vintage-race
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Roller rocker posting for fellow racer

To: "Brian Evans" <brian@uunet.ca>, <derek.lola@sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Roller rocker posting for fellow racer
From: "Pete Towell" <RTOWELL@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 18:12:39 -0500
Good points!  Don't get me wrong ... I like vintage and I have no desire to
go the GT-5 route.  And, I too, will be building my own engines.  Thanks for
the comments ... you are right.
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Evans <brian@uunet.ca>
To: derek.lola@sympatico.ca <derek.lola@sympatico.ca>
Cc: vintage-race@autox.team.net <vintage-race@autox.team.net>
Date: Friday, January 22, 1999 11:26 AM
Subject: Re: Roller rocker posting for fellow racer


>Only if I get Monica and a cigar...on second thought, only if I DON'T get
>Monica OR a cigar!!!
>
>At 11:05 AM 1/22/99 -0500, you wrote:
>>"BRIAN FOR PRESIDENT"
>>Derek
>>
>>
>>Brian Evans wrote:
>>>
>>> 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
>>
>


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