NEW Motorsport NZ Historic Commission Strategic Plan(Please be sensible with replies)

This is the new Motorsport NZ Historic Commission Strategic plan endorsed by the MSNZ board which has just been made public.

In recent times it has come to the attention of a number of racers and people alike that historic values in New Zealand motor racing need protecting. The ever increasing availability of modern technology is slowly turning our old racing car fleet into modernised club cars, this is more prevalent in closed bodied saloon and sports cars.

For the last 20 plus years there has been a good set of regulations under Appendix 6 – Historic and Classic, Group 1, 2 and 3 but these are not being properly enforced, protected or promoted by either the H&C Commission, or event organisers. This lack of control understandably has driven some competitors away.

The time has come for all of us to stand up and take notice. There is a need to retain the integrity of our old Classic and Historic fleet rather than have them turn into club cars in the quest for more speed.

The H&C Commission also needs to make sure that event organisers running meetings under the guise of “Classic and Historic” should be doing so to the H&C Commission MSNZ regulations for vehicles built to Schedule T&C and K regulations.

To date the MSNZ H & C Commission has been very receptive to ideas put forward and historically structured class’s such as HMC, HSC, HSS have found the commission very good to deal with and open minded, like us they need our help as well.

Attached is the plan, so please read through and let us know your thoughts, remember in Historic and Classic racing there should be no technology creep, what’s that saying? “As it was, so shall it be”.

Here we go again... There is nothing that hasn't been said before, but I'll put my neck on the block! Shoot me down if you like - I have had 20 years of criticism from some quarters anyway, so another blast won't be any different.

A vocal minority trying to push the majority, regardless?

More funding just to make sure those with a CoD are compliant?

What about the huge amount of income generated by the non-CoD drivers? Are their wishes just going to be ignored? Is anyone going to represent them? The H & C Commission obviously doesn't.

Or, are the powers that be ignoring them (they certainly don't want to support any class that doesn't embrace the CoD concept and philosophy in its current form) that maybe they are deliberately trying to create an "Outlaws" movement within the overall Classic fraternity, who identify with the Classic movement and definitely not the club movement?

Having had a CoD for my main car for 20 years, I can't say that it has made a blind bit of difference either to the ability to race or in any way add even the cost of processing it to the real value of the car.

Most meeting organisers have been financially hit hard when they tried to go 100% CoD and to date, I'm not really sure that despite the honourable intentions, HMC, after several years, thousands of words in support of the pure historic mantra and more publicity than any other classic/historic class, bar none, can be deemed financially successful for any promoter. Even Dale's frustrations for the lack of actual support at meetings has been aired on this board not so long ago, so surely, there must be some concern that the support isn't as strong as some people believe it should be?

Running at just 4 or five events a year, sorry, but HMC has not yet come up with the numbers. Easy enough for anyone who cares to do any research through AMB and just multiply those entries by the $50 MSNZ fee and compare to those other classes that everyone seems to attack, but are adding to the MSNZ coffers every time they race. I know EXACTLY how much we have contributed on race entry fees alone but we appear to be increasingly overlooked and ignored, despite the obvious contribution to not only the coffers but also to the rich fabric of whatever you want to call the meetings to which we are invited.

Thanks to HRC and particularly Chris Watson for the tremendous support over recent years and for guaranteeing a spot on their race programmes. Any moves to try and blunt the success of some meetings by trying to tell promoters who they can and can't invite is not going to be for the overall benefit of the sport. Classes are and will be historically pure or not.

Rising meeting costs are a bigger problem so the long term danger is that historically pure classes will have to combine - or they may not be invited at all. Is that what anyone really wants? Fantastic, pure cars, sidelined because no promoter can afford to invite them? Just be careful because what you wish for may well backfire.

I went through the process of trying to get a COD when they were introduced, as it was proclaimed at the time that in a couple of years you wouldn't be able to race unless you had one. My car ( MGB ) was not a "to the washer" replica of anything the Factory ever raced in period, and I know of none is NZ that are, but quite easily fell within the T&C limits. Eventually I was granted a provisional / temporary / I forget what they called it COD, while they went away and made their mind up on a couple of things MNZ and I couldn't agree on. I never actually got the full complete COD, and I was never ever asked for it at any race meeting, and never denied entry to any meeting because I didn't have one. My brother got one for his car ( Escort ), but again has never been asked for it, and never been denied entry.

To me, the COD seems to be a local version of the FIA HTP papers. I find even those are a joke, as you have MGB's running around in Europe at all the big invitational meetings at Spa, Le Mans, Zandvoort etc, with incorrect and non-period parts on the cars!!!! But, and this is the kicker, in Europe they have more than enough people racing, so they can afford to say "it's our way ( HTP papers ) or the highway", and the meetings ares still full with entries. We don't have that luxury here, we are a much smaller market, with different tastes in cars and different budgets than the Europeans and British.

As Ray said above, what exactly is the incentive to get a COD for a warmed over MGB / Escort / Datsun Z / Alfa / BMW 2002? There are no series for any classic racing in NZ with anything worth writing home about riding on them ( except maybe F5000 ), we're racing for chocolate fish. I understand that some classes like HMC, HSS, F5000 etc need to comply to the letter of the law, as that is the whole basis those classes are founded upon. But for the bulk of competitors and classes, and COD will do nothing except lighten their wallet and put them one step closer to hanging up the helmet because the bureaucracy is getting to much / too hard to deal with / too expensive.

For HMC / HSS / F5000 etc, it shouldn't be too much of a drama, because once the car is built to the rules, there is next to no room to modify / improve the car. Joe Blogs with his MGB / Escort / Datsun and fresh COD wants to go a bit faster so he changes from lever arm to telescopic shocks and puts on a pan-hard rod, now his COD is out of spec. How do you get that changed? However you do I bet it'll involves lots of money flowing to Wellington. What about the next season when he wants to put 15" wheels on the car? Or change the springs? Or change the SU's for a Weber? You're going to end up spending more time ( and money ) updating the COD than you will racing.

It's got to be horses for courses, and this horse isn't suitable for many courses in my mind.

I can't read that flow chart Dale because it's too small, but on the fourth page it says "Even if a vehicle does not conform to it's COD, there is no penalty, and the car can still compete at Historic Meetings". What are we supposed to take away from that line, apart from, "hand over a pile of cash for a worthless piece of paper, and do what you like to your car 'cos we'll let you race anyway". The whole point of the Certificate Of Description is to DESCRIBE the car, if the certificate and the car don't match, what good it the certificate? Might as well use it to wipe up oil off the garage floor.

Lastly, one thing that I have always wondered, who or how do they decide who gets a COD? Say 3 guys, all with the same model of car but in varying states of tune, apply for a COD, who gets it and who has to change their car to comply? To get FIA HTP papers it's simple, download the FIA papers from the FIA website, build your car to them, away you go. Where are the specification papers for COD's? How do I know I can go and build a car and it will get a COD?

Obviously Motorsport NZ have become aware of the fact that there is a good revenue stream to be
taken advantage of with Historic motorsport in NZ, to wheel out this barrowful of dribble

While it may be easy to come up with a bunch of rules for a modern day class for old muscle cars,
who is going to know anything about any of the old Sports Sedans than ran 'back in the day', many
of which probably received modifications to varying degrees, through a given seasons racing, let alone
major rehashes through the off season in readiness for the following seasons running
Which MNZ appointed COD expert is going to be qualified to make a judgement call on a particular car,
or any car for that matter, bearing the above point in mind ?

Good luck Dale, Crunch and the H&C Commission. Of course it is easy to find car types which can never fit into a set of regulations, eg Sports Sedans but for the vast majority of Historic/ Classic classes complying with a sensible set of regulations is neither difficult nor expensive especially compared with constant updating to remain competitive with the latest "hot rod".

Phew! I expected an attack. Not support!!! (The attacks will no doubt come later...) Whilst Howard's car and those similarly pure are a joy, I have never accepted that the field is ever going to be level, given that a pure 7 litre Ford Galaxie or even a pure 2 litre Escort (if there is such a thing) is going to thrash the bejesus out of a pure 998cc Mini Cooper. Updating is not necessarily to be more competitive, but like golf, it is about your own scores/laptimes and a pride in ownership and development.

As JAFA points out, some cars are constantly developed - and still well within the period rules (whatever they may be). Some may want the ultimate expression of a specific make and model, whilst others are content to keep them basically standard and spend a minimal amount on just running them. Parity is therefore never a real issue for those extolling the virtues of participation.

In 1996, Andy Turpin's XJS Jaguar appeared for the first time. 100% standard with auto gearbox. As posted in my pics thread, the car today (now owned by Derek Moore) looks and is totally different - and probably still 100% legal. Was Andy expected to cough up every month for an updated CoD as the car was develop?

Despite the barbed criticism of so called hot rods, few have ever stood up and named those cars and even then, the criticism may be aimed at just a couple of cars. Unless they are prepared to point the finger at specific cars, I'm happy to be blissfully unaware and let the drivers within a series decide if any car shouldn't be there. Why complicate matters with an excessive control and audit mechanism just to justify a stance?

Classic racing and historic racing is now just about 90% series based anyway, so there are places for the purists and places for the pragmatists, so I personally don't see a problem. For me, it is still about driving standards, camaraderie and variety and always will be.

Pragmatists just let people get on with enjoying their hobby sport whilst the purists seem hell bent on trying to change everyone's thinking to their own. Good luck with that.

I think Ray has written one sentence that should be the control "let the drivers within a series decide if any car shouldn't be there".
As far as I can remember back, into the mid 60s every single time that the controlling body has taken a stand we have seen fewer cars and drivers.
As someone who will never take part at the level being talked about, but watch with interest, the F5000, and sorry Dale your group too, are so far away from "how they were" that I find them a disappointment, and I know from talking to owners and drivers, that the continuing development is hurting the fields. So as not to offend, what sort of HP did a 5000 back then, titanium components, a manufacturer advertising that they have supplied carbon wings and such, ever faster laptimes... These, the lap times don't come down by seconds a season from just being a better driver. Just ask Steve Ross, he has said he has spent too much, and now can't stay on the pace. A midfield 5000 at the McLaren Festival, would now be right at the back, and by some margin, still same (actually faster) laptimes, but the car is pure, just as it was "in the day". Probably won't come out again!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bailey

Obviously Motorsport NZ have become aware of the fact that there is a good revenue stream to be
taken advantage of with Historic motorsport in NZ, to wheel out this barrowful of dribble

While it may be easy to come up with a bunch of rules for a modern day class for old muscle cars,
who is going to know anything about any of the old Sports Sedans than ran 'back in the day', many
of which probably received modifications to varying degrees, through a given seasons racing, let alone
major rehashes through the off season in readiness for the following seasons running
Which MNZ appointed COD expert is going to be qualified to make a judgement call on a particular car,
or any car for that matter, bearing the above point in mind ?

---

Thanks for your balanced input Bailey
Just to answer a few of your questions with facts

1. There is no new revenue stream for MSNZ in this. It is actually a continuation of the current COD system that's been around since the 90's
2. Old classes such as Sports Sedans as you mention; all run to a set of regs. These are on the MSNZ database and are whats used to determine if a vehicle meets the requirements. When that car has run in difeerent configurations under different sets of rules, then the COD owner picks a period that the car represents.
3.The COD panel makes it's decisions based on point 2 above and regularly seeks input fro people with expertise in certain areas, or with certain vehicles.
4. Hope your day gets happier!

4

Hi Ray

Note that the plan is for Historic cars; therefore Schedule K. It is about protecting the vehicles that are still accurate to history. Schedule T&C and the like come loosely under "Classic", and that is different again. So this isn't about the whole of H&C racing...hence the capitals in the title for HISTORIC

Fair call Crunch, which really resolves the issue doesn't it. CoD's for Historic cars = a big fat yes. But for Classics?

As we have discussed many times before, T & C = quite rightly, "Thoroughbred and Classic", which should not be confused with Historic, but the Commission is named "Historic & Classic" and therein lies the major problem. Quite simply, a Historic is also by definition a Classic, but the reverse is not always the case.

Part of the antipathy towards the CoD has always been that many have believed, rightly or wrongly that it was overkill and the perception has probably been that maybe the commission have been fixated on the Historic? Happy to be corrected Crunch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crunch

Thanks for your balanced input Bailey
Just to answer a few of your questions with facts

1. There is no new revenue stream for MSNZ in this. It is actually a continuation of the current COD system that's been around since the 90's
2. Old classes such as Sports Sedans as you mention; all run to a set of regs. These are on the MSNZ database and are whats used to determine if a vehicle meets the requirements. When that car has run in difeerent configurations under different sets of rules, then the COD owner picks a period that the car represents.
3.The COD panel makes it's decisions based on point 2 above and regularly seeks input fro people with expertise in certain areas, or with certain vehicles.
4. Hope your day gets happier!

4

---

Oh; and number 5 Bailey...
If you read the detail MSNZ is looking at actually giving you some money back via a cheaper HISTORIC race licence and HISTORIC RACE PERMIT.
Is it still dribble?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ERC

Phew! I expected an attack. Not support!!! (The attacks will no doubt come later...) Whilst Howard's car and those similarly pure are a joy, I have never accepted that the field is ever going to be level, given that a pure 7 litre Ford Galaxie or even a pure 2 litre Escort (if there is such a thing) is going to thrash the bejesus out of a pure 998cc Mini Cooper. Updating is not necessarily to be more competitive, but like golf, it is about your own scores/laptimes and a pride in ownership and development.

As JAFA points out, some cars are constantly developed - and still well within the period rules (whatever they may be). Some may want the ultimate expression of a specific make and model, whilst others are content to keep them basically standard and spend a minimal amount on just running them. Parity is therefore never a real issue for those extolling the virtues of participation.

In 1996, Andy Turpin's XJS Jaguar appeared for the first time. 100% standard with auto gearbox. As posted in my pics thread, the car today (now owned by Derek Moore) looks and is totally different - and probably still 100% legal. Was Andy expected to cough up every month for an updated CoD as the car was develop?

Despite the barbed criticism of so called hot rods, few have ever stood up and named those cars and even then, the criticism may be aimed at just a couple of cars. Unless they are prepared to point the finger at specific cars, I'm happy to be blissfully unaware and let the drivers within a series decide if any car shouldn't be there. Why complicate matters with an excessive control and audit mechanism just to justify a stance?

Classic racing and historic racing is now just about 90% series based anyway, so there are places for the purists and places for the pragmatists, so I personally don't see a problem. For me, it is still about driving standards, camaraderie and variety and always will be.

Pragmatists just let people get on with enjoying their hobby sport whilst the purists seem hell bent on trying to change everyone's thinking to their own. Good luck with that.

---

Ray; this is not an attack on your race series. I'm sure I have repeated that time and time again over the many discussions we have had about the COD process. Your race series obviously provides a place where people want to play...fantastic! This is not about regulating what is essentially a clubmans racing field, it's about protecting real history.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crunch

Oh; and number 5 Bailey...
If you read the detail MSNZ is looking at actually giving you some money back via a cheaper HISTORIC race licence and HISTORIC RACE PERMIT.
Is it still dribble?

---

Interesting reply Mr Crunch Could it be that these meeting fees charged are simply too excessive to start
with ?

Also, might you please take the time to explain a little about the 'Trans Tasman Visa' fee ? Initially when
some of us first became aware of it's requirement, it's charge was $40.00 This soon became $250.00,
but if one carried an International H license, which only cost about $10.00 more than the common national
race license, the visa charge reverted back to the original $40.00 Within a very short time the cost of the
International H license near doubled, maybe to take care of that loophole, possibly ?

Interestingly though, one competitor, who does post on this forum on occasion, took the time to study
the MNZ rule requirements in regards to the Trans Tasman Visa, and discovered it wasn't actually a
requirement for the historic racing community, but many people seem to have been mislead over the
whole situation Maybe you could enlighten myself and several others that I know who have found
themselves in uncomfortable situations re this visa, namely at documentation time in another country ?