Good thought Bill. As the owner of a Mustang TA clone being built largely to
honor my friend Warren Tope, for whom I crewed in 1968 through 1970, the
halcyon days of sedan racing in the US, I agree with your statement about
production car eligability. There are only a relative handful (maybe a
hundred?) of certified TA cars (David Tom knows.) and I have no interest in
owning such an important car. My car is period correct and is intended to be
a no contact fun drive. This is my form of affordable racing...and this
hasn't been cheap!
Doug
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-vintage-race@autox.team.net
[mailto:owner-vintage-race@autox.team.net]On Behalf Of Wm. Severin
Thompson
Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 8:22 AM
To: Brian Evans; Tombread@aol.com; derek.lola@home.com;
vintage-race@autox.team.net
Cc: gnagy@intrepid.net
Subject: Re: But IS it a Vintage Racer? (was Eastlake)
My .02 and a few cents more....
I've never understood the need for a car, especially a production car, to
have had racing history for it to be eligible. It always seemed as if it was
an exclusionary tactic at best. Sort of... "I found mine... you go find
yours..."
I've always though that period preparation was the real key issue, not
history. Consider that few "time capsule" cars exist. Most race cars of the
era were constantly modified and updated to the then current spec... and to
be properly prepared for the spirit of vintage racing, must be reverse
engineered, rebuilt, or...gasp..."recreated". (Lot's of cars with "history"
out there that have nothing but a number plate in common with the original
identity.)
So, if I made the rules, any car of the correct vintage (not vintage
replica) qualifies. Most organizations, right or wrong, (and probably right)
tech cars mostly on a safety basis, while eligibility and correct for class
modifications are given a quick sideways glance.
The thing that chaps my as most... is selective rule enforcement. A buddy of
"so and so", or the guy that's "run with us for a long time that way" is
allowed, yet others are excluded. Rules for everybody, or rules for nobody
ought to be...well... the rule.
WST
----- Original Message -----
From: Brian Evans <brian@uunet.ca>
To: <Tombread@aol.com>; <derek.lola@home.com>; <vintage-race@autox.team.net>
Cc: <gnagy@intrepid.net>
Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 8:58 AM
Subject: Re: But IS it a Vintage Racer? (was Eastlake)
> As Derek said, this can be debated (choke, spew) ad nauseam by folks (like
> me) who enjoy that sort of thing. My answer is that for a racing car
> (sports racer or formula type) the car had to at least be constructed in
> the period in question and should have been actually raced. Later
> editions, even though identical (Cobras, the various one or two off
> recreations, the Crossle sports racers now in production again) don't
> qualify. This lets cars that were built in 1965, say, but were kept as
> spares and not raced into the mix, and lets out cars that are modern
> replicas even if made by the original guys in the original factory on the
> original jigs, etc. Production cars is a bit more lax (but getting
> trickier as Mini's were still in production till August - can you say 2000
> Cooper-S in vintage racing).
>
> So the answer to your question is "no". In my opinion, for whatever that
> may be worth.
>
> Cheers, Brian
>
> At 08:28 AM 11/7/00 -0500, Tombread@aol.com wrote:
> >Are Shelby Cobra replicas bona fide"vintage" racecars?
> >
> >tom
> >
> >
> >Tom Butters
> >The Greens Fork Group
> >Creative Communications Services
> >765-886-5098
> >public relations & marketing
>
> Brian Evans
> Director, Strategic Accounts
> UUNET, A WorldCom Company
>
|