to be fast regardless of any rules!!

As far as components and rules are concerned Richie I believe we in HMC have got it rite, it’s up to the other groups on whether they want to come back to HMC regulations and to find a common ground? I doubt they will. Also its important to have a good balance between parts availability, price, and historic correctness!! You mention Aluminium cylinder heads, the trouble here is the manufacture of an Aluminium head is “vast” with many different options like a non-factory 18 degree chevy head for instance, which would produce more power than an original 23 degree head let alone be lighter, but while a factory correct style cast iron head is still available, and is historically correct and priced reasonable this is the best component to use in the rules and its self-regulating!! Remember we need to keep as close to T&C and Historic Correctness as possible and we have done just that in HMC. The brake calipers is another one, a lot of time went into this!! the idea of everyone in HMC using an original Thunderbird caliper for fords and Corvette calipers for Chevy’s(for instance) wouldn’t be cost effective, so with much research we found Wilwood, JFZ, Serria, Edco Specialty Products, AP all made aftermarket calipers prior to our 12/77 cut of date, and some are still made today so with that knowledge we allowed Wilwood calipers as they are “Historically” correct, inexpensive and readily available. But Wilwood(and others) also build a modern post 78 caliper so to self-regulate we found the historic calipers where all two piece bolt together lug mount design so hence that’s what we require, understand? I know you do Richie as we have discussed this in the past but others don’t.

Anyway, this posting of yours is excellent and I really like Steve Emson’s view point, very well written Steve and you also hit the nail on the head with My only advice is enjoy the cars!! If you are not, then get out. There will always be someone in historics that will outspend you.

Dale M

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kiwiboss

Richie, No, No, No you are not attacking HMC at all, I understand that!! I mention the turbo Porsches because this is what you’ll have to race with at events like the Skope seen you’re in Christchurch!! they seem to chuck all the V8’s in with anything considered to be fast regardless of any rules!!( To True

As far as components and rules are concerned Richie I believe we in HMC have got it rite, it’s up to the other groups on whether they want to come back to HMC regulations and to find a common ground? I doubt they will.I agree, guess what I was saying if all the classes had rules like TCM, which are not that different,( abet the care are way more developed) other classes may pull back to that level if that was the major player in town Also its important to have a good balance between parts availability, price, and historic correctness!! You mention Aluminium cylinder heads, the trouble here is the manufacture of an Aluminium head is “vast” with many different options like a non-factory 18 degree chevy head for instance, which would produce more power than an original 23 degree head let alone be lighter, but while a factory correct style cast iron head is still available, and is historically correct and priced reasonable this is the best component to use in the rules and its self-regulating!!
I kind of see your point, however iron heads are available in 18 14 deg and able to me made to flow as per any of the alloy heads. Really what I was referring to is a rule like Ausie trans am, with a control part, think theirs is a RHS 200 un ported head for chev, and similar for ford. Remember we need to keep as close to T&C and Historic Correctness as possible and we have done just that in HMC. The brake calipers is another one, a lot of time went into this!! the idea of everyone in HMC using an original Thunderbird caliper for fords and Corvette calipers for Chevy’s(for instance) wouldn’t be cost effective, so with much research we found Wilwood, JFZ, Serria, Edco Specialty Products, AP all made aftermarket calipers prior to our 12/77 cut of date, and some are still made today so with that knowledge we allowed Wilwood calipers as they are “Historically” correct, inexpensive and readily available. But Wilwood(and others) also build a modern post 78 caliper so to self-regulate we found the historic calipers where all two piece bolt together lug mount design so hence that’s what we require, understand? I know you do Richie as we have discussed this in the past but others don’t. No real issue with the brake rule, brakes are a good thing.

Personally think a 350cu displacement limit would be a good idea, less torque, cheaper to build than a 406 easy on the drive train component's, but hey that just my opinion

Anyway, this posting of yours is excellent and I really like Steve Emson’s view point, very well written Steve and you also hit the nail on the head with My only advice is enjoy the cars!! If you are not, then get out. There will always be someone in historics that will outspend you.Everyone will spend more than me, and go faster, but that's ok



Dale M

---

Cheers

I kind of see your point, however iron heads are available in 18 14 deg and able to me made to flow as per any of the alloy heads. Really what I was referring to is a rule like Ausie trans am, with a control part, think theirs is a RHS 200 un ported head for chev, and similar for ford.

The rules stipulate “stock valve angle and port spacing” so this elimates all non-factory style aftermarket cylinder heads. Some of the Dart and RHS heads have a high port intake which is also not legal. Ford Racing also do a N351 Windsor cast iron head which has had the valve angle altered making it not legal, I have added this head part number to our Do’s, Don’ts, Rules and Helpful hints page under Rules on the HMC website. I will add others as they come to hand but really I shouldn’t have to.

Personally think a 350cu displacement limit would be a good idea, less torque, cheaper to build than a 406 easy on the drive train component's, but hey that just my opinion

Unfortunately Richie once you start stipulating rules that are outside “period base production saloons” you are “actually” going down the road of a “race series” which is what Australian Trans Am, TCM, CMC and others are!! been “Historic” we are doing our best not to take that route, infact we can’t!! and although a 350CI rule is a great idea we don’t want to eliminate someone wanting to build a 426 Hemi Cuda for instance, and every car has its achilles heel and his would be weight. If I had my way all vehicles would be there correct engine size, no strokers or over bores and we pondered on this for a while but the problem I could see coming as an example no one would build a 65/6 Mustang as they are only 289, everyone would go for a 69/70 Mustang and fit a 351 or up to a 429 engine so it didn’t really fix the problem, so using the 400 SB Chevy engine which was available prior to 78 we decided OK nothing in a small block bigger than this size in any model!! another reason is that stroker crankshafts are actually considerably cheaper than a stock crank, so as you can see still compromises along the way to make it work, adding aluminium heads would have be too much when cast iron is still available .

Everyone will spend more than me, and go faster, but that's ok

wouldn't count on it Richie, there will be those that will spend less, its a 2 way street!! as Steve Emson says you gotta be in it because you luv the car and not how fast it is!! way cool in the pits beats a race win any day and that’s how I’ve been racing my Mustang for 9 years, I still luv it when its parked in the shed.

Dale M