TRExp

Motorsports Forum

SCCA spit set up

Moss Motors
AutoShrine Sponsor
AutoShrine Sponsor
AutoShrine Sponsor
AutoShrine Sponsor

hoffman900 Bob Adams
USA, USA, USA   USA
1978 Yamaha MC TT500 "Flat Tracker"
In reply to # 1381839 by clshore The term 'Vintage' in 'Vintage Racing' now means about as much as the term 'Stock' in 'Stock Cars'.

ie, both are silent.

Racers will go as far as rules permit, no doubt about that

Patrick's point is that rules are being made (and enforced) by and for the benefit of the Sanctioning bodies
to make more money, not for the benefit of the Racer/Members.

So Bob, and Dick, and Jim, guys like you sound awfully defensive to me.
(And kind of muffled, as if your heads are up your own butts)

Maybe you just can't cut it in the real world of racing, so 'Vintage Racing' rules allow you to spend whatever it takes to win instead.
(maybe someone is 'compensating', if you know what I mean?).

But maybe not, what's the difference, this post is just a bunch glowing dots on a screen ...

No, not really. The key word here is 'racing'.

It's a simple concept - there is a rule book and you build to it. To bemoan anyone who does as such, is really being delusional. The whole vintage spirit thing is flaunted around as some kind of moral superiority thing, when it's not.

There isn't a car in the paddock that doesn't have something that was not around in 1967. When you have guys who were lap record holders, Runoff winning engine builders, car builders, championship winners from the 1960s in your paddock, and you bring this topic up, they laugh, and usually say something to the effect "we haven't seen a single car here that would have passed tech back in the day". And that goes for cars with drivers with the attitudes like Patrick has.

How is this for benefit:

The top TR4 racers back in they day had to replace cranks every 5 races and connecting rods every 3 races due to the revs they were running with the stock components. The fast GT6 racers (Group 44, Kastner) had to magnaflux the crankshaft mid weekend due to the revs.

Do you want to go back to that?

Why use a vintage Koni shock when a top of the Ohlins will bolt in the same place?

Why use a camshaft designed in 1966, when I can have a computer controlled design lobe ground with every piece of knowledge gained of the last 50 years?

Why use craptastic brake pads/shoes, when you can go to Performance Friction and have modern compounds applied to the stock backing plates?

You can't undo knowledge and if you talk to those who were actually there, there is some 'rose colored glasses' worn by some...



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 2016-07-07 06:57 PM by hoffman900.

. Hide banner ads & support this website by becoming a > Gold Supporting Member <
claytoncnc Avatar
claytoncnc Gold Member Marcus Clayton
Melbourne, Ivanhoe, Australia   AUS
I see both sides of this coin in the race scene in Australia, and they seem to co exist reasonably happily.
The cars that are used in historic racing are built to a spec agreed between the owner and CAMS historic commission reflecting a certain point in that car's history, and the car is issued with a Certificate of Description.
This caused some consternation at first, particularly from Morgan people whose cars had to revert back to drum brakes if they wanted to run in their chosen class.
Early cars are very restricted in their spec, but are allowed internal changes to crank, rods etc for reliability. These are pre approved, and not controversial.

http://www.cams.com.au/motor-sport/sport/historics/historic-groups

The cars must all have a competition history (except group N and S) and it works well because owners have a vested interest in keeping their cars quite original. There is no real benefit in cheating, because of the potential loss in value of both the car and reputation when detected.

Group N and S do not require a racing history, and this is where you see a range, from the guy who drives to the circuit in his Simca Vedette, or Citroen light15 (Group Na) to those with giant transporters and teams of mechanics for their Pantera, Shelby Mustang, (Group Sc).

As someone who runs in Group S, I really do not care that I am being passed by Porsche 911s, Mustangs or TVRs, I am happy dicing with people I know in Sprites, Hondas and slower MGBs, and quite smug when I just pack up my tools, my shelter and camping chair and drive home again, anything up to 300km.

You want to spend money? there are more professional classes, with greater freedoms. The Muscle car series cars have professional drivers in cars costing $300K

My opinion is the fun factor is inversely proportional to the amount of money/time spent.
I have been in that sphere, running F2 cars with all the latest tweaks. It became a business, and the serious side far outweighed the fun.

So some of us like racing cars "as they were", keeping to original spec, others like to win by bolting on ever more sophisticated stuff.
I do it for fun.


Attachments:
IMG_2930.JPG    55.9 KB
IMG_2930.JPG

OFRacer Avatar
OFRacer Mike H
Poughkeepsie, NY, USA   USA
I strongly believe vintage racing should feature vintage cars running equipment like they had "back in the day". My 63 Spitfire has been a race car since day 1, built by future IMSA director of competition Charlie Rainville while he was the parts manager of a Rhode Island Triumph dealership. I bought the car 12 years ago, not knowing the history, I just wanted to race a Spitfire. I've been driving them on the street since 1982 and I wanted a track dedicated car. My formula car was too much of a time sink, brilliant idea, lets get a 50 year old disposable brit car.

It was an SCCA G-Prod car then and conformed to the rules. It had a ton of mods made over the years, for safety and performance, but it was still all metal, no fiberglass, no fender flares, it looked like a Spitfire. The reliability and to a smaller degree, my 30 years of driving Triumphs on the street and at track days, allowed me to win 4 SCCA regional championships in G and later H Production. Then the rules started changing, there were now two levels of engine and car prep and to remain competitive I needed to "upgrade" the car. I didn't think it was the right thing to do.

After I bought the car, people recognized the car and started to come up to me, telling me the history and stories about the car. I tracked down all 4 living (Charlie had passed by then) prior owners and got the story of the car. I saw pictures of races, crashes, friends, old trophies and heard tall tales. I now know why there's sheet metal pop riveted inside the drivers side trunk ( broken axle and wheel passed through there), what the old cage looked like and why they made the mods they did.

I made a conscious decision not to modernize the car. I didn't add fender flares to cover 8" slicks (although the car did come with them, 5 seconds a lap faster at Limerock than my treaded Hoosier TDs), no rear disk brake / coil over conversion, Toyota 5 speed tranny or Subaru diff. I transitioned for a few years, running Vintage and H prod but the vintage racing became my focus and joy. I've done many of the big vintage events, The Mitty, Limerock Vintage, Watkins Glen Fall Festival, and I'm midpack at best but so are a bunch of other like minded folks. Two weeks ago at Thompson, I spent the weekend in very the close proximity of an MGB and a Healy Sprite. We finished one race with a spread of 0.4 seconds between 2nd (me) and 4th( the MGB blew the last turn). It doesn't get better than that. No trophies, no phone call from Penske (I'm still available Roger), no victory lap just fun, clean, honest racing.

So please feel free to slice and dice your old car, Triumph team principle Kas Kastner's motto was always "Don't get beaten by Equipment" . I try to follow this rule today but only by making modifications to keep the car reliable (they stopped making Triumph engine blocks 32 yrs ago) and safe, like an accusump or a HANS device. I'll skip the carbon fiber bonnet and just accept that other cars will be faster than mine,

But I doubt as much fun.

Time to load the car on the trailer for the 5 hour haul to Watkins Glen. Spending this weekend there with the Historic Racing Group ( I have 6 championships with them, including last years Group 1). There's a couple of Bs, an Alfa and an original Mini Cooper waiting at the playground for me. Maybe I'll bring home a cheap checked flag or a coffee mug but I know I'll bring back some great memories.

Just my 2 cents,

mike h

. Hide banner ads & support this website by becoming a > Gold Supporting Member <
clshore Carter Shore
Beverly Hills, Florida, USA   USA
In reply to # 1381840 by hoffman900
In reply to # 1381839 by clshore The term 'Vintage' in 'Vintage Racing' now means about as much as the term 'Stock' in 'Stock Cars'.

ie, both are silent.

Racers will go as far as rules permit, no doubt about that

Patrick's point is that rules are being made (and enforced) by and for the benefit of the Sanctioning bodies
to make more money, not for the benefit of the Racer/Members.

So Bob, and Dick, and Jim, guys like you sound awfully defensive to me.
(And kind of muffled, as if your heads are up your own butts)

Maybe you just can't cut it in the real world of racing, so 'Vintage Racing' rules allow you to spend whatever it takes to win instead.
(maybe someone is 'compensating', if you know what I mean?).

But maybe not, what's the difference, this post is just a bunch glowing dots on a screen ...

No, not really. The key word here is 'racing'.

It's a simple concept - there is a rule book and you build to it. To bemoan anyone who does as such, is really being delusional. The whole vintage spirit thing is flaunted around as some kind of moral superiority thing, when it's not.

There isn't a car in the paddock that doesn't have something that was not around in 1967. When you have guys who were lap record holders, Runoff winning engine builders, car builders, championship winners from the 1960s in your paddock, and you bring this topic up, they laugh, and usually say something to the effect "we haven't seen a single car here that would have passed tech back in the day". And that goes for cars with drivers with the attitudes like Patrick has.

How is this for benefit:

The top TR4 racers back in they day had to replace cranks every 5 races and connecting rods every 3 races due to the revs they were running with the stock components. The fast GT6 racers (Group 44, Kastner) had to magnaflux the crankshaft mid weekend due to the revs.

Do you want to go back to that?

Why use a vintage Koni shock when a top of the Ohlins will bolt in the same place?

Why use a camshaft designed in 1966, when I can have a computer controlled design lobe ground with every piece of knowledge gained of the last 50 years?

Why use craptastic brake pads/shoes, when you can go to Performance Friction and have modern compounds applied to the stock backing plates?

You can't undo knowledge and if you talk to those who were actually there, there is some 'rose colored glasses' worn by some...

So Bob, to recap your posting:
It's clear that you have no respect for the concept of 'Vintage Racing', to you it's Just Another Class.
Your agenda is to win, having fun, has no place.
You choose to participate in it because you cannot compete in SCCA 'Real Racing', and see a niche in the rules that can be exploited so that you can do so.

What is being discussed and criticized here is the way that Sanctioning bodies have chosen to (mis)manage the rules.

That you have chosen to participate is your call.
But having done so, don't go getting all 'Offended' about your choice, and expect all of us to agree.

Those of us who were 'actually there' are entitled to our opinions.
You may have spoken to some folks who were there, I assume others who have also made the same choice,
but to assume that they speak for ALL of us is laughably sophomoric.

That we are even having this discussion is ample proof.

That you don't agree and feel the need to justify your choices is your right, and perhaps inevitable, but I for one frankly don't give a flying F%$#.

hoffman900 Bob Adams
USA, USA, USA   USA
1978 Yamaha MC TT500 "Flat Tracker"
In reply to a post by It's clear that you have no respect for the concept of 'Vintage Racing', to you it's Just Another Class. Your agenda is to win, having fun, has no place. You choose to participate in it because you cannot compete in SCCA 'Real Racing', and see a niche in the rules that can be exploited so that you can do so.

Again, you're injecting some kind of moral argument into this.

This is an extremely simple concept:

You have rules. You build to those rules. You go race.

Because those rules do not fit your interpretation does not allow one to pursue some kind of holier-than-thou argument in attempt to guilt another racer (Jim) who built to his organization's rules.

Secondly, Patrick proceeded to attack Jim personally, then threw a friend of mine into his face, as if somehow that validated his argument. Which it doesn't. There is a reason my friend runs up front (yes, he's a good driver even despite being 80+yo) but also because he builds his cars to the rules. This person has a resume like this:

SCCA Nat'l Racer since 1958.
1965 Glen 500 Class winner
1965 ARRC DP Pole and race leader until mechanical issue (5th place finish)
1967 ARRC DP 3rd place as a car builder
1967 Leyland Motor Corporation trophy
1968 ARRC DP Pole and 3rd place (due to a spin) as a car builder
1969-1970 NE BP Champion, 1970 ARRC 2nd place
IMSA victories in IMSA RS/BS
Built the first Toyota to win a professional race in North America

Countless Nat'l victories and lap records as a car builder and driver. Has driven everything from Ferrari TRC, Austin Healeys, Formula Jr, F5000 / Formula-A, etc.

Regularly he has former Group 44 drivers, former Nat'l Champions, IMSA Champions, and other race winners from that era in his paddock. Also has former employees who help out who worked for Penske's Indy car team and built the IROC cars in the 1970s.

If there is anyone who knows what you guys did and didn't have, it is them. There is no poser among them, they are the history all this is trying to emulate.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-07-08 02:05 PM by hoffman900.

clshore Carter Shore
Beverly Hills, Florida, USA   USA
In reply to # 1382019 by hoffman900
In reply to a post by It's clear that you have no respect for the concept of 'Vintage Racing', to you it's Just Another Class. Your agenda is to win, having fun, has no place. You choose to participate in it because you cannot compete in SCCA 'Real Racing', and see a niche in the rules that can be exploited so that you can do so.

Again, you're injecting some kind of moral argument into this.

This is an extremely simple concept:

You have rules. You build to those rules. You go race.

Because those rules do not fit your interpretation does not allow one to pursue some kind of holier-than-thou argument in attempt to guilt another racer (Jim) who built to his organization's rules.

Secondly, Patrick proceeded to attack Jim personally, then threw a friend of mine into his face, as if somehow that validated his argument. Which it doesn't. There is a reason my friend runs up front (yes, he's a good driver even despite being 80+yo) but also because he builds his cars to the rules. This person has a resume like this:

SCCA Nat'l Racer since 1958.
1965 Glen 500 Class winner
1965 ARRC DP Pole and race leader until mechanical issue (5th place finish)
1967 ARRC DP 3rd place as a car builder
1967 Leyland Motor Corporation trophy
1968 ARRC DP Pole and 3rd place (due to a spin) as a car builder
1969-1970 NE BP Champion, 1970 ARRC 2nd place
IMSA victories in IMSA RS/BS
Built the first Toyota to win a professional race in North America

Countless Nat'l victories and lap records as a car builder and driver. Has driven everything from Ferrari TRC, Austin Healeys, Formula Jr, F5000 / Formula-A, etc.

Regularly he has former Group 44 drivers, former Nat'l Champions, IMSA Champions, and other race winners from that era in his paddock. Also has former employees who help out who worked for Penske's Indy car team and built the IROC cars in the 1970s.

If there is anyone who knows what you guys did and didn't have, it is them. There is no poser among them, they are the history all this is trying to emulate.

That's great Bob, but you are describing other people, and I was talking to YOU.
I posed no moral arguments, although maybe it's easier for you to see it that way.

Guess what: I'm free to adopt any attitude I choose, and I will pursue arguments of my choosing.
I neither seek nor require your approval to do so.

I assert that it is the problem is rules themselves, and how the sanctioning bodies choose to manipulate them.
I have two perfectly good Spitfires in storage with SCCA ID numbers and logbooks, provenance enough I think to quality as Vintage racers.
I CHOOSE not to engage with the 'Vintage' sanctioning bodies.

The question is sometimes asked, "Why do we race?"
I think each person's answer may be different and complex.
But I think it boils down to "Because we HAVE to", something inside compels us.

I'm not trying to convince you of anything.
Please feel free to say whatever you like, and I will do the same.

. Hide banner ads & support this website by becoming a > Gold Supporting Member <

To add your reply, or post your own questions

Members Sign In   or   Create an Account

Registration is FREE and takes less than a minute!


Having trouble posting or changing forum settings?
Read the Forum Help (FAQ) or contact the webmaster





Join The Club

Sign in to ask questions, share photos, and access all website features

Your Cars

1969 Triumph Spitfire MkIII

Text Size

Larger Smaller
Reset Save

Sponsor Links