Thanks for that, you're right, it does soon add up! I talked to one of the English FJ drivers at Teretonga (the pea green Lotus 22 in my photos) and he was enthusing about all the racing - he'd done the 6 week tour and reckoned the car would need a rebuild by the time he got back to the UKOriginally Posted by Racer Rog
I was in Aussie about five yrs back with Martin racing a FF ,they all were using a Ford {Focus??/} cost $12,000, the FF outfit brought them 5 at atime and made sure they all the same,they were unbreakable and ran for 3yrs without touching,.The old brigaade wanted to keep the Kent for obvious reasons..
The MSNZ Manual on this issue is not entirely clear but the way it seems to read is that the exemption to be able to use a roll bar that meets or exceeds the specification of a period roll bar is restricted to "... Schedule K Period Classifications A, B, C and S vehicles constructed prior to 1 January 1960 ...". Note that this date is in conflict with the date in Chart 4.4(3) which states "... constructed pre 31 December 1960 ...". I think the December date is the correct date.
Under this section it appears that the SID 3 could not utilise this roll bar exception unless it was built (in its current form) before 31 December 1960.
The Manual (under Schedule K) then goes on to say " ... Where fitted, safety structures shall be homologated under Appendix Two Schedule A (vehicles manufactured on or after 1 January 1978) or approved under ... Schedule AA (vehicles manufactured prior to 1 January 1978) for all vehicles, except single seater and sports racing cars, with a MSNZ vehicle logbook issued before 1 September 2010 and ... Period Classifications A, B, C and S vehicles constructed pre 31 December 1960 ........ All vehicles ... other than those exceptions specified above shall have a MSNZ certificate contained within the vehicle's logbook ...". (underlining and some punctuation added)
From this, does it seem the SID 3 as a sports racing car constructed after 31 December 1960?? is meant to have a roll bar homologated under Schedule A and the appropriate certificate contained in the logbook?
I've read the section of the Manual so many times I'm starting to get confused - have a look at the Manual at page 501 and try and work out what it means.
Last edited by RogerH; 03-05-2013 at 11:52 AM.
Hi Crunch,
Thanks for responding to the gripes (not grips) of a bitter old man who had drunk too much bitter prior to writing.
You're correct, FF does need a kick start! maybe Formula Honda as has been suggested but you also have to look at how the FF regulations have been tampered with over the years, in some cases to accomodate competitors who have bottomless bank accounts and who can afford to assist MSNZ officials in ways that disadvantage less wealthy competitors.
Having said that, I also take on board that MSNZ are not solely responsible for the state of FF but MSNZ has most certainly contributed to the state of FF racing today. One only needs to look for comparison to F.Vee or Formula First as it's now known.
From an enthusiasts point of view, MSNZ looks to be top heavy with people who don't value the sport sufficiently well to do a good job. I exclude yourself from this rather sweeping statement but nevertheless, I believe this to be true. Too many small minded chaps in influential jobs. Recent history proves that I'm correct in making this statement.
Good luck to you Crunch. You come across as a genuine, level headed fellow but have you ever thought that you might be the only one?
Regards,
Russ Cunningham
The saga drags on... I'll post more details shortly, when I have had time to cool off, otherwise I may write something I may later regret.
Suffice to say that we are just going around in circles and I am now no nearer getting the car on the road than I was when I was told that the cage wouldn't be passed by MSNZ. Meanwhile, another two months has now elapsed and absolutely zero progress.
If anyone wants to buy the most expensive MG Magnette in the World, send me a PM. I suggest you then insure it; set fire to it; (carefully); get it written off; claim off the insurance; buy it back and put in a 44mm hoop to current specs (you may have to cut off the roof to do it, but the roof will need repainting anyway), because at the rate we are progressing, I'll be too decrepid to ever get any fun out of it.
The cars I referred to as having to be recomplianced were Warren Goods Super Tourer, that ran in Europe comlpianced by the FIA, 2 cars brought in by Mike Delmont, they had to be recomlianced. Andrew Buist had to spend in the vicinity of $6,000.00 to finally get his car legal in NZ,the Listerine car also had to go through the recompliance process. Gary Wilkinson had to have his Opal go through the process as did Bruce Miles when he brought in his BMW from Hong Kong, which has loads of European history.
All these cars ran in FIA sanctioned Series in Europe and were compliant under FIA regulations in Europe, it was only when here in New Zealand that officialdom deemed them not to comply.
This is only a small number of examples that have had to have thousands of dollars spent unecessarally because of small minded officialdom going out of their way to make things as difficult as possible, ego's are very costly things when they are part of an idiots makeup. It is also a known fact that these type of people are attracted to positions within Government departments and organisations that have a controling influence over their captive participants. Like I said in an earlier posting,"little Hitlers"
Each and every person I have spoken to regarding the whole situation with MSNZ, all are of the opinion that the only thing Julian Leitch deserves, is a bullet.
I have brought in 2 E30 M3 DTM cars. The first one was 6 years ago and didnt have a log book, but was not too much of a problem to have the cage inspected and certified. The second car had a log book with it which was submitted to MSNZ along with a copy of the homoligation papers for the cage, and the completed MSNZ logbook was returned in under 2 weeks. The cars mentioned above did not have logbooks with them, and the cages were of a later double hoop design. Part of the trouble was that MZNZ would not accept that the Listerene car was genuine, it could have been a fake. One look at the car gave a good indication that it was the genuine article
It is Leach, not Leitch...
I'm afraid I do not join the personal abuse bandwagon, but any comments I make are regarding the position held, the authority, the power and the ability to either construct road blocks or remove them. At no time do I ever attack people personally, though I am now being accused of creating problems by raising the issues in public. (Shoot the messenger, never mind the message.)
What this (and other message boards) can do, is bring issues out into the public arena for information, for discussion, solutions and also for scrutiny of the processes. When it degenerates into personal attacks, I am not really interested.
I am highlighting my own issues as I am not satisfied that either the rules or the processes are robust nor do they stand public scrutiny, nor are they always based on common-sense, so if people want to get uptight about the processes that are being attacked, or short-comings of any sort, then so be it. It is not personal and if some people want to make it so, then I hope that I can stay above it.
Others have raised their issues and although to many, they can't see what the fuss is about, it is because it is the difference between driving a 2012 Toyota Corolla and a 1908 Itala. One, everyone understand, has no foibles and requires no thinking. The other requires specialist knowledge and a more mechanical aptitude to drive, own and maintain.
At the end of the day (and I sure hope that comes soon), I would hope that the various anomalies are ironed out and common-sense prevails, because all I am doing at the moment is getting shoved from pillar to post, with some people lobbying hard on my behalf and others hiding behind flawed rules and procedures and passing the buck.
The day I have to cut out a cage that was installed to the standards of the day, that is in all respects no weaker than most of its contempories, will not only be a sad day, but will also take this issue to another level as an example of where rule makers are flawed in either their decisions or their process or both. Reducing the strength or safety of a car that may or may not be used in serious competition has to be totally contrary to the laws of reason and common-sense, yet that seems to be what the rule makers want.
Sorry, but I just do not understand why that has to happen. I just wonder what would happen if I were to be killed or seriously injured as a result of an incident on road or track, that could have been prevented had the front cage been left in? Is everyone then going to run for cover? If the same thing were to happen with the cage left in, then no-one is to blame, so why the current attitude?
The words I used regarding the MSNZ employee are the ones people I have spoken to over this issue, have used, all I have done is to put on record the thoughts of those who wish not to be publicly identified.
If those are the feelings of the few that I have talked to, how many others involved with motor sport in this country, also think along those same lines. It is a sad day when those who are there to administer the FIA regulations are creating unecessary dificulties that appear to be only made to inflate their ego's. There are no productive reasons for many, infact most of these decisions.
When people create the sort of disention that is now begining to surface, it would appear that there are major issues within MSNZ that seem to start with those holding the higher positions. If they were interested and involved enough and were a good managment team these problems would stop as a good managment team is in place to run a smooth ship, to carry out those duties entrusted to them in an efficient, orderly manner, this is clearly not happening.
Mark Coulthard
Christchurch.
Will find out why those vehicles had some problems getting compliance and report back. There may well be viable reasons why as most that I have been involved with go through with the minimum of fuss, and if they dont have the paperwork, may take a bit longer.
These examples must have been from a few years ago, as I dont remember them.
The point I am making is that the issue is not new, many people are not prepared to go back to MSNZ as it seems to them to be like bashing ones head against a brick wall. Many just find an alternative form of recreation to participate in, something that is user friendly, without major obsticles to overcome, just to enjoy an active past time.
Sadly Mark, you are probably correct.
Having been actively involved in motorsport for over 40 years - 35 of them in some sort of organisational capacity, current issues are debilitating in the extreme and if we are not extremely careful, we'll very soon find that the future is not going to be in organised motorsport, overseen by a governing body.
The future is already towards over-subscribed private track days, private hire events and other non-regulated motoring activities.
If an engineer says my cage is as strong as the MSNZ model, that is good enough for me. It is not for anyone else to demand it conforms to a test model that is flawed or unfairly loaded.
I still have a few days to wait for the LVVTA's response to certification modifications and that may well dictate where the future now lies, not only for my car, (I already have two people very keen to buy!) but also my involvement in organised motorsport.
Sometimes, the fight just isn't worth the time and aggravation (as has been pointed out by one person heavily involved), but having fought a long battle and also uncovered some amazing anomalies in the system, (there is more than has been published here so far...) plus an amazing number of private emails expressing total support, it would be a shame to back off now.
Anyway, having documented it all so far, I have the fairly well fleshed out bones of a publishable book (which was always on the cards from day 1) - electronic book publishing (Kindle) is so easy, I can't really walk away without a conclusion!
Last edited by ERC; 03-08-2013 at 06:39 AM.
Ray, you are only one of many with thoughts of getting away from motorsport, sadly there are 100's who have already taken that course of action. I know of 5 that wouldn't complete scrutineering, deciding in the heat of the moment to withdraw their cars from competition there and then and leave the sport. One of whom was a sponsor of 4 others, who also had to withdraw as they didn't have a personal income that was large enough to carry on. How many more scenario's such as that have occured in NZ motorsport over the years, many I would think. Only the self centered and naive would be unable to grasp the fact that there is being irreversable damage being done by very few in the management of the sport in NZ.
I was talking to an official of MSNZ earlier this week who has been involved in Motorsport in NZ for as long as I can remember, the early 1960's at least, who is now very disolusioned with what has happened to our sport, who is now also talking about walking away from it so he can enjoy the remainder of his life doing something that is not frustrating like having to deal with MSNZ. Now that is a sad situation for that person to be in, when you have spent years getting pleasure from participating, then spent another 20 plus year in a support role within MSNZ, giving some of his knowledge and experience to others, only to have the paid servants of MSNZ create an atmosphere of deception, half truths and biggotry so these dedicated volantary officials, find they cannot continue with any credibility.This person is a old school, honest person with real human values who wants to see Motorsport returned to an Organization, who are going to do what they should be doing and that is to administer the sport as per the FIA regulations. Without the Ego influences and biggotry we find we are now dealing with.
I am not in a position to influence the voting at the AGM, but I would sincerely like to see those members of participating car clubs hound their president's and commitee members into voting for serious change at MSNZ, in fact a total clean out with major constitutional changes made to make the organisation transparent and accountable.
Mark Coulthard.
Christchurch.
Last edited by markec; 03-08-2013 at 08:09 AM.
I have written to our club captain, but I am not sure that he is in a strong enough position to convince a club committe that comprises those with interests other than racing, to put anything forward to change matters. He is probably not totally up to date with these issues either.
The simple fact is that there are now several (large) marque clubs where only a few of their members are in the least bit interested in formal competition as we know it, yet pay a $5 levy per member to MSNZ.
I think that over the next year or two, you'll get say "The Alfa Trofeo Club Inc" or "MG Motorsport Club Inc" (affiliated to their marque Clubs), but then only paying levies to MSNZ for their competition members, not for the majority, who are effectively social members.
Needless to say, the numbers at MSNZ conference may well be the same, but the lost income will obviously have to be recouped by licence holders or on race levies and we all know what that means, but it appears to me to be inevitable and that in turn will focus voting members to challenge in all areas - or walk away. I'm no psychic, but I would think that real change isn't too far away and is inevitable.
Well, I have just had a look at a car a gentleman has been building up over about 6 years and he is intending running it in HMC and Production Muscle Cars or what its called. It has seats and upholstery all fitted around the cage. He has recieved a letter back from powers to be. I will not mention too much at this stage, but very interesting read. One part tells him that the pipe that the cage was made out of (built 6 years ago by engineer and beautiful welds etc) has not been in production for 6 years and he can not use it. So does this mean that all our older cars with pipe that is no longer in production are not allowed.
It is an interesting read, with other " debateable faults" pointed out. He is not a young fella and has raced years ago and fair enough he has not filled some forms out properly (his best 3 years at secondary school were 3rd form) and this will be easy fix with a little help.
He said all he wants to do is a couple of meetings a year and can not afford to do much more at this stage. Oh and the car is looking very nice and is a different shape to most out there and is going to be 'tribute car' in presentation.
And therein is the real issue Rod. This is affecting basic cars, not Super Tourers or out and out track cars.
If all older cars were forced into replacing the main hoop, to the current 44mm, then there'd be a mass mutiny. This is precisely why I pushed the issue into a public forum. It appears to be a personal/departmental stance rather than one based on any degree of sustainable logic.
Best of luck, but it isn't always such an easy fix - unless you include removing the roof of a newly, professionally painted and fully trimmed car as easy.
Rod, if he didn't file the paperwork for Rollcage/logbook application at the time of the rollcage been built then HE is at fault and can blame NO one!!!(that's if this is the case?)
Dale M
Just to lighten up this very serious thread.
I don't know who this guy is but but he sure could do with a roll cage of any type.
Things were certainly different in those days.
Milan- thats a very interesting pic, what details do you have on this?
The wheels, the body work, the breather on the bonnet
Last edited by John McKechnie; 03-29-2013 at 11:01 AM.
He's dead, died while inhaling cork, whilst using his head as a roll bar, that ia after the spokes in the wheels broke. brave man!
Rog
Just to lighten up this very serious thread.
I don't know who this guy is but but he sure could do with a roll cage of any type.
Things were certainly different in those days.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote