To reply to your points, comments interspersed below:
At 12:32 AM 1/22/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Nice to be clean and all ... but some of us would like to add a degree of
>reliability that isn't there otherwise.
One major element of vintage racing, as many currently define it, is to
experience things the way they were. That includes the frustration of
having to deal with production based parts that impose reliability issues.
A really good 1275 Mini in 1965 MAY have put out 110 Hp on a modern dyno. I
know of a modern 1275 (actually 1293, it was .020" over) that made 153 hp.
I bet if we all built 110 Hp engines, we'd have good reliability...
Vintage is becoming prohibitive due
>to the need for "period" parts. That's all fine and good for those with an
>unlimited budget ... for the rest of us, it means that we can't play.
Period parts, for many cars and for BMC cars in particular, are more
available now that when I started in 1988. And they cost less in today's
dollars than they did then. They certainly cost far far less in terms of
how much of my paycheck they use up. Vintage racing has created an industry
that supplies many parts now that we had to make or do without only 10 years
ago.
>Should we allow roller rockers? ... I don't know, but racing an early '60's
>BMC car is challenging at best and painful when the rules say "build it to
>1964 specs." When I need 2-3 engines to get through a season at $6-8K each,
>I think we've lost the point on amateur racing.
RAcing is always about choices. I ran BMC engines for 10 years - both Mini
and Midget, 998cc, 1070cc and 1275 in the Mini, and 948 and 1275 in the
Midget. My motors cost anywhere from $1000 ( the first 998) to about $3000
(the latest 1275) That's all in, parts and machining, and I build them
myself. I normally get 10 races from an engine prior to freshening. The
only engine that I had to abandon is the 1070 - it broke a crank, and 1070
engines kind of suck compared to1275, so I didn't rebuild it. A freshen
normally costs me about $500 (rings, bearings, oil pump, timing chain etc)
unless the head needs guides, in which case I need about another $500 (CDN,
btw) for that. I did just fine. With HSR, for example, when I would run
with a big enough bunch of Midgets to really see what I could do, I would be
in the top third of the group (top 10% if you discount the guys with the big
motors, MGB brakes, Toyota or Webster gear boxes, and so on). When we had a
group of 30 or so MG's run at our festival race two years ago, I finished
5th overall, running my 948 engine (only car under 1.5 liters that finished
the race) and using Dunlop L-series hard compound tires. The engine was two
years old then.
I agree that 3 $8k engines is a bit much. That's why I don't run with that
crowd anymore. I thought that those people who were building engines that
only lasted 2 - 3 races, and had a few more at home or in the trailer were
spending more than I felt was required - kind of beyond the spirit of the
whole thing. So I voted with my feet, and wallet.
I had a ton of fun, but I did end up getting frustrated when guys with
bigger wallets that I had simply sent their way past me. So I changed to a
different class of car, and so far I'm having fun again! It seems to me
that if you want to race a 1960's BMC engined car using modern engines and
all the newest stuff to ge the ultimate in performance, then SCCA GT-5
beckons! Why aren't you there? (I ask that question honestly - I *did* run
CASC GT 3 when I got pissed off with VARAC some years ago) Many Vintage guys
(not all, to be sure, and I tend to waver violently from time to time) think
that the whole point of our sport is to race 1960's cars for real, not to
race 1960's cars with 1990's engines, transmission, tires, and suspension!
Cheers, Brian
|