The Roaring Season

by **Rod Grimwood** » Thu Mar 19, 2015 9:49 am

Does any one have a copy of 'wide wheels' August 1969 there is a great article on the 'Problems' of NZ Motorsport in the July 1969 copy with 2nd part in August copy. (I do not have August) Under heading 'Suggested Racing Formulae Bryan Faloon'. Very interesting read and would love to see final part.

I will scan and try and size 1st part of write up that is in July magazine, and post it's interesting read.

by **rf84** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 7:57 pm

The anecdotal evidence would suggest that the majority of people on this Forum have a strong interest in saloon cars. But if we are debating which is THE premier class of race cars in NZ then arguably it is the Toyota Racing Series. The number of overseas drivers and teams continues to grow, the cars look good and the racing is close. In the final qualifying session at the GP meeting at Manfeild a mere .633 of a second separated the first 16 cars! Would loved to have seen the driver's face when his team told him "We have some good news and some bad news. The good news is you broke the old lap record. The bad news is you are 16th on the grid!"

by **paul lancaster** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 9:29 am

V8supertourers have cancelled there next round at timaru citing,"not enough numbers",not many nails left in that there coffin!

by **Oldfart** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 11:50 pm

Is this THE premier race series or A premier.
If it is one of a few, then a saloon based class has a chance. If it is to be THE then it must be single seater cars IMHO. To me one make won't do the business. The cars need to be different so that there are apparent technologies.

by **Allan** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 9:11 pm

You make a good point Rod, but our sport has been like that from year dot. If you look back to what some consider the "good old days" it was those that had the backing or where with all that did the best. As an example in the early Tasman days you had three levels, firstly the internationals, secondly the locals with the previous years cars and then the rest.
The question I would ask is are there too many different classes or series in today's motorsport, particularly at the grass roots level. But as a rider to that question look at the competitor numbers in such classes as ERC and HMC. Would combining some of the less frequented classes help or for that matter work.
And then along comes the Ssangyong utes with 30 plus entries. My prediction for that class is that the push and shove, crash and bash that often comes with a one make series will thin the fields when when the panel beating bills start to mount. I hope not.
Allan

by **Rod Grimwood** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 7:57 pm

This is a warning to the DRIFT 1NZ group, if anyone reads this or are interested, only 'an observation', but been there done that.

The next motorsport to suffer the 'wallet' syndrome will be Drift. Over the last couple of years they have started shooting themselves in the foot. The top 1/2 dozen or so have taken the sponsorship dollars from the sport (not saying unfairly, but there are only so many sponsor dollars) and now have big horsepower special built cars that are way out of the original concept and now its about beat the next guy to the first corner and game over.
This is a trend in all motorsport, it gets off real good and spectacular with guys in basic cars all around the same horsepower and the young fellas watching say 'that's neat I can do that in my car' and join in and you have big field. Then the money comes in and some turn up with super horse power engines and custom built cars and the average guy is left in the 'smoke'.
If you want your sport to survive, Keep it limited to a horsepower level, weight restriction, and all on same tyre and then the guy from down the road can compete on equal terms.
Yep build special cars, but as mentioned limit horsepower, weight, tyres, and then driver comes into it, and lets be fair the top guys would still prevail under experience, talent, but the average guy who fills the pits and stadium up has a 'fighting chance' and will still see the car he is 'chasing' and will not wander off thinking 'I got no show, so bugger this' and is lost to the sport.

Just a thought from what I have watched over few years, and I enjoy watching it but can see the gap getting bigger and the average and not so average (dads) wallet getting stretched until it pops.

by **Shoreboy57** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 10:01 am

apparently STs have cancelled their South Island trip - down to just 5 cars! Decision on Puke to be made in a couple of weeks.
They shoot horses don't they?

by **Rod Grimwood** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 8:36 am

Jac you have just hopefully started the 'first' bit of sensible wording.

by **Jac Mac** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 6:21 am

Allan wrote:That, Custaxie50, is like asking for the meaning of life.
It is my personal opinion that most of us involved in the construction or modification of saloon cars prefer to work to a simple set of rules that make whatever they allow easily achievable while allowing us to have a greater input of ideas as to how this is achieved. By that I mean that a situation like the NZV8 supertourers where the chassis are all identical is not my idea of an ideal class. Please don't get me wrong, with a full field of entries these can be quite spectacular, but we need just that, a full field to create the spectacle that will get the punters bums on seats. But those cars are all the same except for a few bolt on panels and the badges. It doesn't matter how excited the commentators get about the "Ford verses Holden" stuff but in reality they are all an identical space frame and Chevy motor. To me the NZV8s are better because at least they start will a real car and turn it into a race car allowing those who build and maintain them to have some input into how they achieve the end result. I actually feel the same about the Aussie V8 supercars but they attract large crowds because of brand loyalty and the spectacle that the sometimes put on. I find the DTM to be so far away from reality as to be not worth watching.
I have thought for some time that world motorsport needs a class where it is possible to build a car anywhere in the world and be competitive. But it would have to be a class based on real cars not some quasi silhouette hot rod. For example how about a world wide class based on basic 4 door saloons running 6 cylinder engines up to 4 litres with no aero other than that fitted to the original base model, no great big flared gaurds, with no paddle or sequential gearboxes and major restrictions on wheels brakes and tyres. And on the point of tyres leave that open for competitors to use whatever they want within restrictions placed on them over sizes and quantity per meeting. Why? Because it gets a greater number of tyre companies involved which must benefit the series. And then hold a world series in as many different countries as possible, just like the old group A. We have in both NZ and Aus the skills and people to build a winner give a "sensible" set of rules. I think what tends to happen is the rules get too complicated and too expensive to allow for the backyard guys who would get involved in such projects.
It is also my belief that apart from the once a year visit of the Aussie V8s most motorsport is run for competitors and not spectators. If you went to the Ganley festival and looked at the crowd most there had been involved in some way in motorsport during their lives.
Allan

[color="#0000CD"]Before adopting the NZV8 TL category as a basis for this series the rules need a thorough going over. There has been a 'loophole' in the engine specifications since inception that should be addressed. There is no specified/minimum deck height or piston pin height for either Ford or Holden and this has/is being exploited by decking the Ford block ~0.130" along with custom pistons, this 'mod' requires several 'cuts' of the deck surface, the custom pistons, shorter push rods,intake manifold machine work along with other bits and pieces. Same mods attempted on the Holden create a problem with head bolts due to reduced thread count.
Holden only gets a cast crank which does not seem to like living long term with the abuse from dog boxes.
Don't get me wrong, I think the class could form the basis for what you describe, just long overdue for some sensible rewording. [/color]

by **ERC** » Thu Feb 12, 2015 2:17 am

Not quite Dale. What I meant was that the majority of classic drivers are amateurs enjoying themselves. There are of course many other genres catering for amateurs driving modern cars!

If the 100 or so other drivers in our group are happy enough, then WE don't have a problem. If others outside the group have an issue, that is their choice. We already have it within our rules that if 15% of the paid up membership object to a specific car, then it is out.

There are now sufficient classes around that just about all cars have somewhere to run. The numbers speak for themselves and drivers then align themselves accordingly.

by **Kiwiboss** » Thu Feb 12, 2015 12:10 am

Really Ray, REALLY!!

ERC wrote:Generally, Classic racing is about amateurs enjoying their cars on track. Simple as that.

Although you say "Generally" I think not! and its not as simple as that either.

So an "Amateur" enjoying his "Supertourer" on track would be considered(to you) "Classic Racing" Hmmm

To me Classic racing is ONLY about the car and about its correctness(EG: period components from the era, etc)

Been enjoyed by an amateur driver is what the experience is about, as it is for most of us(EG:the FUN factor)

Dale M

by **John McKechnie** » Wed Feb 11, 2015 8:55 pm

Howard-Quite simple really- With the moving towards COD and cars having a relevant schedule, then that will identify which cars are actually Historic, Classic, Replica and Club .
HMC cars already must have COD defining the engine, S & J engined cars will eventually need to find an accepting class

by **ERC** » Wed Feb 11, 2015 8:43 pm

Fair comment Howard, but apart from the combined classes at the Festival, where we were oversubscribed, I see no value in chucking out cars just as long as they are driven in a gentlemanly manner. When the time comes that we have to weed out those cars outside the basic rules because the grids are over full, we will.

Oh that Tier 1 grids were so full that they needed to subdivide. As it is, they could combine at least three different groups and still have grid spaces going begging. What does that tell us?

by **Howard Wood** » Wed Feb 11, 2015 7:56 pm

ERC wrote:

We allow period transplants so a 1999 engine in a 1965 car is a no-no, but a 1970 engine is OK - within certain criteria and judged on an individual basis.

You say that Ray and I understand the reasons for your pragmatic approach but the fact is you allow big capacity alloy Cosworth YB derived engines in your series. The base engine was built from 1986 to 1997, not too far from your 1999 example and the S & J Alloy motor was, according to their website, first developed in 2006!

by **ERC** » Wed Feb 11, 2015 12:39 am

1980 is now a long time ago - 35 years, but we'll never agree on what constitutes classic - or Thoroughbred!

Agree with Oldfart that the newest major component dictates the age, though we have to be careful here as older gearboxes are now getting scarce so the practice of fitting a Toyota 5 speed is done for reliability and ease of maintenance and preservation of the original. Running an original gearbox that only last three laps every time it races is a sure recipe for a car being garaged.

If a crossflow head was available and used in period on a BMC A Series or B Series engine, would you now ban them?

Brakes free - but from the same manufacturer? I don't really see the point.

Probably doesn't really belong in this thread, but responding to Allan...

Why 14" wheels? It makes no sense all, given that many older classics used 16" and 15" wheels anyway.

The critical thing is "Where can I run my car and what is the allowed format?" (ie Targa, sprint races, hillclimbs, endurance races etc.)

It may be the tail wagging the dog but this is now a tired subject that effectively boils down to getting sufficient numbers to make any class or event viable.

We allow period transplants so a 1999 engine in a 1965 car is a no-no, but a 1970 engine is OK - within certain criteria and judged on an individual basis.

I wonder how many cars from F5000 down, are using engines and componentry built pre 1980 and 100% exactly as raced in period?

The more restrictions you try to impose, the bigger the can of worms trying to police it. If we are mixing a 1300cc Escort with a V8 Corvette, then the winner is going to be pretty obvious anyway.

Generally, Classic racing is about amateurs enjoying their cars on track. Simple as that.

by **Oldfart** » Tue Feb 10, 2015 9:54 pm

Allan I agree with you, in fact I tried to donate a trophy for Targa for the highest placed true "Classic" which had similar guidelines to what you suggest. The offer was declined.
Cars should be dated by the newest of the major components, shell/chassis, engine, transmission in my opinion. So your 1965 example with a 1999 motor is a '99. If it has a Jericho box, then whatever year that is.

by **Allan** » Tue Feb 10, 2015 9:33 pm

To add another bit to the mix comes the word "classic". To my simple way of thinking the Targa classic cut of date of 1992 is way wrong. What some folks call "classics" I tend to look at as hotrods. Don't get me wrong on this, when I look at some of these "hotrods" I see some absolutely beautiful work and preparation and congratulate the builder, but a 1965 car with a 1999 motor is not a "classic".
I believe that the cut off date for a "classic" should be 1980 with a run on for models absolutely identical to those registered/produced before 1980.
So having said that how about the original motor, two valves per cylinder, on carburetors (except where fuel injection was standard on that particular model and then one must use the original system), transmission from the same manufacturer but used before 1980, brakes free but from the same manufacturer, 14 inch wheels, standard body shell (no add on aerodynamic aids) etc. Keep it simple, keep it cheap but allow for some creativity. Allow special models that existed at the time to be recreated within the rules. The model range here is massive and includes Escort, many Fiat models, Alfa, Toyota, Mitsi, Datsun, Hillman Avenger and many more. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

by **paul lancaster** » Sat Feb 07, 2015 6:24 am

Kevin Hirst wrote:Wasn't the small replica holden/ falcon /v8 coupe powered by motor cycles motors built for that purpose? what happened there? lack of interest or what ?

Hi kev, I think you will find that mr quinn owns the aussie racing car series, so pretty unlikely you will see them run any where, other than highlands park

by **John McKechnie** » Fri Feb 06, 2015 12:24 am

They still love their little Aussie battlers- in fact I think they were at Highland Park as one of the support acts.
There are profiles with chassis and engines- sound familiar?

by **Kevin Hirst** » Thu Feb 05, 2015 11:44 pm

John H wrote:I think the ST class is a great concept and must have taken a lot of effort and tenacity to put together. Would love to know why its not thriving?
I remember Aussie tried briefly the Nascar type car around the Gold Coast and other tracks with the concept of a very simple car concept with Bob Jane. Perhaps we should try that formula of car? This country is awash with those who could build them.

Perhaps we need to forget about Australia and accept our small population and just do our own thing?
These are just questions.

Wasn't the small replica holden/ falcon /v8 coupe powered by motor cycles motors built for that purpose? what happened there? lack of interest or what ?

The Roaring Season

New Zealand's premier race series.

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: New Zealand's premier race series.

Re: New Zealand's premier race series.

Re: New Zealand's premier race series.

Re: New Zealand's premier race series.

Re: New Zealand's premier race series.

Re: New Zealand's premier race series.

Re: New Zealand's premier race series.

Re: New Zealand's premier race series.

Re: New Zealand's premier race series.

Re: New Zealand's premier race series.

Re: New Zealand's premier race series.

Re: New Zealand's premier race series.

Re: New Zealand's premier race series.

Re: New Zealand's premier race series.

Re: New Zealand's premier race series.

Re: New Zealand's premier race series.

Re: New Zealand's premier race series.

Re: New Zealand's premier race series.

Re: New Zealand's premier race series.

Re: New Zealand's premier race series.

Re: New Zealand's premier race series.