Hi Mike,
What a perplexing problem! I can only imagine what it would be like to drive
"that" Morgan...the very one that my Dad raced and your Dad owned!
Bill
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike.Savin@nokia.com [mailto:Mike.Savin@nokia.com]
Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 4:18 PM
To: mgvrmark@hotmail.com
Cc: vintage-race@autox.team.net
Subject: RE: Vintage eligibility & intent
I understand the arguments, pro and con. I think it is great that
some
people have resurrected old racing specials, that is, one-off race cars
and we get to see them race once again. But as someone said, if this
was only open to cars that had actually raced when new, the cars would be
extremely expensive cause there would be fewer cars available.
I believe I know the whereabouts of my dad's first race car: a '55
Morgan +4 roadster. This car had a great racing history, was very
successful
and well known to many people -- and was raced after my dad sold it by
another
man for some years -- so it had a long history of racing. This car was
restored
some years ago to street condition -- and the present owner evidently was
completely unaware of its long racing history -- until informed by Morgan
club
members who knew because of its serial number. The car is now red --
instead
of the turquoise color used when the car raced.
The point is, I intend to recreate my dad's car as it raced in the
50s:
same paint job, numbers, leather belt across the hood, locked rear end, etc.
Would it not be a shame to take a well-restored Morgan and change it
back to its previous appearance -- or would I not be better to take an
unrestored
car that may not survive unless I take it and make it a replica of my dad's
car?
Personally I believe it would be better to make the replica: then
there
would be two Morgans running instead of one. It would be a shame to take
a nicely restored car and change it back into a racer -- though for
sentimental
reasons, I would prefer to own my dad's original car.
--- Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: ext Mark Palmer [mailto:mgvrmark@hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 2:55 PM
To: dmeadow@juno.com; mcobine@earthlink.net
Cc: vintage-race@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: Vintage eligibility & intent
Mike, David, et al,
It all comes down to the line-drawing game, doesn't it? Maybe some types of
cars, and some vintages of cars, should require period race history to avoid
lopsided fields of modern, high-production-volume cars. But older, rarer
models might be exempt from period race history requirement. We'd probably
all agree with that principle, but the difficulty comes when defining the
demarcation point. 1972? 1967? 1959? Or 1972 for sports models, but 1960
for sedans? Are all sports-racers & formula cars presumed to have history,
or do you have to prove it? What about the spare F1 car that was never
raced in the period? What if the factory used this chassis only for
testing? Do we require pro racing history, or is amateur racing history OK?
Then what groups to we recognize as valid amateur groups -- certainly
SCCA, but what about Cal Club? Mid West Council? CASC? EMRA? PHA? Does one
or two small hillclimbs constitute "period history"? Does an autocross?
What if the car was rallyed? Then what kind of rally is acceptable as
"period competition history"?
Reminds me of the old days when we debated "what is a sports car?" It's
impossible to get a concensus answer.
Besides, who really knows what the "original intent of vintage racing" was?
Who ever wrote it down? And if they did write it down, did everyone agree
at the time? Was it VSCCA in 1959? Or SVRA, when they started? Or VSCC in
England, when they began (which was well before all the North American
groups)?
I sure don't presume to know all the answers to those questions. Each club
has to work it out for themselves, and unfortunately each race promoter also
has to work it out, financially, for themselves. Hopefully we all end up
with some events to our liking -- which seems to be working out pretty well,
so far, I think. But there will never be a universal agreement on what cars
should be eligible, which ones should have period history, or even what the
"intent" of vintage racing is/was -- nor do we need such an agreement.
Regards,
Mark Palmer
>From: David Littlefield <dmeadow@juno.com>
>Reply-To: David Littlefield <dmeadow@juno.com>
>To: mcobine@earthlink.net
>CC: vintage-race@autox.team.net
>Subject: Re: Race Spec Roll Bars
>Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 15:30:00 -0500
>
>On Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:43:40 -0400 "Mike Cobine" <mcobine@earthlink.net>
>writes:
> >
> > Am I the only one who thinks this doesn't quite click with the
> > original
> > intent of vintage racing?
>
>You're right, I think, that allowing "new" vintage racers probably
>doesn't click with the intent of 70's vintage racing. But that was a
>long time ago, and the vintage racing has evolved. For the better?
>That's a matter of opinion of course. My answer is "yes" because it has
>opened vintage racing to people like me, who could not afford a "real"
>vintage racecar, particularly, as Bill Spohn noted, as there would be a
>great escalation in prices for those cars as the only mode of entry.
>
>What would the vintage racing world be like if we returned to the 70's
>intent? Much like the pre-1972 SCCA world you think was "too exclusive
>and
>restrictive." There would be a lot fewer cars, with fewer competitors,
>fewer places to run, and probably prohibitive entry fees for the lucky
>few that are allowed to race their special cars.
>
>I certainly believe that you should be able to start with a vintage car
>and make it a vintage racer as someone would at the time. A Grand Sport
>replica? Well, I think I would be happier if the owner were less
>ambitious, but if he does a good job and it looks good out on the track
>dicing with similar cars of the era, I think I would get a kick out of
>watching it. It could likely be as close as I could ever get to seeing
>the real thing, and certainly as close as the driver will ever get to
>driving it.
>
>Besides, there are different venues for different views. SVRA requires
>some classes to have race history, although not others, perhaps to avoid
>being flooded with cars in some categories. Some other clubs are even
>more restrictive, so if your opinion differs from mine, there are places
>to go.
>
>I'm speaking only as a member (not an official) of CVAR, but I think we
>would be shooting ourselves in the foot to restrict entry to "real"
>vintage racecars. I can think of at least 20 to 30 cars just off the top
>of my head that wouldn't qualify (including my own) and probably a lot
>more that I don't know about. That's out of a field of 80 to 120 cars at
>an event and would equate to less entry fees of $4,000 to $6,000 in a
>typical weekend. Also, we have a difficult enough time recruiting corner
>workers. If we were to eliminate the spouses, friends, and acquaintances
>of those car owners we wouldn't be able to run a race, even on the "short
>course." Assuming we could even open the gates, the cars that qualified
>would be running around the track virtually alone, or would have to race
>with dissimilar cars. Where's the fun in that?
>
>David Littlefield
>1974 MG Midget vintage racer (built in 2001 to 1972 specs, must really be
>confused!)
>________________________________________________________________
>GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
>Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
>Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
_________________________________________________________________
|