Brandon, if you've been following a lot of what has been going on these last
few weeks you will have picked up on the fact that one of the most
significant factors influencing decisions re preparation is the organizing
body or club you are most likely to race with. When you identify that, then
get a copy of their rules and regs as a starting point. If where you live
makes it possible to race with different groups, then prepare your car and
select your tires for the most conservative.
I am not personally familiar with prepping an e type, but it doesn't strike
me as a low budget car to prepare or run.
GJB
-----Original Message-----
From: brandon dixon <dixon@cs.ua.edu>
To: vintage race list <vintage-race@Autox.Team.Net>
Date: Tuesday, December 02, 1997 12:27 PM
Subject: Vintage racing E-types
>I've been lurking a while on this list as I ponder a project or two that
>I'm thinking about.
>
>I'd like to get some feedback about preparing an E-type jag for vintage
>racing. I have an opportunity to get the right car for the right price.
>
>Some background:
>I'm a current SCCA formula ford competitor looking for a fun project to
>exercise my fabricating and car building skills. The car is a series 1.5
>car (with the covered headlights), is completely disassembled right now,
but
>was a complete car (I was there). The sheet metal work is 3/4 finished.
>
>I'm trying to decide what it would take to make this car a good vintage
>racer. I would want to do a "fairly" period car, I don't want to build the
>car to current SCCA prod rules or anything, but I don't want to spend a lot
>more money to making the car represent the period than if I used current
>pieces.
>
>What are my options? What sort of engine modifications do cars like this
>usually run? Generally speaking, what are the roll cage rules? What is
>acceptable as a replacement for the wire wheels (I'm pretty sure that they
>E-jags didn't race on them in the 60s)?
>
>I will certainly consult the appropriate rule books before diving in, but I
>would like to decide the feasibility of the project first.
>
>Thanks in advance!
>Brandon Dixon
>
|