Well here's my take on this stuff;
Gordon Glasgow wrote:
>
> I agree with most everything that has been said, but a few clarifications are
>in
> order. My first reaction when hearing about the airdam issue (he couldn't
>prove
> that they had used airdams on 1969 cars) was to get very indignant and go
>after
> one of the Tech Committee members that I happen to know. Actually, he's a
> current NWDE member and past President of the club who raced his 510 in
>vintage
> until last year. He explained a few things to me.
>
> The airdam wasn't the biggest issue, although there was inadequate
>documentation
> on that. Besides, it isn't a BRE-style airdam, it's a big aluminum sheet, more
> like what you'd see at the SCCA Runoffs.
This is a problem. If it were a BRE airdam, it would be fine for most vintage
groups as there is plenty of documentation for them. However, with the '69 cut
off this group uses, even these may not be allowed. But for a modern type dam as
described, you would have to have lots of good photo documentation to get to run
it as this was not the state of the art at the time. Since I know of no cars
back then that ran such a dam, I doubt there will be "adequate" documentation.
>
> The Penske remote-reservoir rear shocks were an issue, since those certainly
> weren't available in 1969 and nobody else is running them.
Yep this is a no-no. This is the antithesis of vintage. It's modern parts in an
old car. I too would have complained about this.
>
> The same goes for the Wilwood 4-piston calipers on the front. You aren't even
> allowed to run those in SCCA or the regional Conference events.
Again, same thing. If the racing body limits the period to '69 and earlier,
there is no way to document the use of any 4-piston calipers, let alone modern
aluminum ones. Even the Vintage 2.5 Trans Am group is baulking at this, and they
allow much later specs than '69. They gave Steve Link a hard time about just
this on his 510.
>
> The dash is a sheet-aluminum fabrication. While it looks nice, it is
>definitely
> not a production item. A quick survey around the pits showed me that the other
> cars were using original dashes (even the Porsches).
Well now this I might try to argue for. *IF* the rules from '69 allowed it, and
if it can be documented on *any* car (any make any model) from the era that ran
in that class, then it should be an allowable modification. OTOH if the '69
rules forbade it, or there is no documentation that *anyone* ever ran a fabbed
dash, then I'd say it shouldn't be allowed.
>
> The class grouping is "flexible" based on how many cars show up to run. At a
> small event like this, they just do a small-bore and a large-bore class; at
>the
> larger events, they have a middle-bore class. While it is designed around
>engine
> size, it is more of a guideline than anything else. There were probably 25-30
> cars in his race group, so it was a pretty full grid.
>
> They talked to Paul about all these issues on Friday, before they found out he
> was going to qualify on the pole for the race group, so it really wasn't a
> matter of "Oops, this Datsun is going too fast, we better fix that."
This sort of confusion also popped up in the 2.5 Trans Am race. Word went out
after the race that Steve was talked to about some items on his car *after* he
turned in a 2nd place (with the assumption that his high finish is what lead to
the complaints). Fact was he was talked to before the race. In neither case was
it a situation of sour grapes because the Jap car did well. And we as a group
need to be aware of our sensitivities and not jump to conclusions about this.
There are enough real instances of bias against Japanese cars. we don't need to
go looking for it or start to expect it. Otherwise we will begin to look like
the ones with the chip on our shoulders.
>
> That's not to say there isn't any anti-Japanese bias in SOVREN - there
>certainly
> is on some people's part. A very few of them don't even like the fact that
> SOVREN allows production-based cars! They feel it should be only purpose-built
> race cars. Kind of a "Let's go parade around in our expensive former race
>cars,
> then go have brandy and cigars at the club" mentality. Fortunately they're a
> minority, but some of them are in positions of power at the moment.
In fairness, that is pretty much what vintage started out as. It has morphed
over the years to become more and more open. In some ways this is good but in
some ways it is bad. I remember back 10 years or so ago when MGBs were not
vintage legal and the MG Vintage Racers Association did not allow MGBs to be
members. A lot of this resistance we feel has more to do with general changes in
vintage than it does with Datsuns or Japanese cars in particular. It also has to
do with a fear that newer cars that aren't a valuable are going to be more
willing to get into real racing and do damage, and that is a genuine concern! I
know that If I owned a famous vintage race car worth hundreds of thousands of
dollars, I would be loath to run it next to a guy in a $10k car whose focus is
on winning a pointless race and who might be willing to swap some paint to do
so. Especially if the car is ugly and poorly prepared and shows little or no
pride of ownership. Now Paul's car is obviously not that kind of car, but the
fact is Japanese cars have a history of that sort of thing. They have been cheap
race cars for so long that many forget when they make the move to vintage that
vintage is about the cars more than it is about the racing. Les, Craig, and I
went to a pre season vintage tech inspection event not too long ago and there
were only a few Datsuns there. Sadly one of them was a primered, beat to crap
510 that looked like it was waiting to run some local roundy round. That sort of
thing has done more to alienate us as a group from the rest of the vintage crowd
than we might realize. We need to understand the others just as much as we want
them to understand us. The fact is it was their playground first and we are
asking to be let in, so we will probably have to pay some dues. But we also have
brought on ourselves some additional dues.
>
> To finish the story, Paul was late getting to pregrid and they had blown the
> 1-minute whistle when he got there, so he had to start from the back of the
> grid. He passed 12 cars on the first lap and 4 more on the second. He was
> turning lap times that were close to the lead cars. In mid-race he found
>himself
> in a big gap with no one to race and he dialed it back by about 3 to 4 seconds
> per lap. Then towards the end he saw a Porsche up ahead and decided to go
>after
> it, but by that time there were only two laps to go and he couldn't catch it.
> Even so, his last lap was his best (a 1:41.9, if anyone is familiar with SIR).
> "A pleasant Sunday drive" was how he described it.
Sounds like he wasn't that much faster, if at all, than the lead cars, which
means he is probably in the right group. However some of his mods are definitely
not okay and he needs to bring his car into compliance with the local rules. I
am sure they just got caught up in the racing and lost sight of the fact that
this is vintage not racing. This happens to folks all the time. But in fairness
to Paul, the variations in local vintage rules can be very confusing. I know
that in Paul's area there are at least two different sets of vintage rules. If
you include the entire west coast, you can be looking at 4 or 5 sets of rules,
some of which conflict with one another. For example some have a '69 cut off,
others a '72 cut off, others have a 25-year rule. It can be very confusing and
aggravating.
--
Marc Sayer
82 280ZXT
71 FJ510
|