You are quite correct here Holbay developed these and they were quite successful, but they are very different from a YB, which were developed well after the MK1 and Mk11 Escorts used by date.
Roger
Originally Posted by escorthvn
You are quite correct here Holbay developed these and they were quite successful, but they are very different from a YB, which were developed well after the MK1 and Mk11 Escorts used by date.
Roger
Take this as a scenario - which just happens to be fairly near to the truth!
1) A standard 1970's Rover 3500S P6 has a CoD as it conforms in all respects.
2) A standard 1956 MG Magnette has a CoD as it conforms in all respects.
3) The engine in the Magnette fails and the body of the P6 is wrecked in an accident, but combining the two into one car doesn't qualify for CoD or acceptance as a Classic, regardless of the DNA.
However, combining a Mazda Rotary with an Austin Seven using the same analogy could also apply, but if no one would let it run, (or maybe someone would let it run!) then the driver/constructor is out in the cold.
Combining a Gyspy Moth aeroplane engine with a sports Riley however, excites us all and yet when you examine it, it is merely our own perception and philosophy and dare I say it, personal prejudice, that accepts one but not the other.
No one has yet given me a REASON for not accepting a period repowered car into the classic fold. The only statement that has been put up so far is that "it wasn't built in period". That is not, in my humble opinion, a valid reason. It is a personal opinion only. No one has yet come up with a genuine reason as to why it shouldn't run.
Even if the ERC Series and/or the MGCC Series were the only events that accepted the car, that would be my problem, no one elses. Certainly not the commission's problem as to where cars may run, as further down the line, rules are already in place to prevent a Rotary Austin 7 running with us. It is up to meeting organisers/promoters to choose to invite Series cars, or, they have an open grid where they decide who can and can't run. If organisers accepted the Rotary Austin, then they would have to accept any potential backlash from other competitors. Not the Commissions' problem.
I wouldn't expect a repower to be allowed into the current HD Festival meeting for example, as that meeting is currently aimed fairly and squarely at conforming cars, the closer to Schedule K the better. If however, the dollar counts, so instead of inviting the BMW E30s for example, who may not make up a full grid, that grid was offered to the ERC Series (which is highly unlikely!) who might fill the grid, then the organisers would have to accept the series eligibility rules, so it is all self policing at meeting level.
Having a car scrutineered to Schedule A rather than AA doesn't appear to be a major problem, given that scrutineers are there for safety reasons not eligibility reasons anyway. We won't broach the vexed problems of roll cages today though...
Last edited by ERC; 12-13-2012 at 01:45 AM.
The question, Crunch, was quite straight forward ... and relevant ... and nothing to do with the Rally Commission Chairman. Historic & Classic rally cars are COD'd against Schedule RH which is your purview.
A "period modification" as defined in RH requires manufacturers homologation. This was not the case with the YB powered Escort and the COD was incorrectly issued. We have all accepted that the mistake was made, the car exists and that is history.
The question remains whether that has set precedent for future applications and whether that precedent is limited to exact replications of this particular COD or other makes and models similarly modified.
I have particular interest in the answer as I am presently looking to import a car for the 2014 Silver Fern. Given your revelation, that there may be "quite a few cars with COD's that should never have got them", others may be similarly interested in the answer.
Although I am not conversant with this particular car, I think I read in an earlier post by Crunch that indicated that the owner had come up with documentation that an Escort ran with this engine/head in period. If this documentation was incorrect then the basis on which the COD was issued was also incorrect and I would have thought the COD could be accordingly withdrawn. You certainly don't want to perpetuate something that is not correct.
I agree Roger. Although Crunch has also stated that, once issued, a COD cannot be rescinded. Which was the comment that prompted the enquiry as, if a precedent is established, it opens significant floodgates.
You can't have a situation where a COD has been issued in error and despite that it can't be rescinded. A COD is applied for by an applicant who provides information in support of the application to a vetting group. The COD is approved or decline on the basis of the information provided. If it is subsequently found the information provided is wrong (either by error or deliberately) then the basis of issue is flawed and it should be reassessed with the correct information. If this results in the COD being withdrawn then I would think the applicant has no come-back against MSNZ.
It seems totally illogical that an applicant can put in a COD application saying his car has X gearbox (which complies) when all along it had a Y gearbox that didn't comply and then demand the COD stands despite the clear error. It should make no difference whether the "error" was deliberate or a genuine mistake.
The issue, in this particular case, is not the accuracy of the information provided by the applicant, but rather the wrongful interpretation of it's relevance as assessed by the COD issuer.
Now, I absolutely agree. The COD ought be revoked.
However 5 years have passed and the car has changed hands, at least once but possibly more, with the COD no doubt forming a sizeable part of it's value. Perhaps the window of opportunity has gone?
In which case, where does it leave the rest of us?
I am not sure that on its own, a CoD for the majority of cars, adds significantly to the value. In the early years particularly, there were extremes. Some were denied for petty reasons and others slipped through the net. Over the years, the jury is well and truly out as to the real value of the whole CoD system. I also doubt that the average auditor is going to establish or determine the accuracy of the CoD as it stands now, just with a cursory inspection. If the auditor is a marque expert, it is highly unlikely that they are experts on all other marques.
For a genuine single seater or sports racer with history, maybe even a saloon with history, the CoD establishes a degree of provenance, but on its own, doesn't.
For a run of the mill production car such as a VW Golf, or an MGB, I doubt the CoD adds any value at all and is seen by many as no more than a flurry of red tape/paperwork and extra cost, for no real benefit. Once a cage is welded into a classic saloon or GT, the dash modified or rear seat modifed to accommodate it, it is permanently damaged and devalued anyway.
There have been many such cars offered on TradeMe and generally, they fetch a much lower price than an unmolested standard car, even though the owner has spent a thousand or two on safety equipment.
A V8 stuffed into an Escort is obviously not pure, but at least there is no finger pointing and bonnet lifting, which is not always the case with cars presented as standard or period.
At the risk of repeating myself yet again there is no level playing field in classics anyway other than maybe the BMW E30s, which is a control series, so any cars in our series with 300cc or 500cc more than declared, are handicapped according to track performance anyway. They kid no one and therefore there is virtually no finger pointing.
I'm not too sure that documentation like a COD (and a MSNZ log book) doesn't add value in certain circumstances. Not too long ago an un-named high profile person with an un-named car that was an excellent replica of the real thing applied for a log book with a chassis reference belonging to the real car. It was probable that this would have got through the system and a log book would have been issued giving the car an identity which would have been accepted overseas. Fortunately people knowledgeable with respect to this marque got involved and it was eventually issued with a log book that recorded it was not the real thing. Likewise a COD can be used as a "seal of approval" that the car is acceptable for racing in NZ - and this can have a value, especially when there are cars around that for whatever reason are "orphans".
With respect to the matter of cars over the capacity declared, the first question is why didn't they declare the correct capacity? If they have told porkies about capacity what other components aren't true to the declaration? For example, T&C have provision for overcapacity (Groups 1 and 2 provide for a 12.5% increase and Groups 3 and 4 allow a 0.060" overbore). These increases were meant to allow for a re-bore on tired engines but increasingly new engines are built to the increased capacity. I suppose it gets to a position of where you draw the line - today an extra 500cc is OK, tomorrow a sequential gearbox is OK because it looks like a standard gear lever, the next time it may be a supercharger that was never there and then dread of dreads it could be one of Ray's engine transplantsEventually you haven't got a classic or historic car anymore, just something that use to be one.
Bruce
I am told that the information supplied by the owner of the car at the time was correct. There was no interpretation as it was in black & white.
I am also informed this was the second Schedule RH COD issued. Apparently two or three (1st Silver Fern?) years ago when someone raised this whole thing, it was reviewed again and found to be correct.
Any further issues you have with this subject should be addressed to Mike at the MSNZ office.
I think Roger that your points are 100% valid - for an historic race car. A FF or FJ with an increased capacity is obviously a major issue, but with Ford Escorts (aren't they just a brilliant example!!!) in race or rally spec, they can be anything from a cooking 1100cc to 2000cc and way beyond, in all states of tune and head configuration. As they are likely to be sharing the same gravel or tarmac at the same time, it all becomes rather academic.With respect to the matter of cars over the capacity declared, the first question is why didn't they declare the correct capacity? If they have told porkies about capacity what other components aren't true to the declaration?
These increases were meant to allow for a re-bore on tired engines but increasingly new engines are built to the increased capacity. I suppose it gets to a position of where you draw the line - today an extra 500cc is OK, tomorrow a sequential gearbox is OK because it looks like a standard gear lever, the next time it may be a supercharger that was never there and then dread of dreads it could be one of Ray's engine transplants
The idea of sequential gearboxes which I presume were not a period option is a red herring, but superchargers have been bolted on to all manner of cars for 100 years as period options. Under the old book, we had the classic case of "a car must have a cylinder head of the original material". For a BMC B series engine, this was a cast iron siamesed port. On the next page "period modifcations are allowed" so we also had cars with alloy cross flow heads etc.
None of this however answers the repower issue with period parts... I think Crunch is as keen as anyone for this to be discussed openly but apart from a bit of hijacking and a couple of posters, any form of useful discussion for guidance so far, has been a bit thin.
Maybe most people either don't have an opinion or don't care so it does make it difficult to establish a way forward.
Last edited by ERC; 12-13-2012 at 08:23 AM.
You are correct Crunch. The issue is black & white.
Was the Escort homologated with the YB engine? No, it was not. Therefore it is not compliant and should never have been issued a COD.
I am sorry Ray if you think I have hijacked the thread. That was not the intention.
This is a thread about repowered classics and my question is essentially - if the officialdom knowingly (or otherwise) allow the certification of a non compliant car, what impact does that have on others when they are making buying decisions, in respect of such cars?
The question could have and should have been answered when it was raised two pages ago. Crunch's inability and/or unwillingness to acknowledge the issue and answer the question is disappointing yet, sadly, not at all surprising.
No one in their right mind would race the nose heavy Volve B30 engined car, when the better balanced B20 engined car was more suited to track work, so homologation in period is yet another red herring. That effectively rules mine out as getting an FIA Appendix K label, even though it is standard in all except wheels and brakes, because they weren't homologated for racing in period.
Homologation is not the current issue here. Fitting period parts is. So does that include fitting a period engine or not? Is an engine a part of the package?
I have no knowledge of classic racing but I won't let that stop me from having an opinion!
Absolutely yes, cars modified with period parts should have a place in classic racing, how un-Kiwi to think otherwise! We need all types of racing. We need the purists who require homologation before the cover can be changed on the fuse-box - these 'stock' cars are our history, we need to see them and they need to have a class that allows them to be competitive and race with like-minded people. We also need the people that put a period blower on a BDA and cram it in the back of their Hillman imp, who doesn't appreciate looking at a well engineered, tastefully modified race-car? Who doesn't like seeing a Hillman Imp nipping at the heels of a Porsche or maybe showing it a clean pair of heels...? Most of us love the old Sports Sedans/OSCA car, aren't period-mod cars a bridge between that class and the 'pure' classics?
How about a class where period-mods are allowed as long as all the components were available within a set time of the car's manufacture? I'm sure we'd see some great cars put together, maybe some old Sports Sedans modified and brought back into the fold? For the less modified or less highly tuned cars, how about a power to weight ratio rule that would allow them to run in a wider field of classics but not single-marque races? Once the power to weight ratio is broken they go and play with the highly modified cars.
I've only got an old S4 Lotus 7. Nothing anyone would get worked up about if I modified and a type of car subject to a lot of in-period modification. I'd like to think that if I decided to put a 70's-spec rotary in the car, there would be somewhere 'classic' to play. I also think that if I was to put a latest-spec rotary with electronic everything and twin-turbos that I should be out in the cold, running with modern racecars.
Anyway, just an opinion from someone who doesn't know much!
Exactly the sort of response I was hoping for. Thanks Paul.
Historic and Classic racing regulation is something the Australians do so much better than us in New Zealand, which is surprising for the offspring of prostitutes and murders. CAM's have a very strong will to preserve older vehicles as they were and to resist change very strongly - probably the strongest in the world in that regard. Is this correct course of action? You would have to think so, because this is the mandate given to their commission and to the NZ Historic and Classic Commission. In a pure sense the cars should be as they were. If it's an E Type Jag, then it is as original as it can be, taking into account some changes in tyre technology etc.
Taking Pauls account above of how much fun it would be to see an Imp beating a Porsche, if the imp was powered by Lotus Twin Cam and the Porsche by a Chev small block, would any of it have much relevance? Sure it would be exciting and may have been possible in period, but it is of novelty value only, as its not a Hilman Imp racing a Porsche.
Unlike Australia, the NZ scene especially up north is dominated by classic and historic race series. In Australia if your are an 'O' class sportscar, then that is what you race in all over Australia and you know that there are stringent rules that you will race under and every car will comply, be it Perth or Sydney. It is not possible to get NZ to line up with this thinking, so the different series will prevail.
We have a set of regulations in the MSNZ book for Historic and Classic racing that form a framework for H&C racing in NZ, along with the COD system to verify that competing vehicles do in fact meet these regulations. This is workable except for the number of series that spring up not quite adhering to the H&C rules. Just lately we have had the new MX5 series start up with its own set of rules that don't compley with the manual. Why? These cars could have just as easily adhered to the Historic and Classic racing existing rules and ensured an easy absorbtion in the future - now they won't. Same thing with the BMW E30 class, old enough for H&C,but misses out by running a single seat and allowing the glove box to be removed. Why are there four Muscle Car groups? Surely some common ground could be found?
Anyway, I digress from the thread. Ray, the possible modified in period cars could be run as a series if you could get enough of them, but would be outside the MSNZ rules. You would probaly find race meeting promoters that would run a grid of these cars for the novelty value. The concept does appeal to some people who dream of moving outside of the existing boundaries of what Historic and Classic racing is about, just as OSCA does in the South Island. The cars that were modified this way in period, with V8's in Escorts and Cortina's are real Sch K cars and another lot of modern 'recreations' could devalue the original cars.
Putting modern gear in old cars makes them a great club car, but it is not for Historic and Classic racing. Imagine the dissappointment of an old guy wondering up to an MG Magnette and saying to his grandson, "this were great old cars son. I remember taking your grandmother for her first date!" Then "Aaaaah what have they done to the engine, the whole cars wrong, oh my heart!"
Totally agree with this synopsis - keep historic and classic cars as just that - cars that represent "standard" cars of the period with modifications allowed under current regulations. This doesn't mean that there should be no home for re-powered or out of period modified "classics". Although in my mind they can never be a genuine historic or classic car they could find a home somewhere if enough get built and someone puts on events for them. It is probably unlikely that they could race in classic meetings like the upcoming Festival but some clubs could put on a grid for them in their clubmans type meetings?
Ah, and here is the problem. These guys WANT to race with the Classic/Historic brigade, not with some ordinary club meet. There is a perception that the Historic/Classic scene is 'a bit special', like the Denny festival. Not only do these guys want to RACE, they want to be SEEN to race. Mixing and mingling with the 'enthusiasts' at these special meetings carries a bit of cudos, does it not. No club meet that I have ever been to has this feeling of style. Well how can it with a bunch of Evos, Hondas and Toyotas......good as they are for what they are doing.
Time and again on this thread it has been questioned 'where do these guys race'......there are meetings, but the owners arent interested because the admiring public are not there, drooling over there babies.
A different era I'm afraid. Look at the average age of the Classic brigade......oldish!!!!!
Now, as for bolting a supercharger on.....go for it. Note Supercharger NOT Turbo charger. Superchargers have been around since 'Auntie fell off the Tram'. Unfortunately they got a bit of bad press in the old days, as we didnt fully understand what was going on in the combustion chamber......compression ratios. I had Shorrock super charger on my MG TC for a while, and even with the terrible petrol around at the time certainly gave the rather pedestrial TC a bit of get up and go. The TC had as standard a rather low CR so it didnt seem to worry it unduly......and had a lovely sound.
Woops strayed a bit Ray....sorry
I could not agree more, in fact there is a group, including one from the VCC, that have been charged by the H & C Commission to look at the CAMS regulations in Historic racing and try and tie them up with our T & C, to give it more strength, unfortunately another couple of minor events has slowed this down a bit ( Xmas and the Governace review ) but its hoped that this will be back on track very soon, personally, I think if MSNZ had followed this plan, and I hate to note that I think the Aussies got it right, I don't think we would be having a lot of the debates we are now.
Roger
There are a quite a few 'club' cars that should have transitioned into 'classic' racecars. They may have had bolt-on flares and wings etc but they generally had some semblance of the original engine or perhaps a period-repower. Many didn't get the of chance to age gracefully though and have either been wrecked or given totally modern powerplants in order to remain competitive. Personally I think we've missed a trick here, there are a lot of people who would like to see these period racers sliding around the track with their peers. Preserving our local motorsport history and character should be given priority up there with preserving marque heritage. I know classic and historic fields are big right now but history suggests it is much safer to be forward rather than inward-facing.
Anyway, I've said too much for someone that doesn't know terribly much about racing, I've probably made a fool of myself so over and out. Cheers.
Reply With Quote
