Hooray for posts 77/78/79, said everything I wanted too, but a damn sight more eloquently.. have a look at the Bill Pottinger thread, .... when joe public could get very close to the motorsport hero's of the day, if your trying to recreate history then do it the Kiwi way, ...Don't try to be the UK or USA in NZ, that's not what we are, many overseas folk I know who have been making trips down under for the SFOS series for over a decade now come back each year just for that reason alone.
Don't know quite how to reply to your post #80 fullnoise, but I'll give it a go.
Sweetwaters........never been, but you may be able to enlighten me.
After my comment on the presentation of the HMC cars today, what I meant to say was that the cars of old LOOKED like heaps of junk, and I stand by that.
Where did I say the Festival was not working? What I said was, if you put your glasses on, was that festivals subsequent to the McLaren one didn't have the BUZZ that it had......an air of expectation and excitement perhaps. If you had competed in it, and the ones following you would know that, I think.
Dementia, yes, could hit anytime.......but I probably wont know!!
I definitely DO get what HMC is all about......end of story.
Ah well......Live by the Sword, Die by the Sword.
Jac Mac, I`m not comparing or saying try and make it a Goodwood, and I`ve been to plenty of various race meetings in the USA. What I am saying is it`s one of NZs premier historic race meetings, in a unique environment, lets set a standard. I didn`t mention restricted access areas or any of that other bullshit. It is a simple case of you can`t please everyone.......
Fantastic feedback everyone, guess I’ve cause a bit of a ruckus, Crunch is rite i should have toned it down a bit before hitting the keyboard, sorry to all those offended!! First I need to apologise to the Festival directors as I’ve probably offended them the most but Tonys posting has shown their intent and direction. Although i have an opinion the out come of the festival will always be in the hands of the Festival directors and not by anyone else and they are the ones that see the commercial reality$.
I've only bought this up because i don't see this for the betterment of this fantastic historic event, but that’s my opinion and i respect others may not agree as shown(yes even you Gerald, LOL). Ray, i apologise if i've offended you as i don't mean to do so!! but i see ERC as a mish mash group were rules seem to be more guides lines than offering up historic values in the vehicles, if you can line all 100 plus cars up and walk down the line, rule book in hand, tech auditor beside you and every single car meets the rules i'll forever shut up and apologise even further, you see with ERC having its 30(there abouts)year history and 100 plus field and your immense organisational skills its easy to be critical about a new group only two and half years in and go har har, WERE ARE THE NUMBERS, numbers are never the excuse and are cheap and yes I know you show concern about commercial reality, but just letting EVERYONE IN is easy but thats just the friggen problem with “historic racing” in this country, we may only have had 10 HMC cars at the Festival but what we had(and others saw it too) was a 100 percent correct legal grid(to HMC/MSNZ T&C rules) we even turned one away because he hadn't down sized his wheels!! TUFF, hardly as he had 18 months to do so, i viewed him as not serious and taking the micky, add numbers, hell yeah thats the friggen easy bit!! as for HMC been a hot shot class yeah rite(F5000 maybe), and certainly not how i see it as we are no more important than any other historic group! hell i've even heard that we're a bunch of V8 boggens!! just some good old historic saloon racing with conforming cars will do thank you!!
Howard, you are a racer and still currently racing so you're paying the price and that means i value your comments, to me you are so correct and if the festival becomes a watered down ho hum affair like so many others in this country the effort to turn up will become less desirable, i for one really don't wanta see that happen and have thrown my support in behind the organisers!! and as mentioned you been a racer and currently racing which begs the question, HOW many have made comments on this posting that are actually currently racing and have done so this year? or even raced last year? or have ever raced? probably will never race? or a gunna race one day but don't wanta pay the price? you see there seems to be two sides of the fence here, those that watch and couldn't care less what's on the grid, under the bonnet, how legal the cars are but just wanta see some ACTION, and then there's the RACER, the guy actually DOING IT, the guy PAYING for it along with all the sacrifices that goes with it, HE’S the guy i respect and wanta look after so rules must apply to keep it all equal the best you can!! so 10 HMC cars all legal, all on 15" wheels just like the old days but one wants in on 16's!! not on my watch!! now bear in-mine this is just one example but i mean to carry on how we've started and if that means suffering in numbers initially until the group grows and getting lambasted for it so be it, if i get it wrong and all stay away i'll fold up shop and call it a day but while im still breathing and with petrol in my veins I will do everything in my power to make it work!
This years event was one of the best we had and the best racing for both groups, all the U3L historic saloon guys had a ball and enjoyed it immensely, that’s what they told me!! with the speed difference everyone got along and all received a trophy(for 2nd place) in keeping with the enthusiasm and sprit of what we are doing this for!! 2 weekends of hard racing and only ONE minor incident, too me that just doesn't get any better!! as for the Amco mini Ray! how will you deal with it when it smashes into 3 of your ERC cars and gets called "just a racing incident" my decision may not have been popular but our racing/incident ratio this year proved i was correct in the call made!! what call would YOU make? because I agree with you that driving standards and vehicle damage should not be tolerated, historic racing is NOT a racing series so no need for this!!
Last week i had the privileged to view the graph of a poll taken from this year’s Festival, now considering this year’s event was Ferrari and some voters may not even know what a historic muscle car or historic saloon car is? HMC and HSC polled extremely well and not far under F5000 and third overall when other groups barely registered, it was quite interesting but did show that the MAYBE the punters can tell the difference in the cars? how they present themselves? according to their historic values? as controlled by the regulations! hmmm. So along with our tech auditors and HMC management we will make sure HMC as a class sticks to this and stays that way, sure we’ll suffered in numbers but I see it as a short term PAIN for a long term GAIN, the standard must be set TODAY so in 10 years(when im 64) and hopefully still racing maybe just maybe we’ll have that 40 car grid just for you Gerald so you hang in there MATE, I’ll even come pick you up from the old folks home(LOL)!!
And finally Ray, I'd personally like too welcome your ERC group onboard for next years Festival, remember this not some ho hum event so please bend a little and look at the group marque as it’s a worthy cost allowing the Festival organisers to offer up a professional looking meeting they(we) so desire, hell for a small fee we all get to race at someone else multi-million dollar complex all with-in spitting distance of most of NZ’s population, THAT my friends just doesn’t get any better and I consider it affordable.
Dale M
Last edited by Kiwiboss; 03-13-2014 at 04:06 AM.
Dale, I think I can confidently predict that I wont be around in 10 years, so that has saved you a trip to the Rest Home!!
You couldn't have made any money today after writing that post, and I am glad that you took Walter Chryslers advice and didn't write it while you were mad. Perhaps you were composing it all night.
Also good to see LOL back...........makes a big difference to how I view your posts.
I don't think I have ever criticised your group Dale, or your philosophy. But you keep harping on that our cars do not confirm to any rules. So wrong my friend, so wrong.
It's a great pity that you weren't at the Auckland driver's meeting that Crunch referred to a few years ago. There were about 110 or 120 drivers who turned up. We challenged various aspects of the CoD system and I presume, the T & C "rules" to which you allude. Crunch threw out a challenge to the meeting to rewrite the T & C rules to make them more acceptable and we then spent a lot of time and effort conscientiously going through the T & C rules, line by line, word by word.
What we then presented to the Commission was a set of rules under which Alfa Trofeo and ERC specifically agreed, with some input from BMW.
Crunch and Tony and the Commission did indeed take some of our suggestions on board but within the commission, I'm sure that Crunch will agree, they are still somewhat divided on some issues, just as we may be on here.
Our philosophy then and now was that we have the Appendix & Schedule K rules for the purists, therefore the T & C rules by default should be a slightly looser set of rules, BUT, series organisers could tighten up those if they saw fit.
HMC has elected to run a tighter set of rules under the current structure, but several of the issues we raised way back then have not been changed, though they may have been addressed.
To accuse us of "not having any rules" is just the sort of statement that can only come from total ignorance and a biased opinion and is a cheap shot at a series that first and foremost, caters for what the drivers want. What is so wrong about that?
Our thinking back then, as now, was that T & C was initially drawn up and a CoD system implemented to enhance the provenance of the cars racing in NZ. However, many cars racing neither need nor gain from a written provenance.
It may seem to you that drivers are the only ones with opinions, but just remember that the Festival, more than any other local event has spectators who pay - and in some cases quite a lot. They also pay a fair bit in travel costs and their opinions are just as valid as those of the drivers. You may have a ball dicing with a couple of others, but if the rest of the track is empty, you don't seem to care - we do.
Having some professional experience in polling, I know only too well how the results and conclusions can be skewed so regardless of what you take from the Ferrari Festival feedback, I know that you learn far more from genuine criticism than praise and I have copped a fair bit of criticism over the years, some of it totally unjustified and some of it totally valid.
What spurred us to approach the Festival committee was feedback from those who had negative views of the Festival, but who desperately (and genuinely) wanted to see the Festival grow and be successful. The poll may give you the warm fuzzies but if you took the time to talk to those with less positive feedback, you'd have a different picture. I am sure that the committee took on board the results of our driver poll which consisted of a mix of competitors and event spectators.
Because you elect to only do 4 events a year and abhor any form of points, doesn't mean that others are happy with that format. We are still a chocolate fish series but what we need is some form of commitment and when people mention sponsorship, fronting up with just 4 cars at a meeting - and there are only 4 meetings, isn't really a good return for them. Considering our longevity, we have only ever had 4 sponsors (plus in the first couple of years, a donation from the MGCC Wellington).
So yes, numbers are important to many of us, even at the expense of running some cheaper but rarer cars of modest performance as a field of same or similar cars is not what we are about.
As for Angus running with us. You forget that both he and AMCO72 have run with us in the past without incident and having been overtaken by Angus going into the down hill hairpin at HD, I knew he was coming up behind me (that is what mirrors are for) and I left him room. No problem - nor with any of the other drivers in that grid. We welcome Angus with open arms and he knows that if he is quicker than the guys in front, they'll make room for him. We treat him no differently from any other driver and he will be handicapped only on his lap times as will everyone else.
This is just one grid out of a two weekend programme so if people don't want to watch, there are plenty of other races to entertain them, but I sincerely hope that ALL cars emerge at the end of the weekend with zero panel damage and big smiles and that the spectators leave with big smiles and Nigel Watts has to take spare memory cards and that the Festival is profitable...
Last edited by ERC; 03-13-2014 at 07:10 AM.
.
Last edited by Andrew Metford; 03-13-2014 at 02:14 PM. Reason: Double post for some reason
Dale, do you even read Ray's posts??? Because if you did, you would have read numerous times that he doesn't "let everyone in", and you would have also read numerous times that he has turned people away because their car doesn't conform to the required standards of the series. If I could be bothered I'd go back through the whole forum and post all the times he has stated both of these points, but I'm not going to waste my time when you are being so totally pig-headed about it all. You are losing my respect faster than your car goes.Originally Posted by Kiwiboss
Ray, just to play the devil's advocate with regards to your comments regarding ERC's rules.
From your site it seems a fundamental requirement of your rules is that "This is the official web page of NZ's most popular classic car racing series - ERC (European Racing Classics) for pre 1977 road going European saloons, sports and GT cars. ".
I think we all know that there are a number of ERC cars that don't comply with T&C (to varying degrees) and to the European pre 1977 requirement. There are an increasing number of post 1977 cars allowed in - with some of them considerably post 77.
We have had two pre 1977 cars in Ray's series (currently one registered) and this aspect of letting in significantly post 1977 cars is a concern - it is probably one of the reasons we bring our car out less for ERC events - why go to the bother and expensive of producing a complying car? Perhaps this might be one of the reasons why despite having 100+ cars registered only enough turn out to support one grid?
I understand it is a difficult position to be in - falling grid numbers equals diminishing economic viability - open up the rules to attract new entrants - upset existing drivers who don't turn up = reducing grid numbers.
Hi Rog. Lately the ERC series has been split into Arrows Wheels and AES, so the ERC 'brand' hasn't been used. I'm a big fan of Ray's series and commend the amount of work he does. It's not a perfect world and it seems that motorsport is more imperfect than most!
The rest of the world is based around cars racing as an 'era field', but here in NZ we race series, so it has been hard to get competitors to change their way of thinking. But on the other hand, series coordinators are great to have because you are just dealing with one entity instead of all the competitors, so there are pros and cons for both styles. The ideal would be for all of Ray's cars to be on COD's, but that is never going to happen. Remember Ray is from a country where some guy called Ellis picked up the soccer ball and ran with it and then invented a new game! Maybe it's in the blood!
Regarding Roger's comments, he is correct that pre 1977 is our core, but the rules were relaxed a few years ago on several grounds. One of which was the issue of "Thoroughbreds" within the classic arena, a term that has never been defined. We have always worked very closely with Alfa Trofeo as our overall ideals are identical and they run Alfa 33's and later cars for example, which we also accept.
As several of our drivers asked about various later model cars, we accepted them too because as they age, they are more accepted as classics in their own right. "Classics" didn't suddenly stop at a magic date in history.
Our Articles have always stated, right from day one, that the committee would consider on its individual merits, any car outside the pre 1977 Euro, which is why we have the exceptions listed in an earlier post.
I'd like to remind all posters, (supporters and critics) that the mission statement for MSNZ is to encourage participation and that the Classic mantra is again about the emphasis on participation rather than winning. Those two statements embody what we are about, but critics would rather some of these cars we accept, sidelined - or mixing it with the modern Japanese saloons. Neither of those options is acceptable to us.
The post 1977 cars are highlighted on our website and if and when there is a call or financial viability to run them as a separate grid, then we would do so. As it is, many of the current absentees are away for very good reasons and we have to accept that.
I accept Roger's comments in part but as driving standards and handicapping are a major focus, then the car almost assumes secondary importance. (Not quite!) As far as I am aware, Roger is the only one who has seriously objected to the inclusion of later cars. One other driver did object initially when we allowed in MGF's, partially to support the MGCC Series in exactly the same way that we have supported the Alfa series, but when it was pointed out that we had allowed his car to run that was not a pre 1977 Euro, the objections faded!
Some question why we allow in Tony's Corvette, but like the Segedin Mustang and others you really have to ask "Why not?" or more to the point "Which other race series would be a better fit?"
When the previous CoD only Arrow Wheel Series folded, it left people such as Ray Williams (Turbo), Bruce Manon & Andy Turpin (too fast for us) out in the cold, so we adapted our own rules to include them. That is something that was expedient, again, otherwise why lose them or sideline them?
In truth, we allow up to 5 transplant cars but have only ever run Gordon Burr's V8 Escort in several years and only one MGF has ever run with us so all those who forecast we'd be overrun with cars they didn't like were wrong.
Sure, I understand that the handling and performance capabilities of an E30 BMW are a step up from a BMW 2002, but it is no worse than comparing John Ures MK 7 Jag against an XJ6. Time marched on even pre 1977.
Over the years we had good support from TACCOC initially, but that faded somewhat with the demand for all cars to have CoDs and even then, there was an objection to one car that had a CoD! In recent times, the bridge has been partially rebuilt with the December TACCOC meeting inviting series which are not CoD compliant. The logical approach for TACCOC is to run pure (CoD) meetings and others. That they do both is mature and realistic. When/if the "pure" meetings are more successful in all respects than the "Series" meetings, then no doubt the "Series" meetings will be dumped?
We have also always had good support from the MGCC (Wellington and Auckland) and individually, Chris Watson has been 100% supportive from day one.
Tony, as above, has also been supportive and wishes we'd all get CoDs but as long as race promoters accept us, as we are, warts and all, it is no more than an option for our drivers. When/if compulsion ever sets in, then the CoD system has to be revised on several counts. The down side of any compulsion, is that if the drivers do not support it, then we'd merely seek other invites and avenues, but I think that might well be a net loss to the classic fraternity rather than a gain.
Could there be merit in a rolling age limit, instead of a fixed year? Like the 40 years for classic rego, perhaps a 25 or 30 year age limit, so that the pool of qualifying cars would increase, but the spirit of a "classic" would still remain?
Interesting opinions - and if anyone watched Top Gear and the James Blunt interview full in the blanks. "Opinions are like.....everyone has one"
I am one of those you talk about Dale - not actually racing currently (have done in the past) so while my opinion might not count in some eyes I think given I am building a car (and many might say the incorrect car more on that) I have read the rules over and over to ensure I understand them. So my car will be compliant to Appendix 6 - be it Schedule K or T&C (and it will be built to fit under both aka standard series production body work which is a T&C requirement)
I am both lucky and unlucky with my car choice. I am a 70's child and spend my early years in an Asian country while Dad was posted OS and as such Japanese cars were the norm and when I returned to NZ again most cars on the road were Japanese, Australian and British - the Euro and Amercian cars were not so common. When I started to show an interest in NZ Motorsport it was during the ShellSport days when Dad, my brother and I would go town to Pukekohe to watch these and other grids.
I unlucky feel in love with the S30Z range of cars aka Datsun 240z to most for the following reasons.
1. It was very un Japanese in styling
2. It was a very successful race car in most countries (except NZ where it appears no one raced one - maybe due to class rules or cost of the cars who knows)
3. They were an affordable classic car to purchase when I got my first one at 20 years of age (still have that same car today some 22 years later)
The unlucky part is there is no girds for such a car. The Datsun 240z have had a very hard road to row here in NZ, for some reason which I don't know (other than it is Japanese), the last 240z track car I owned used to race in the NZ Production series in the late 80's early 90's but when I purchased the car from it shed the PO showed me video footage of it running in these girds but over the 10+ years he had it parked up he moved houses a few time and has lost the log book. So I got a new one, removed the now illegal alloy roll cage and did classic trial in the car.
With the new car I am building it was outside of T&C rules when I got it (1/2 completed Targa car project that due to devoice had to be moved on and I picked it up) at first I thought I would run in the Japanese Series that ran under the Auckland Car Club events (aka Club car stuff) but having supported another 240z that raced in that grid and looking at the driving standard I was not going to put a car that is difficult to find in today's market with body parts that are NLA new from the manufacture. So I started to talk to the guys I knew that raced in the ERC grid (which at the time said Datsun 240z were out as they had a grid to run in aka the Japanese series) to see if I could be accepted in that group. With a green light I then started to remove all the non T&C/Schedule K spec items from the car and moved those on. So now I have grid to run in when I finish the car. So I thank Ray and team of the ERC group for giving us a place to race.
I would love to run at an event like the festival but currently I have few issues with the grids as they relate to a Datsun 240z.
The Datsun 240z like a MG midget, is classed as a Sports and GT and therefore is placed in a grid with non standard series production cars aka Mallock U2, Lotus 7 replica and other purpose built race cars aka if someone was to turn up with a Ford GT40 or any other lemanns special they are Sports cars under the FIA definitions so how can a standard series production GT be in the same grid??? This did not happen in period so what should it happen today? The GT cars ran in period with other Production based cars - maybe in a different group/point based group but on the same grids as the Alfa's, Escorts, BMW's, Mustangs, Corvettes, Porsche's etc. But today they are not allowed on the same grids as they are not a Saloon???
That is my only grip with the Festival is the grids are not how cars completed in the day, sure in NZ there was no Datsun 240z running in a grid in 1971 but else where in the world they did and they were in the same production based grids. Sure keep out cars that are outside of the rules if that is what the event requires. That is the issue I personally have (aka my opinion and like an ..... I have one) with the Festival and the U3L Saloons - why block so many cars, MG's, Datsun 240z, Healey, TR4 that are under 3.0 ran in period with the same cars but that are not Saloons.
This is why I support the ERC grid at next years festival - cars (ideally pre 78 as that is the type of cars I like but understand time does not stand still for no man) as the grid will based on ERC grids and not limited to just Saloons we will see cars that raced on the same grids as they did in period, Escorts, Capri's, MG's, Jag's, Datsun 240z, Porsche's, Fiat's, Triumph's, Torana's ie Production based grids.
So why could a Datsun 240z race in the 80-90's in the NZ Production Series like the car I used to own but today it can't be on the same grid? How is that "as it was, as it should be"
So that is my unlucky bit liking the Datsun S30z series of cars as they might be too different to be on the track as the same time as other production based cars - and the same could be said if I like a Triumph TR4, 5, 6, 7 or TR8 all GT cars aka no back seat = epic fail in the eyes of some as production based race cars.
The lucky bit is the ERC group do want to see these cars running in grids like they did in period. And I only hope I will still have place to run when the car is finished and I don't have to go and play club car like I did in the 90's with my first Datsun 240z race car (it was not a lot of fun in grids with only V8 muscle cars (with 4x my 100HP at the wheels) as I had 2 cylinders too many for one grid and 2 cylinder short for the grid I was placed in while you are learning race craft - I guess I learnt to get out of the way and make space for the faster cars)
Last edited by nzeder; 03-14-2014 at 01:37 AM.
Mike L
Sports cars have two seats, saloons have four - is that the problem for the 240Z? Opposite issue when tiny back seats allowed 911 and RX7 to run as saloons in NZ and Aus? Only Z-car I can recall racing in the '80s was (iirc) Rod Collingwood's 300ZX in the first Group A race at Wigram.
Yes that is a problem - the 240z is not a sport car under the FIA it is a Production Based GT car not a sports car. A sports car under the FIA is a limited number special series or purpose built race car - that is the FIA Appendix J definitions for the era the car represents. Cars like the 240z, TR's of Triumph, Corvette etc are out in the cold in NZ motorsport as they are not identified as mass produced GT cars but as these "Sport Cars" which they clearly are not specials/low built or race cars only aka a Le Manns Ford GT40 is a Sports Car as is the Nissan/Prince R380, or Porsche 917 - they are "Sports Cars" under the FIA Appendix J of the 70's and a Datsun 240z, Triumph TR7, MG, Corvettes are GT cars.
That is a big difference in my eyes.
Mike L
Hi NZEDER
There are several FIA Sports Car categories that range from Production Sports Cars, GTS through to Sports Racing Cars. New Zealand has never had a production sports car class, so you are correct in there. The Festival is inclusive of all sports cars in one field, but does so with a regard to the differing performance levels and on safety. Sports cars are inherently safer than single seaters in a racing situation, because they have covered wheels and therefore not the propensity to touch wheels and launch into the stratosphere!
Once again, it is a numbers game. If we had enough production sports cars then a field could be run, but then that would disappoint other competitors in non production cars that would be turned away. Your Datsun 240Z is welcome in the Festival pre 78 race class as it is.
Bingo and that is why the Datsun 240z were never raced here in NZ in period - no class/grid for them. So if that is the case did the Corvette's, Triumphs TR's, MG Midgets race in NZ in period as they too are classified under the same FIA groups of Appendix J or the day.
My car is actually a Datsun 260z - however when most think of the 260z they automatically jump to the longer wheel base 2+2 version when mine is the shorter 2 seater version (even though the log book has it down as Saloon) which was produced in smaller numbers than the 240z with only 22,000 ish of the 260z 2 seater in RHD form created over its 4 years of production. Unlike the 240z which was made over 100,000 RHD then 200,000 in LHD (then there were JDM models too) so my car is in fact rarer than a 240zbut it is easier to say it is a 240z as most ID that with the 2 seater version as the 240z was only ever made as a 2 seater.
Mike L
Actually Ray, I don't think I have ever formally complained about this but I do recollect the "you are the only one complaining" story being said to others in the past when I was aware that a few held the same view. Don't mislead yourself that I'm the only one who is a little miffed about opening up a supposedly pre 1977 class to 1990s cars - I've spoken to a few who have similar views. In typical Kiwi fashion they don't complain but just don't turn up again.
I'm not aware of any others Roger (bar the one mentioned earlier) but you and I have discussed it!
The rolling age limit is generally accepted as logical but as has been said many, many times before, we already have 1800cc MGBs and V8s, 1300cc Ford Escorts, 2 litres and V8s; 2 litre Capris and 2.6. 3 litre and V8s. So what about the real differences between a 1959, 69, 79, 89 cars? Are they really any more different than the capacities?
I really do not see a totally level playing field whether pre 1977 or not, so unless we see sufficient of either Sports/GTs, post 1977, speed groups and/or any combinations anyone cares to dream up, we are consolidating with a single grid for next season, so now we will upset those who see the speed differential as a problem and we may lose one or two more.
Unlike Dale and one or two others, we cannot and will not justify tiny multiple grids, split by speed, capacity, age, body style etc. as it just isn't viable to create a sand-pit for every interest group.
"You can please some of the people some of the time" and I long ago stopped trying to please "all of the people all of the time" as it is an impossibility. I'll happily accept the flack for changes made since I inherited the series, right back to the very first season when we scrapped the "limited to 4 cylinder cars" but all those changes are generally thought out to take into account the changing conditions, finances, car ages, calendar and so on.
What I do know is that if for example, if we made CoD's compulsory, it would destroy the series overnight!
I personally wasn't too pleased years ago having to change from a grid of saloons and a grid of sports/GTs, to two speed groups and I know that those with smaller cars aren't too happy racing alongside large saloons, but history shows that it was the right decision. I don't make decisions based on self interest, I make decisions based on what I believe is best for the series and if I am wrong, so be it.
Reversing any decision made because it doesn't work is fine as no-one is right all the time, but I do have the luxury of being a one man committee so I believe that what we have works for the vast majority. If sufficient people voice their concerns regarding any aspect of the series, then it is looked at, be that the rules, individual cars or individual drivers. Talking over a beer with mates and grizzling doesn't cut it. People have to be up front if they are dissatisfied with any aspect of the sport but there is no guarantee that anything will be changed, as I'd like to think that I have a reasonable handle of what works - for us. I don't take it personally as this is a series for the drivers not an over inflated ego trip.
Maybe I'll retire at the end of season 20 or maybe I'll carry on, but I'm not indispensable (nor are any of us) and I am sure there are others who'd happily stamp their style on it and that someone may totally change things. It won't be any easier or harder than it is now.
Last edited by ERC; 03-14-2014 at 07:19 AM.
Mike/NZeder, most of the cars you mention did run in the time, along with other sports cars such as the U2s, Lotus 7 like and more specialised cars. No there was no class for them per se, but they did take part. I did a couple of events with the Sprite and before that the MGA. They were low level events, but we did them. It was in the sprit of "I would rather be out there" than hoping for good results, and fun was had.
I don't think that the lack of a "production car class" was imposed by anyone, just not enough people wanted it to happen. Remember these were valuable cars for most of us that we needed to drive to work on Monday.
It does not seem that long ago that there were very few classes, in some cases it was saloons, sports cars and single seaters, that was it. It is only in more recent times that the class thing has proliferated.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote