I do agree with Ray and NZeder re exterior trim. Chrome work and bumpers are at times, dependent on the car, difficult to replace. Along with the rare cars which were plentiful once now are hardly ever seen.
I do agree with Ray and NZeder re exterior trim. Chrome work and bumpers are at times, dependent on the car, difficult to replace. Along with the rare cars which were plentiful once now are hardly ever seen.
Last edited by Spgeti; 01-09-2014 at 06:45 AM.
So true - that is why I love classic racing - different makes/models from different countries all have a good blast on the track.Originally Posted by ERC
Rules do change seen the T&C rules change - once alternate materials were permitted if originals were rare/NLA then changed to read only factory spec body work...now changed again to allow alternate materials via approval from the H&C Commission. If someone is taking a long time to build a car like me (and it was 1/2 complete went I got it and that took 8 years to get to that point and I have had it for 2 years now) if I was going to T&C under those 2009-2012 era then I might have installed fiber glass panels only to come out the other side and find they were illegal....no legal again if approved via the Commission.
Update: Thinking about how the rules change over time this is why the CoD exist - is it not?
Last edited by nzeder; 01-09-2014 at 10:04 AM.
This is not a compulsory situation now.
Q: Can we classify "period modifications"?
Example - 1945 car, 1965 engine. By general agreement, that is then classified as a 1965 car, being the date of the latest major component. However, if we are running a series for pre 1977 cars, does 'period' then include items available pre 1977?
Hi ERC. the "period modification" pertains to the period of that particular car, not the T&C period end date. So a 1968 car can have proven "period modifications" applicable to 1968, not to the end of T & C group classification, which is ten years later at 31/12/1977.
This is just my quick take on all this!! We need to drop COD’s and T&C for modified Saloons, get rid of it completely. For anything that is a Saloon car it pretty much had a class or category to race in from 1960 upwards to 12/1977(FIA change in technology) in just about every country and mostly under FIA rules. Now different country’s ran their own class’s at the time, this mostly depended on their economies or import rules of each country!! after all from 1960 to 67 we had our fabulous All-Comers class then Group 2 FIA Saloons then group 5 and onwards and mostly they ran together as one class was phased out and the other bought in. For the real cars we need to recognise each of these, and the groups they ran in for “our own” country, not overseas as this is our own history! Remember im talking only the real cars here, EG: the real Fahey bread van Anglia should be recognised as the actual car and given the paperwork for the category it raced in at the time.
From here this is what we should do, all old original New Zealand race cars(not recent or other made up ones) no matter what should be categorized to the “actual” Motorsport NZ race series rules they ran in back in the day as I mention above, EG: A real “Shell Sport” Datsun that is rebuilt today should be restored accurately to that period and to those rules used with no modern parts fitted because after all “this is the real car”, now if someone built a Shell Sport car say 10 years later/or builds one today and fits modern parts then it is a “replica” and should not be recognised as real, it’s really just a club car. BUT, if he rebuilt it 100% to the old Shell Sport rules and is accurate in every way it should be categorized as a Schedule K car and carry the necessary paperwork to say so even though it isn’t a real car that raced in the day. The real cars should be Logbook to show that they are infact the REAL ones.
OK, that’s sort of covered the real and schedule K cars. For person wanting to build an old car today every single vehicle(mostly) needs its own rules and class to fit into as done overseas and should only be given a “logbook” to race when its passed tech inspection for each class its built for. Now, I know Ray(ERC)(god bless him) will come back to me and say what about a “Izetta thingame bob” that raced in Russia in 1961 because I want to build one, well I say sorry as there is enough makes and models or mainstream cars to satisfy most all and not every car can be catered for, it’s just the way life is. The aussies solved this by saying it must have raced in Australian only back in period, maybe we can use the same but as raced in NZ, Australia, USA, England period?
Now some of you will go holy shit but it is easy as the Aussies have done this for 30 years, Historic Saloons Group Na, Nb, Nc, SC(Sports cars) a & b and so on based on engine capacity and year, this way one can choose his weapon of choice, look up the rules(as the Aussies do on the CAMS historic and Classic website) go ahead and build an old race car using those rules, same as SVRA and VARA in the USA as Nezder has mentioned, and then you know you will be up against similar cars and not later built hot-rod type vehicles with modern components fitted and other cheater type cars because to start with they won’t get a category Logbook hence can’t race, problem solved.
Now this is just a broad prospective what I mention above and I could go on for ever and in great detail but I have to earn a living(don’t yar hate that) but this will require lots of behind the scenes work and won’t be perfect!! but we can learn by what the Aussies and other countries have done and make it better, why reinvent the wheel? EG: if one particular car you can’t get certain parts a rule can be made to as for its replacement for that “one” vehicle, can’t get original bumpers for a 1961 Mini we can allow fibreglass for instance). But if you all just want keep racing against over modified or cheater vehicles(EG: Escorts with YB engines or even just Forrest flares) then don’t whinge to the organisers or the commission if YOU won’t put your hand up and help or do something about it, put your ideas up here on the forum and lobby the shit out the H&C commission for instance(there you go Crunch, more work, LOL) and last of all none of this will work unless there are MSNZ H&C tech inspectors at events to keep check of the fleet, that’s important.
Also I don’t buy into the “I can’t afford this or that” as people will spend what they value to themselves so choose your weapon of choice, don’t choose an odd ball car that you can’t get parts for and turn around to the commission and argue for a rule change because you can’t get this or that or its too expensive, that’s only thinking about yourself. I’ve seen cars hand built from a “skid-mark” at untold expense because that’s what the owner wanted to do so anything can be done, evaluate your own financial position first and use common sense please.
Dale Mathers
Last edited by Kiwiboss; 01-10-2014 at 04:10 AM.
"Period modifications" is such an open term, unless defined. Interpretations are like opinions, everyone has one and will argue endlessly about what it means (usually for their own ends).
Dale has very valid discussion in post #26.
In my opinion there are a lot of things that need to be nailed down, cars claiming to represent something should do so, warts and all. An example; If the brakes are inadequate compared to cars they wish to run with, well guess what, that is what the driver coped with "in the day". I do not believe upgrading brakes to be a safety issue, it is a performance modification allowing you to go deeper before braking, ergo faster lap times. If you get fade, tough, that's how it was. Suck it up.
How does this relate to log book or whatever documents the car has/needs? It is declared, and checked from time to time at an audit.
Im gonna have to make an appointment with my doctor ( I hate that ), WHY, because I actually agree with 99% of what Dale has suggested.
Seriously the idea of having scruitineers/inspectors on the ground who actually really check stuff, both from a safety & eligibility point of view is long overdue, rather than do it on a MSNZ steward/fines etc basis, how about a 'scaled pink sticker' type setup with limited time to correct issues.
Hi ray, I have tried to get and paid for, I might add, a c.o.d for a classic ff, there is alot of stuff, e.g block no, head, tyres, etc, also a section on history.as this car won the 1988 goldstar hillclimb championship, and is quoted in the manz book of winners, I thought that would have been suffice, but no more papers sent back to the point I have given up.too much crap involved, and anyways I guarantee half the ffs I have raced against arent your standard 711m crossflow engine, so what exactly is the point of a c.o.d?
And that's precisely why HMC have 2 Auditors. JacMac, have refrained from making a Dr's appointment as what Dale has posted is the fundamental basis for HMC.
Cheers Dave Graham
WOW, would love to get back into the sport but after reading the above its enough to put you off.Spend time building up a car to your best knowledge and then have it rejected [!!!!!!!], why would you bother,then after you have saved up and bought a racecar to have it knocked back for some simple thing like brakes. Once raced a Bugeye Sprite fitted with a supercharger and running MG Midget disc brakes on the front........now it seems it would spend its time in the paddock arguing with officials.Where has the simple racing gone,wasent it the idea just to go out and enjoy the racing,winning although nice was not the that important.It seems to me that a small band of wantabe racers have spoilt it for others.A lot of these types are newbies and never did any motorsport back in the dim darks and now want to prove they are faster than the original owners of the cars they have recreated and over improved.
Ross, you hit the nail fair and square on the head!!!
Firstly I’ll say I’m not terribly up with the play with intricacies of COD’s etc, as they were just starting to come in when I stopped racing. My brother has one for his car though.
I did started applying for one, but they told me I couldn’t have this part and that part, and some other things would need changing before they would give me a COD because some parts weren’t available in the year of my car ( despite them being in the Factory racing parts book ! ). The guy I bought the car from had raced it this way for a number of seasons, and I had also raced it for a season in the same spec, so to be told all of a sudden I have to change this that and the other in order to get a piece of paper that half the organisers say is optional anyway, seemed to be to be a huge waste of time and money for me. I didn’t bother changing anything, didn’t get a COD, and continued racing for a year before I went overseas.
I can semi understand what it’s trying to achieve, but I also feel it is a local version of an FIA Certificate. An NZ COD wouldn’t be recognized outside of NZ, but an FIA certificate will get me into all sorts of events the world over if I wanted to go that route. So when I can race here without a COD, why would I bother getting one? My car is not to FIA spec, because FIA spec is virtually stock standard and renders the car a mobile chicane for NZ domestic H&C racing, but it is built in the spirit of H&C racing ( no sequential / EFI / Wilwoods etc ) using period available parts, so unless it becomes worth while ( ie I can’t race anywhere without it ) I won’t be getting a COD. The next thing is if I do get a COD and then want to change something, and lets face it who doesn’t tune and tweak their race car over the years, the COD will be void and I’ll have to cough up more dollars for a change / amendment etc.
The race orgainsers by and large have cars in the correct groups according to car spec, most people know and are open about how far they have “hot-rodded” their car and know which groups will and won’t accept them, and as it has nothing to do with safety ( it’s not a logbook to be signed off every 3 meetings ), to me it seems to be a lot of work and money for basically no benefit.
Nzeder makes a very good point about the process of building your car, then applying for a COD and getting turned down because it doesn’t meet the rules. I agree that there should be an easily accessible spec list for each car that you can build your car to, and know that if you build it to the letter you’ll get the COD, but if you stray from it expect problems. As I understand it FIA Homologation papers aren’t cheap ( from memory when I looked into it years ago ) so maybe something else needs to be organized to get the specs to people building cars, or it could be included in the cost of the COD. You pay a fee and get the COD application and build papers for XYZ car, then you build your car to the specs, get it signed off by a MNZ approved inspector as being to the spec, then the COD gets issued and away you go. If you don’t like the specs or want to build something better / faster / different, then do you take your chances that the race organisers will continue to say the COD is optional?
There are the standard 10 – 15 cars ( saloons and GT’s ) you would consider if you want to have a decent go at H&C racing – Escorts / Capris / Alfas / MGB’s / Mini’s / Jaguars / Mustangs / Camaros / Falcons / BMW/s you get the idea. As it stands, they are all built a little differently, yet they all achieve roughly the same lap times but they achieve it in different ways. If everybody is forced to build their cars to the letter in order to get a COD, then it’s going to get boring watching 15 identical Escorts circulating at the front, then 5 Capris, then a gap back to 10 Alfa’s, and finally 8 MGB’s bringing up the rear, where no one can out brake or out accelerate anyone because they’re all the same. It’ll be as much fun as watching HQ’s / Suzuki Swifts / you other favourite one make series.
Here’s another one for you to consider. This article has just popped up on a forum I frequent http://www.britishracecar.com/DavidR...lks-MG-MGB.htm This car has an FIA certificate because it has to in order to run in the Ecurie GTS series ( series is for pre 66 FIA cert’ed cars ). So it would be fair for one would assume it is to the letter of the FIA book 100% in order to get that FIA certificate, much the same as if a car has an NZ COD, you could pretty fairly expect it to conform 100% to that set of rules ie this is how it was / would have been built back in 1965 ( or whatever year ). Now look at the car, it is immaculate!!!!!! BUT, not correct. The car has an FIA certificate certifying it as a 1965 car, yet it has 1966 onwards doors / door handles / door locks and catches ( they are push button handles and antiburst catches, 1965 should have pull handle and no antiburst catches ), an alternator ( available October 1967 onwards, should have a generator ), electronic ignition ( electronic not available in MGB until mid – late 1970’s, should be points ), a 4 synchromesh gearbox ( available October 1967 onwards, should be 3 synchromesh and non synchro first gear gearbox ), spin-on oil filter ( available October 1967 onwards, should be a cartridge filter ), gear reduction starter motor ( never available on MGB ), silicon radiator and oil cooler hoses ( never available on MGB ), Parabolic leaf springs ( never available ), and the bodyshell is a BMH repro based on a 1974 model with an pre 1968 transmission tunnel grafted in which means the engine bay sheetmetal is wrong for a 1965 model.
FIA is supposed to be the strictest as far as car spec goes, they are the world governing body, an MGB ( for example ) with an FIA certificate will sell for a fair bit more than one without the certificate because the certificate means ( supposedly ) that you are getting something built to XYZ rules and passed as being true and correct, and you know you can take it to Classic Le Mans, Goodwood, Retromobile etc etc. Most of the mods on the car you could argue don't give it a performance advantage, but the whole idea of an FIA certificate ( and a COD as I understand it ) is that the car represents a particular period in time, and this car doesn't because it has later, and aftermarket, bits on it. If the Black MGB is what people are getting away with at high profile FIA events in the UK and Europe, please forgive me for thinking we’re not going to get far with COD’s here.
I’m an MGB anorak, so that was a very easy car for me to pick to bits, but I’m sure Dale can do it for Mustangs, and others can do it for cars they are familiar with.
For me, the classic scene in NZ ( Auckland at least anyway ) and the way the cars are built and run is not out of control or over the top. There is the odd car that I think shouldn’t be allowed to run at H&C meetings because it is nothing like a classic any more ( the Metalman Escort ), but overall I don’t see too much wrong with what we have, and I don’t really see how COD’s is going to improve the racing of the standard / quality / presentation of the cars. I’d rather see nice cars racing closely and fairly ( no bashing and barging ) and know that some of them are not 100% period, than see a grid of cars tootling around unable to pass anyone because they’re all identical but they all meet the rules 100%. When the grandstands are overflowing with spectators paying $50 a head to watch, then we can start getting a bit more picky about the spec of the cars, but until then we’re only racing for the fun of it, and the winner of the best series gets a chocolate fish!! Good on ‘ya Ray, keep up the good work!!
PS: I can’t wait to come back home for good and start racing again.
Oh how true.
Just go and race.
The big money bunch will get fedup without competition. let the real racing start.
Much like am the Datsun Z anorak of NZ
Having read today's posts over a late lunch I think JAFA has summed it all up nicely - we can all bang on for ages about this and that, but we need this or that - and as pointed out even the FIA get it wrong - I have heard of another similar issue but with a limited formula type car that has HTP for 1968 when the car in question was not designed until 1969 - how does that happen.
I also agree with Dale that NZ Specials and NZ racing history needs to represented, so there needs to be a way of recognizing the real car from a later recreation (even if 100% accurate) - if the real car is dead - it is dead Jim so no car should lay claim to the original ID even if made from some of the original parts - look at it this way if you had a factory works MGB with all the special works parts if the special body was destroyed (assuming the body was special with different gauge sheet metal as some manufactured did) if you install all the remaining parts into a new/replacement standard shell could you still call it a Works MGB? No - it is not as it was, it is different, close by not as it was.
Slight thread hi-jack here but I need to rant a little about this as it is bit of pet peeve .......
Why do so many keep banging on the about Saloons when the FIA never refer to the production based cars as Saloons - they are in their terms are "Series-Production Touring Cars", "Special Touring Cars" aka the modified Series-Production Touring Cars", "Series-Production Grand Tourning Cars" and "Special Grand Touring Cars"
The term Saloon automatically excludes so many cars from a grid that were including in period on track all over the world, Ferrari's, MG Midget, Lotus, Datsun Z and 2000 Roadster, Austin Healeys, Bugeye Sprites, Triumphs TR4,5,6 and 7, Corvettes all great cars in the their own right. They raced in the 60 and 70 - even 80's on the same tracks and grids as the Saloons (maybe in a different category/class but the same grid).
If people want to play the "as it was, as it should be" card then don't exclude great cars from a grid of 70's cars because they are not Saloons.
From the research I have done (quickly in the last 10 minutes) even the NZ Sport Sedans rules were loosely based on the FIA Group 5 rules which, in fact the earlier version of Group 5, were for two seater cars only.
Right rant over back on track
Yes I am a newbee and never did any racing in the 70's (the era that I am interested in) and I agree there is a lot work that needs to be done before a car is "fit for the rules" aka mine is 2 years and counting + waiting for me
1. Save the $$ to purchase parts
2. Slack owner going to the track to watch others race and not be at home working on his own car in the weekend.
I don't want to win races - ok not win the race but the race within a race - you know have a good dice with others in different makes/models then have a good laugh/chat after the race with the guys you were dicing with
I just want to race a classic car not a modern car. And classic racing has these rules - so follow them I must. I did not set them, I just read the rules in which a car must run - right or wrong. Rules will cause issues and there will always be a difference of opinions.
Last edited by nzeder; 01-10-2014 at 04:19 AM.
What do you mean "put you off" Ross? this is exactly the idea of this forum posting, "sorting out historic saloon car issues"(Touring Cars Nezder) if you spent time and money building a car to the said rules as i mention in post 26, ask questions, have tech guys check if your unsure, your car won't be rejected, how can it be? and it certainly wont be at the track!! and if you "bought" a race car surely you'd check what class it fits first before you handed over any dosh, wouldn't you? hell i would.
You see, it is simple and there's no arguing with officials if your vehicle is built historically correct to class rules and that is pretty simple to me but i can see that your supercharged Bugeye Sprite running MG disc is EXACTLY the problem we have "its a cheater car" and because you thought it was OK to build it to benefit from the added technology(as Oldfart mentions in post 27) you've just forced others to do the same and this is exactly the current problem we have with NZ old car racing(i hate the word Classic as everything is a classic these days, i call it Historic or old car), the next guy will then build a Rover V8 powered Bugeye Sprite with bigger mono block brakes so he can beat you as he see's you doing just that and on and on it goes around in a vicious circle until those with the proper cars stay away and the field eventually explodes, or as happens in most case's you just get "out spent" by those that are prepared to do what it takes.
So all this is nothing to do with a small band of wanta be racers or those from the dim dark ages of motorsport, there is currently a HUGE world wide interest in old car(Historic or Vintage for the Yanks) racing because most see it as an affordable sport and hobby and even young people are intested and one can do it at a leisure, and you don't have to be a professional racer!! you see "Historic" motorsport should be no different than someone playing golf or going fishing this weekend but unfortunately we do need rules on vehicle eligibility which we currently do have under T&C and Schedule K its just a bit difficult to understand, and nothing is enforced or checked at this level which is what must change.
Jacmac, maaaate i had to go to the Doc today as well, damn fell outta my chair after reading your post, put me bloody back out, LOL!! but no, seriously were all human and i enjoy difference of opinion and the cheerful banter, it goes to show we're generally all on the same wave lenght and are trying to achieve a better level in our choosen hobby, long may it continue.
Gerald, yeah 800HP figgen in my dreams!!!!! those Aussie just didn't like that i had a handle on them, LOL
Dale M
Last edited by Kiwiboss; 01-10-2014 at 08:44 AM.
Question for the H&C commission members given that is what this thread is about.
Is it possible for a single car to have 2 CoDs?
Example car is setup to run x brakes and x parts for under schedule k grids. Then another CoD with y brakes and y parts for a t&c grid.
Last edited by nzeder; 01-10-2014 at 09:43 AM.
Paul ring me about that, I don't think that this has past our eyes, I would have noticed it, and don't remember it being turned down.
Roger
No, and why would you bother, What happens in real life is that often both will run in the same grid, its a numbers game, you have to have so many in each grid, but the CoD reflects what that car is, or you could go to a HTP if you really want to hit the high notes.
Roger
Kiwiboss,sorry dont know who you actually are but would like to reply to your reply. At the time the little Sprite was raced with a group of people who did not much care about COD compliance,as long as you turned up and had a good time and the car is within the period so to speak,a chocolate fish was the prize and that might be for last place ! I consider that the parts on the car were for my enjoyment and others,when the bonnet was lifted and folks saw a shorrock supercharger [including fellow competitors]they were more interested in seeing the technology used than have it sitting in a box on the shelf.The discs brakes were from a car 1 year difference to the last build date of the Sprite.Hell, I only raced it a couple of times for fun !!
Maybe we should take note of the growing trend of VCC racing,they have a range of cars in various forms ie the Gypsy Riley and numerous austin sevens,bucklers etc running a range of different engines etc to my knowledge they just have a good time and certainly provide entertainment to the crowd.
Ross H
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
