This message link is like the arguement of "How many angels can dance on the
head of a pin". This is why there are so many differing organizations out
there trying to run a racing season - none big enough to offer geographic
scope and none with enough creativety to expand beyond the biases of the
founding group of individuals who, in some cases, have adopted the attitude
of the "MIghty PooBah of .....".
Why not try and find a common ground and expand on it rather than
ceaselessly draw lines in the sand.
John Doede
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-vintage-race@autox.team.net
[mailto:owner-vintage-race@autox.team.net]On Behalf Of TMHEFFRON@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 8:54 AM
To: vintage-race@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: what is vintage and who should......
OK then, I'll wade into the cesspool...
I think:
1. In our USA vintage racing I want to see a fairly close period correct
car
preparation, regardless of whether the car in question has race history or
not. This means tire width and tread type (wide tires on cars that should
be
skinny is stupid looking, incorrect, and dangerous to suspension
components),
brakes (modern disk brake conversions are NOT correct). I'm not really
concerned about engine internals in the more 'open' classes- if someone
wants
to build a hand grenade, OK, or if someone wants to use stronger internals
for durability, great. Skinny tires are a great limiting factor to
horsepower gains. Formula classes (Ford, Vee, etc.) should follow the
strict
rules - to consciously cheat in vintage racing in order to 'win' is really
pathetic.
2. Continued emphasis on safety. Safety should be a big concern. The boys
in England racing their very fast cars very hard with no roll bars or belts
are taking BIG chances. I have seen many of our MG T series class cars
race
with no roll bars or fuel cells. I wouldn't choose this myself, and I'm
not
sure this is such a good idea. Luckily, in the USA these classes tend to
have the most vintage spirited people in them, and I've observed they
generally leave a safe margin in their driving out of respect for the cars
and each other.
3. The boys in England have also allowed the evolution of their 'vintage'
cars to the point where their XK 120's look like our USA super-modified
jalopy race cars of the 1950's. Is this because they place too much
emphasis
on competition, or because they haven't set up and enforced rules requiring
'period' preparation? I don't know, but I'd speculate emphasis on
competition is not the real devil, rule-making and enforcement is going to
decide what our vintage racing, looks and feels like, and how safe it will
be. Our vintage racing should not descend down their path.
4. Replica's and new specials - I also think it takes away from the
'show'
when some made up sillouette car easily beats famous period winners because
of modern technology. This is like seeing the 82nd Airborne show up at a
Civil War re-enactment. I don't have a big problem with faithful replica's
and specials, if period correct. The special I'm restoring will be pretty
damn period correct, and of course that means it will have slower lap times
than some of the other cars converted to modern brakes and wide tires. I
won't bitch about getting beat by those cars, because I won't care what
place
I end up in, but I will care if the over-stress suspension breaks on one of
these cars, especially if this happens right in front of me.
Terry
|