fot
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: "Were Raced"?and Vintage Racing

To: "David C. Wingett" <elkhorn@megsinet.net>,
Subject: Re: "Were Raced"?and Vintage Racing
From: "Greg Solow" <gregmogdoc@surfnetusa.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 1999 00:54:44 -0700
Dear David,
    Stewart's comments were directed at participants in "Vintage Racing,"
not SCCA "Current Racing".
    And therein lyes the distinction between "Vintage Racing" and " Racing
Old Cars!"  Vintage Racing  traditionally was/is about racing cars that are
prepared to the rules and /or technology that was in place and existance at
a given time in the past. Traditionally that time was usually a date limited
to a year before 1965 or 1967.   That date may vary from group to group.
That is why it is called Vintage Racing.   I have no argument with anyone
that is interested in "Racing Old Cars", in fact I think that it is a great
pastime.  My argument is with those who do this and call it "Vintage Racing"
    As a mechanic and engine builder, I like to have some idea of what I am
competing against.  When someone whistles by me on the straight, is it
because they have done a better job of building an engine than I have, or is
it because they have 200cc more displacement  with valves sizes .150 inches
larger than they are suppossed to be?
    Perhaps a partial solution to that would be for each competitor to
"testify" to the size of their engine and if it is larger than it is
suppjossed to be, then the displacement must be painted on the side of the
car for all to see!
If they were then  caught lying about that displacement, then the 13-13 rule
would apply. At least then all would know why the 1800cc Lotus 26R or the
1800cc Porsche 356 was so damn fast!
    My personal preference would be for the SCCA rules in force in the 1967
GCR be used as a guideline for car preparation.  Displacement as standard
+.040 thou. overbore max.  Standard valve sizes as delivered from the
factory.  Standard carburation as approved by SCCA or possibly FIA.  No
roller rockers or roller cams.  Blocks and heads must be of original
manufacture, type, and material.  I would allow aftermarket rods as a
reliability addition, as long as they were of original demensions.  and so
on...
    I believe that it is time for a shot of HONESTY in what we are doing in
Vintage Racing.  At the very least everyone should have to "fess up"  to
what they are running!

Regards,

Greg Solow
----- Original Message -----
From: David C. Wingett <elkhorn@megsinet.net>
To: FRIEND OF TRIUMPH <fot@autox.team.net>
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 1999 12:58 AM
Subject: "Were Raced"?


> Stewart/Greg
>         When you mention the HSMA philosophy of preserving Triumphs as
they
> "were raced" You do many others a Great disservice ... the Triumph is
still
> raced today . The few that will still carry on a marquee that died off
more
> then two decades ago should be looked upon as heroes and there autos as
the
> High bread of the specie. There may soon be a day the SCCA opens the flood
> gates and squeezes us out.
>          The Runoff entry list for the E Prod group  has only 3 TR-6's in
> it. Dwight Cooke, Mark Gerdes & Sam Halkias. (per the SCCA web)  It's my
> understanding that Speedvision may carry this race on Sat.10/9/99.  There
> are many others of us that have chosen not to freeze ourselves in time but
> to continue the Racing tradition that the Triumph was built on.
>             The philosophy I most appreciate about Vintage is the strict
> enforcement of GCR 9.1.1 & others. The racing is clean and that comes with
> ATTITUDE...It's not the age of the car, It's the maturity of the driver.
Any
> auto that's still racing, many long years after the walls of the factory
> have fallen silent ...IS Vintage.
>             David Wingett
>
>


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>