NZ Historic Racing Saloons Group

[AMCO72]

I have a sneaky suspision that the HMC boys dont really want us, the U3L, with them, and I fully agree. Although it was a stirring sight at the festival with all these cars mixed up, the fact of the matter is that it was a 'convenience' thing. I have no doubt in my mind that Dale and his boys will be able to field a full grid of proper Muscle cars next festival, or before.

Where does that leave the U3L brigade ?
Arthur Vowels is a bit worried that this class is not attracting many new entries, and I dont know what we can do to improve the situation. The theory is that spectators come to these events to watch. Maybe they race in another class now but see U3L as a better alternative and decide to have a go. You cant do anymore. If the racing grabs people they may be tempted to try it themselves.

But I think if it could be got off the ground as it were, the Historic saloon cars racing together would be magic. As you say a lot of these machines are already up and running, so is just a matter of getting them altogether.......yeh right!!!!!

By the way the 0-1000cc class were racing on Dunlop slicks for both the 70/71 season and the 71/72 season.
I refer you to the MSNZ manual no35 page 480 where it states clearly that a historic race car should compete on the rubber it was on in period.

The Amco Mini would be very happy tooling around with these guys. Howabout you also stipulate that the ORIGINAL driver/s do the driving!!!!!!!!!!!LoL

[Steve Holmes]

I have a sneaky suspision that the HMC boys dont really want us, the U3L, with them, and I fully agree. Although it was a stirring sight at the festival with all these cars mixed up, the fact of the matter is that it was a 'convenience' thing. I have no doubt in my mind that Dale and his boys will be able to field a full grid of proper Muscle cars next festival, or before.

Actually Gerald, HMC and U3 are a fantastic match for each other. The combination of the two groups is just that, bringing together two groups that compliment each other. All the cars are period correct, and they look amazing out on the track together. Perhaps eventually each will grow in car numbers to the point its not possible to race together at the high profile events, because there are simply too many cars. I reckon if you spoke to the HMC guys at the Denny Hulme event, almost all would be full of praise for the way the small car guys drove. And I think the same would be true of the small car guys. Remember, 40 years ago big cars and small cars all raced together. Nothing has changed, there is no reason why it can't still be the case.

I've been trying to get Arthur on this website to create a thread specific to the U3 group. More exposure is what is needed to help create enthusiasm and boost grids. The HMC thread has now had nearly 60,000 page views, and has been really helpful in building the profile of HMC, and it amazes me that other historic racing groups aren't doing likewise. It bonds competitors and educates people. Trouble is, by his own admission, Arthur is fairly technologically challenged, so this may take a while to achieve. But I'm happy to help him through it if it means helping the U3 group.

[ERC]

I've been trying to get Arthur on this website to create a thread specific to the U3 group. More exposure is what is needed to help create enthusiasm and boost grids. The HMC thread has now had nearly 60,000 page views, and has been really helpful in building the profile of HMC, and it amazes me that other historic racing groups aren't doing likewise. It bonds competitors and educates people. Trouble is, by his own admission, Arthur is fairly technologically challenged, so this may take a while to achieve. But I'm happy to help him through it if it means helping the U3 group.

As 95% of Athur's group are already running in the two ERC grids, (AES & Arrows) I am not sure what difference it would make. I started a thread for our group and publicised it on here, but even with 115 or so driver's registered, there is minimal response on here as presumably they are happy enough where they are and don't really have too much to say?

Steve, you do a great job of publicising HRC and between yourself and Dale, put out a lot of words each month, but is the intention to take drivers and cars out of the ERC group because our rules are a little more pragmatic than adhering to 100% period or T & C to get them into U3L?

I think not, as you don't seem to strike me as someone who would try to derail a proven series. For the U3L to create its own stand alone niche, it has to bring cars to the track that are not already racing. So far I can't think of a single U3L car that doesn't already have a regular place to run.

Over the years I have copped a lot of flack from relatively few people regarding our eligibility rules and can justify our/my stance on several grounds. The fact that we are close to T & C but not 100% is unfortunate but also totally justifiable.

I ask again. Can any meeting promoter afford to put on six grids of a few cars each and pay out $12,000 to run a 1 day meeting at HD? The answer is obvious but a few people are so totally wrapped up in the purity aspect that they ignore the realities.

Creating the U3L class to run at HRC meetings might well give a fair few drivers an additional 3 races, which they are doing, but if they had to pay full price for their grid space, I am pretty sure they'd opt for a series of meetings that are still chocolate fish based rather than running just two or three events a year. Or am I reading this all wrong?

Crunch is well aware of where T & C doesn't work for us and other like series, but creating an extra class just to appease those who believe that T & C in its present form and CoDs are the way forward is not going to bring cars out of the garages. It didn't in the previous Arrows Series (CoD essential) and it isn't happening now, even though publicity at the time was coming from MSNZ that this was the way forward.

Arthur himself has made the suggestion that we do not need the current cumbersome CoD 15 page system that tends to put people off, especially newcomers. Far better to have a simple declaration where anything non-standard is declared and can be easily audited.

You can go out today and pick up a roadworthy MGB GT for a song, but why the heck do you need to state the size of the clutch plate to get a CoD???? And who is ever going to check whether it has an 1800cc or a 1950cc engine? Does it matter, given that there is no level playing field?

The CoD system was intended to document and provide a provenance for an historic race car where that history and originality was deemed to be important.

Bringing out an historic race saloon or replica or even a saloon built out of period parts is all OK by me as currently they need a platform but you can't come out with six cars. Far better to have classes covering different levels, periods, capacities. They could just as easily pad out the HMC grid now, as a short term measure.

Without better paying grids then entry fees will rise. A 15 car grid covers the basic costs and puts something into the promoter's pocket as long as all drivers are paying a fair contribution and not doing double duty on one race fee. Where only one or two drivers are paying, it is a different story. Their grid is being subsidised by the other drivers.

The MGCC series is still in its infancy, but I can't guarantee a space on our programme after this year. Their club committee has elected to not join up with another marque club, so do we disband the ERC series so that the U3L series, the Alfas, MGs and the open BMW series have more members, thus leaving a fair few cars totally out in the cold, particulary Jaguars and the like and over 3 litre Porsches? After a total of 27 years, have we done our dash, or do we carry on with a class that is popular and successful as it is, with zero support from MSNZ, and minimal support from one or two other key areas?

I think the answer is pretty obvious but any proposed additional classes have to be justified and an open (Classic) race saloon class is.

[crunch]

, or do we carry on with a class that is popular and successful as it is, with zero support from MSNZ, and minimal support from one or two other key areas?

.

Hi Ray

Can I ask what you mean by zero support from MSNZ?

[ERC]

Can I ask what you mean by zero support from MSNZ?

Not once in all the newsletters, either in print or electronically, has the Series ever really been recognised, encouraged, promoted or acknowledged, despite the massive levies paid over the years. If I have overlooked something, I am happy to be proved wrong.

Never an offer to partially pay for our TV coverage of a few seasons back, so we had to fund it all ourselves, not even $1,000. Yet because we can get decent numbers to our own meeting, we paid MSNZ $2,300 for just one meeting last year. If I totted up the total we have paid MSNZ over the years, just on race levies alone, I am sure it would be substantial.

Only you Crunch, representing MSNZ, but in more in a personal capacity, has ever accepted that not only one grid, but two grids, have been viable and contributed to Classic grids over the last few years in the north island.

At several meetings and particularly, prior to the emergence of the BMW series', we have often provided at least 40% of the levies at those one day meetings, but have we ever been thanked for our considerable contribution to the MSNZ coffers? No, but we do see a lot of push for anyone toeing the T & C and CoD line and vast sums promoting 9 car grids!

Or let me turn it around, what has MSNZ done specifically for the series over the last 17 years? (Or 27 if you include the 10 years under Donn White?)

Maybe this should now move to the ERC thread?