Going Even Older!!!

[AMCO72]

Just a question I need answered. Do you think that a WOF & Rego would be mandatory for this class. Could stop a lot of the 'illegal' modifications being done, to make it a slightly more level playing field. Performance and handling characteristics of these cars on Steve's list is mind bogling. I think the A40 is in the care of our 'horder' in Cambridge that I mentioned before. If it is, he has a lot more stuff more suitable than the Austin. They were bouncy old things when brand-new, and as we are not allowed to change to a different type of shock absorber will be a nightmare to drive at other than a gentle pace.

[bob homewood]

Just a question I need answered. Do you think that a WOF & Rego would be mandatory for this class. Could stop a lot of the 'illegal' modifications being done, to make it a slightly more level playing field. Performance and handling characteristics of these cars on Steve's list is mind bogling. I think the A40 is in the care of our 'horder' in Cambridge that I mentioned before. If it is, he has a lot more stuff more suitable than the Austin. They were bouncy old things when brand-new, and as we are not allowed to change to a different type of shock absorber will be a nightmare to drive at other than a gentle pace.

Gerald my thoughts are the Wof and rego on the face of it look like a good idea ,but it might pay to think ,the idea of this class appeals to me because we can do away with a lot of the red tape we go through now to go and have a week ends fun,I just look at the dramas we have here at work getting things certified etc and just wonder if we are introducing a whole lot of dramas ,most of these fine old machines we are thinking about are bound to going to need rust repairs etc,in some cases that is going to create more paperwok than I really want to get involved with ,I think that if we have a set of rules the cars have to retain a standard appearance and be up to the equal of WOF standards i.e. lights ,wipers etc fitted and operating ,doors opening and shutting etc,I just think the Wof and rego will make a lot more paperwork ,especially if the car has been laying in a shed for ages ,which the A40 I know of has been,I for one certainly don't want to go out and build a supercar type thing ,I spend all my working hours doing that ,I just want something that with out a lot of paperwork or hiring a solicitor I can go and have a bit of fun with ,who knows my lost youth might even be hiding in the boot of it

[AMCO72]

Thanks Bob, thats all I need to know. I agree with everything you say, because I'm going to be kind to you from now on!!!!! No seriously, you are right, we do not need any Land Transport involvement in this. I just wonder about this shock-absorber thing....could be a matter of safety....well thats what we are told on the telly.

[rogered]

hate to see it chopped up though
http://www.trademe.co.nz/motors/used...-397568408.htm

[AMCO72]

Rogered......Farina is too late....1963. Got to be the shorter wheel-based Mk1. But I have 'discovered' 2 very likely candidates. You remember my friend Glen Horn....the one with the wrecking yard that we talked about in Y & Y....well he has...[1]. 1958 Austin A35..4 door...one family owner. Nice little car....a small rust patch under the accelerator pedal, otherwise very sound and complete....Glen is asking $2500.ono. [2]. 1958 PA Vauxhall Cresta.....three piece rear-window model. Some small rust patches but very sound and complete.....$3000. ono. The Vauxhall especially was a grunty machine in it's day....easily capable of 90 mph, and very receptive to tuning. I do not want either of these cars, so if anyone is interested let me know on this site, and I can point you in the right direction.

[Oldfart]

To answer some questions.
While I wrote about the shocks, I am personally not in favour of retention of levers where they were originally fitted being compulsory, so this may change. Still not in favour of fabricated wishbones, adjustable platforms etc though.
WOF, I don't think this should be necessary, some of the cars I envisioned were the "barn finds" and re-compliancing is an expense which may not be warranted. BUT they should be able to comply with WOF type scrutiny. (As Bob has expressed very succinctly)

[Oldfart]

Gerald, you have said "we need RULES" please contribute your thoughts.
I can take a rarking, but just criticising isn't too helpful, your thoughts have been great, and I am totally stunned by the enthusiasm.
The "3 types of entrants" earlier is right on the nail, and the serious racer is not really the ones I give a monkeys about. The Aussie N rule actually states it pretty well, if you don't like the rules, go find somewhere else to play, well somewhat paraphrased.
I also have a few contacts for likely cars, but would be interested to know about the A35 (Glen)

[bob homewood]

To answer some questions.
While I wrote about the shocks, I am personally not in favour of retention of levers where they were originally fitted being compulsory, so this may change. Still not in favour of fabricated wishbones, adjustable platforms etc though.
WOF, I don't think this should be necessary, some of the cars I envisioned were the "barn finds" and re-compliancing is an expense which may not be warranted. BUT they should be able to comply with WOF type scrutiny. (As Bob has expressed very succinctly)

No I think some how we need to keep the fabrication of components out of it ,might sound strange comimg from one who has built a few cars,but if you are not careful you open the floodgate ,Shock absorbers that is a bit of a hard one ,back years ago I used to repair and modify my own lever type shocks,granted they were never put on a shock dyno or similar ,but the approach is the same as it used to be tuning with out a Dyno etc ,common sense and the seat of your pants ,I am not suggesting however that we go down that path as these days you could buy a decent pair of shock for a fraction of the cost of trying to rebush,reseal and modify a pair of levers ,long time back in the past we used to make up a replacement assembly that replaced the lever shocks on A35 and A40 etc ,it was a steel bracket and bush assembly ,it was not tubular and did not use any rod ends or similar ,I would believe something like this that was sort of period may be the answer ,other firms and people made them as well ,somewhere there will be a photo or drawing ,maybe we could adopt that as the guidline ,shocks thats another area that needs to kept under control ,I think once again perhaps they should be period looking ,no alloy ,four way adjutables etc ,perhaps a maximum allowed camber on the front wheels would keep things in check as well ,easy enough policed with a camber guage,as I said before if I can help with my "two bobs worth " just ask

[AMCO72]

Actually I wasn't aware that I had criticised any of what you had proposed.... I questioned the lever arm thing , but otherwise just tossed thoughts around for everyone to comment on. When I went on about the 'rules' bit I was thinking of the Taupo meeting in 1987 when a competitor turned up with a VERY modified car, and there was nothing to say he couldn't do what he did......was all ok as far as he was concerned, because the only 'rule' we had then was for us to abide by the 'spirit of the class'....whatever that meant, and to have a current WOF. So when you proposed this new scheme, I immediately thought "I hope that doesn't happen again". Start out with a clear format and stick to it. I am happy to go along with whatever is suggested ,and if I think I can build something that will conform, I will go along with it....if not I will stay home and do my knitting. There are plenty of much more experienced guys out there than me, who will I'm sure, help to steer this in the right direction. The A35 belongs to Glen Horn......tel....07 827 4147......or Glen Horn Automotive....07 827 9121. His yard is in Gillies St in Cambridge but he is not often there, and has no cell phone so is sometimes hard to locate. In fact he has all sorts of stuff that could be termed 'barn finds' but these two are the ones requiring the least amount of work.

[Jac Mac]

There is an over riding rule that many series have , [[ If it does not say you can do it, then you cannot ]] , It is/was in the HQ series & as tech officers it was very easy to apply to anything we found that was not otherwise covered by the rules, if you dont have something along those lines you end up writing rules for rules. For example if you were state that the original shocks must remain in place, but could be supplemented by the fitting of extra shocks then you open the door to a set of Penske or similar being added, write it so that shocks from pre 1960 can be added its better, write it so that we have to use the originals only, but can modify them as per Bobs example would be quite sensible as that is what we would have done 'in period'.... or have we all forgotten how... or do you not want to get your hands dirty

[bob homewood]

Lever shock replacement ,this might provide a bit of thought regarding the lever shock replacement ,this one is for a Healey Sprite ,but is identical to what you would use on a A35 or A40 .The ones we used to make were more basic in the top arm design ,just a pair of shaped steel plates,with a tube for the bushes at each end and a reinforcement in the centre,it would still be more cost effective and better than trying to rebuild the levers in my opinion,ignore the brake set up in this photo I am not suggesting that

[bob homewood]

Another view of the concept ,this one appears to show a more basic top arm variation,more like what we used to make

[Oldfart]

Please guys, I am very flattered by the attention this is getting from such credible and notable names. As the last week has progressed I believe all of us are coming closer to be on the same page, and the very sensible suggestions are most gratefully received.
I do believe that by putting this out for contributions we will end up with a much more "robust" rule than not having done so.
I guess it's getting close to the time where I solicit a list of people who wish to be involved at some level. All that remains is to think of a good way without opening the floodgates to a whole lot os spam emails!
Over the next few days I will make amendments to the "guidelines and repost for further thoughts.
JacMac, I do like the "if it is not on the list" idea.

[Jac Mac]

Couple of other things have been raised in talking about this possible series.
1. At moment you have proposed a 1960 cutoff, is that 31/12/1960 or 1/1/1960.
2. Those Aussie regs used 1958 as a cut-off, might that be a better option if you ever got to the point of inter tasman challenge- just food for thought.
3. Where you have a car model whose time frame extends beyond your cutoff date could such later cars be eligible as long as they conform with cutoff specification..examples 1960 cutoff, both mini & 105e anglia were in production & continued in 1960 formatt til around 1965 in the anglias case anyway, with diminished stocks of suitable donors should later stamped body shells be allowed, Gerald has pointed out the later Farina A40 had a w/base increase so obviously thats out. Lots of other candidates that fit in the same problem area, simca. renault/ skoda etc.

[Oldfart]

Thanks for the input. Here is version 2!

Thoughts for Vintage Racing Saloons.

Below is an amended set of guidelines based on submissions from a number of interested people. This is still a “work in progress”
The intention for this class is to operate within the Vintage Car Club of NZ rules, and is intended as an outlet for members of that club to participate in friendly rivalry with a like -minded group of people. It is NOT intended as an out and out racing class. If a potential entrant is unsure of what is allowed they are encouraged to contact the group who will then make a considered decision. Loophole hunting is heavily discouraged. Any entrant who does not like the rules is encouraged to find another outlet for their endeavours.
Cars.
If the rules do not specifically allow a modification, then it is not allowed
All major components must be made from the same material as originally fitted to the car portrayed. Ie Cast iron blocks, cylinder heads, gearbox case, differential housing, body panels, may not be changed for a lighter material..
The car to be a production saloon which was in production prior to December 31 1960. Onus of proof of this rests with the owner. Variants of saloon, ie staion wagon are acceptable, sports version (non saloon) are not.
Body modifications, ie chop tops, channeling, tail chops etc are specifically banned. The car shall have a full complement of seats as sold, although the drivers’ seat may be replaced with an alternate with better support. Current “wing” seats are discouraged. Should the car have originally have been fitted with a “bench” seat this can be replaced, a front passenger seat shall be fitted.
Bumpers shall be in place.
Hubcaps are not required.
All lights should be in place, headlights taped (as was done and required in period).These must be in working condition.
External trim strips, ie chrome etc. PLEASE DISCUSS, my personal feeling is they should not be compulsory, as in period they were often asked to be removed for safety, also an item that may be difficult and expensive to find.
Floor mats/carpets, if removed the floorpan should be a subtle colour so it is not too obvious.
Steering wheel should be of the period. This is taken to mean that a steering wheel of a diameter not smaller than 50mm smaller than that originally fitted shall be used. Wire spoke wheels are heavily discouraged, rims shall be in sound condition, woodrim wheels must be those constructed with a continuous metal re-inforcement .
Instruments must be period, ie no digital, shift lights etc. Additional instruments may be fitted but must comply with the preceding statement
Windows may be replaced with alternate material, however the fitting of these should appear to be of the original manner. Specifically, bolted on lightweight materials are not allowed, nor are “driver porthole” type windows. The windows shall be in original tracks and at least the drivers’ window shall open in the original manner.
Roll over protection. May be fitted if desired. The design should not be such that reinforcement of the structure is a design criteria.

Engine
To be a version of the engine supplied with the car as sold new, or a common conversion. Ie one off engine transplant is not acceptable, but where this was not uncommon would be allowed. Onus of proof as above.
Modifications to the engine.
Only modifications which could have and were been done in the period (pre Dec 60) are acceptable. Ignition systems should appear to be of the type originally fitted.
Specifically electronic systems are allowed, but must be of the type installed primarily inside the distributor. Management systems are specifically disallowed.
Carburettors shall be of a type available in the period of the car.


Suspension
Suspension systems may be modified. Springs shall be of the type originally fitted. Ie torsion bars, coil springs or leaf springs must stay as the sole form of springing The rate, length, thickness, may be altered but the original attachment points must be used. Cars may be lowered to road legal limits.
Shock absorbers may be added, replaced with an alternate form, however onus of proof of the availability of the unit used being available in the pre- 1961 period rests with the entrant. Externally adjustable shock absorbers, and adjustable spring platforms are specifically disallowed.
Axle location should remain the same as original, but additional members may be added, ie panhard rods, Watts linkages, tramp bars, as long as the primary location remains. Test of this to be detach one end of any rod and the car remains suspended..

Brakes
Must remain in the same form as originally sold. Ie if sold with drum brakes, no conversion to discs is allowed. Brake scoops, ventilated back plates, Alfin type drums are allowed. Brake lining material is free. Conversion from rod or cable to hydraulic is acceptable. A secondary form of braking is recommended, even if it is only handbrake.

Wheels
Must be of a size which could have been fitted in the period. This automatically means that widened wheels are not acceptable as this process was not in place until later in the 60s. Alternate wheels, eg van versions, 13” rims on original centres, Vauxhall wheels on Ford 10, wheels from a later version (pre 60) are acceptable Any wheel which is known to be of a suspect standard may be replaced, as long as the diameter and width is respected. Appearance of the wheel must be of a period type.
Tyres
Must be of no lower profile than 65 series, road tyres. Ie no race or semi race tyres are allowed. They should be available readily without specialist suppliers.

Presentation
The car should be presented to a reasonable standard. The spectator should be able to expect to see cars of reasonable standard, no primer, dents etc unless sustained at the same meeting, although contact between cars would result in questions being asked of both parties.

EXTRA
It has been suggested that a car having been allowed at one meeting does not, as of right, qualify for any other. Additional restrictions may become needed as the use of these cars becomes more common. All modifications should be reversible without disagreement, discussion is fine, argument is not!

[Oldfart]

Hi JacMac, the rule of Dec 31 1960 is a vintage car club date. Most countries have specifically disallowed the Mini and 105e.
The advice from the speed steward is that later versions (continuation models) are on a case by case basis. Perhaps an earlier date would be a wise thought. We will toss this around. Perhaps people should be thinking of the earlier cars rather than trying to get the latest possible car? My own one is likely to be a 1956,(if I can get the rust issues sorted) even though a 1960 would be much easier!

[bob homewood]

I have got a few photos ,articles etc I have collected over the years which apertain to this older era stuff we are talking about here ,I thought I might post it in this thread ,if you think it should be in a thread of its own let me know and I will do so before I post anymore ,they might be of interest and create a bit of conversation
This photo shows how it is possible to modify the Peugot Cylinder head,to give you four inlet ports ,inserting some tubes and epoxing them in place

[Oldfart]

That is wonderful, especially seeing as the car parked outside my garage is a 203! Only issue is that the panel beater/welder I had round earlier today reckons it would cost "many thousands" to become OK! The word of the day is "Oh F*&^"

[bob homewood]

The 203 is a bit like the Borgward ,something I would have liked to have done ,mainly I guess to satisfy my mechanical curiosity.thats the only down side of what we are trying to do ,to find something that is not eaten away by the ravishes of time,guess I am lucky in some ways because a lot of it I can do myself ,but I am being sensible about it as I have heap of other things happening in my life as well

[Oldfart]

A thought has been raised, what sort of "testing" needs to be done to establish that corrosion and braking systems are of a suitable standard?
In the "good old days" scrutineering would have picked this up, now there is not really scrutineering, just a check that the self check item audit takes place.
Run it through a WOF check even if it's not going on the road?