An old "Road & Track" that I have from about 1964 details in an
article the set-ups of a Triumph Spitfire race car and a TR4 race car.
Each car raced in a SCCA "production" class. If I recall correctly,
the engines were modified for winning: milled heads, porting, new
rods, balancing, headers, etc., etc. The SU carbs were "belled-out",
which made them look like Mickey's Wide-Mouth beer bottles.
Safety equipment for each car was limited to a roll "hoop" and carpet
removal, and maybe a fire extinguisher. The TR4 still had its
original dash and passenger seat in-place, and I think the Spit
interior was almost all stock. The driver's seat for the TR4 was a
homemade welded-tube contraption, which when combined with the
military-type lap belt held the driver somehow in-place. Other than
pads and shoes, I think the brakes were also stock.
Considering all of the engine mods described in detail about each car
in this article, the suspension changes were relatively sparse.
Stiffer or cut coil springs were used up-front on each car, with a
de-arched rear leaf-spring used on the Spitfire. The TR4 rear springs
had "naturally sagged" to lower the car a bit, written as if a great
thing had happened. For the TR4 a front sway-bar was added, and both
cars had limited slip diffs installed. Wheels for the TR4 were the
"factory" 8-spoke mags, but the Spitfire ran on widened steel wheels,
I think.
If I recall from the article, the TR4 owner complained of a push
problem, and his driving technique included "pitching" the car into a
turn until its suspension "flopped" over. The Spit handled much
better than stock mainly because the rear-end jacking had been greatly
reduced. The final results showed that both cars were considerably
quicker and faster than stock, mostly do to the hot-rodded engines.
These were "state-of-the-art" production race cars then, but I don't
think suspension technology or know-how had really reached either car
owner.
Which brings me to the question of "What is Vintage?" If I found one
of the cars described above in a barn someday, I think it'd be
difficult for me to restore it to any other condition than originally
raced (per the 1964 R&T article). Because the point of the
restoration would be to show others what the car was like in the
period of time it was considered contemporary.
However, I'd also have a lot of difficulty risking life and limb
racing a car without the benefit of today's proven safety equipment.
So what's the answer? Well the answer may be just what is going on in
Vintage racing today. To some people the vintage car is more
important than the racing; to other people the racing is more
important than the vintage car. It's up to the individual deciding to
go Vintage racing first to decide which to value; the car or the race.
In my observation, the problems that have been discussed recently on
the list arise when the "car" people clash with the "race" people
within on-track race groups. The solution is perhaps to race with
organizations who's values appeal most. If none exists, some might
try to establish a new on-track race group, or to establish a new
organization altogether.
Sincerely,
Kevin D. O'Connor
|