What's the answer?

[rf84]

You raise another good point re roll bars Ray. We had an (ostensibly standard) Subaru competing locally that was a full SIX seconds faster up a hillclimb than a Porsche GT3. The Subaru had no roll cage and a standard lap and diagonal seat belt. If the Subaru had been fitted with a roll cage it would have had to be homologated with MNZ. This costs in excess of $500 for the paper work alone let alone the cost of the roll cage. What is preferable-having a car with a roll cage that is not homologated or having a car with no roll cage at all?
Three years ago I imported an aluminium fuel cell from the USA. I cannot use it now because as of January 2016 fabricated fuel cells have to have paper work to prove what materials and what welding filler rods were used in it's construction. It then has to pass a pressure test. Yet someone can have an old car whose tank is possibly affected by rust and that's OK?
All more reasons to question the competence of some officials.

[ERC]

As for cages, the engineering test required for a free form cage (ie not strictly to one of MSNZ's plans) is so extreme, that a similar MSNZ approved cage would fail it...

MSNZ seems to think that a little used steel shelled road car, needs the same sort of cage as for a full race, fibreglass skinned race car.

They also ignore anything other than the cage itself, totally ignoring any existing bodyshell strength, so you'd need the same cage in a 1500cc or 2 litre normally aspirated road car. as an armour plated Sherman tank. As with many of these rules, it is down to personal safety, that wouldn't affect anyone other than the driver in a serious crash.

MSNZ has a mission statement that they seem unable to abide by, which is to encourage participation.

Even overseas, things are not as smooth as they used to be either, as apparently, they now struggle to get a grid of pre war historic race cars to Monaco. High costs and minimal track time don't help.

The one area where NZ race organisers score highly (well, most of them) is the determination to cram as many races in the day as possible, but if drivers are being forced out, for whatever reason, rather than encouraged, the future is looking a bit grim.

By the time Elf & Safety have finished, you won't be able to race cars at all. Just tricycles with foam rubber surrounds or Scalextric cars - as long as there is some electricity...

[Ross Hollings]

Can i ask a question,historic race cars,open cars,ie those race by HRSCC,Vintage Car Club,
etc,do not need seatbelts [?] ,roll cages [?] ,is that true?
SO if they can race without that protection why not can others,remember years ago when the argument about fireproof overalls came out ,and some said it did not matter for club events,there is a very old saying "There is no such thing as a clubmans fire"?

[rf84]

That is partly correct Ross. The HRSCC scrutineer to MNZ regs. The VCC have their own regs and do not require seat belts or roll bars.
The crux of the "problem" is that when MNZ promulgate rules they do not seem to differentiate between forms of car racing that have relatively low levels of risk and those that have higher levels of risk. Most people would agree that a Standing 1/4 Mile Sprint is less dangerous than a field of F5000 cars racing on a circuit. But the regs often do not reflect this.
Maybe the VCC have some common sense. As Ray has quite rightly pointed out in Post #120 MNZ do not differentiate between different designs and/or different materials used in race car construction. VCC probably acknowledge that if you tried to fit a roll bar to say an MGTF the roll bar itself may be strong enough to prevent injury in the case of a crash but what about the attachments to the car? There are very few possible attachment points and they are weak so will likely fail in a crash. Though not required under VCC regs there are very few (if any cars) racing under VCC regs that do not have some form of roll protection or seat belts. They just don't get overly officious about "out of date" seat belts or roll bars that don't meet the same standards as those required for F5000 cars.

[Oldfart]

My tuppence.
Some of you will know that my son did the basics of an FEA (Finite Element Analysis) for Dave Silcock on his "non legal" cage which he had built from Chrome Moly, but failed to get the paperwork done on time before MSNZ moved the goal posts on the main hoop. As Sean doesn't have the applicable certification his numbers would not have been accepted. (He does do rather high powered engineering for a significant manufacturer of close to £2 million cars here in the UK). Out of interest he did a quick set on the MSNZ "approved" cage. Dave's one would pass the numbers which MSNZ required, the MSNZ one doesn't, and by quite a way.
As Ray says, they have no differentiation on "their" cage for if you are putting it in a Falcon or a Bambina, but when it came to the Jag, they wanted to include the weight of the car as a reason to decline.
Bashing heads against a wall comes to mind.

[Allan]

I do know of a vehicle imported recently from Europe with a FIA cage that had to be modified to comply with MNZ regs.

[Oldfart]

I do know of a vehicle imported recently from Europe with a FIA cage that had to be modified to comply with MNZ regs.

I had too do that for a car allowed to run an NZ event as long as the driver was on an International, overseas (MSA UK) licence. When I bought it with a MSNZ licence it had to be changed. One event, not crashed, brand new seats, cage, belts, extinguishers, and all FIA, and 5 years within date not allowed for NZ!

[Ross Hollings]

Then you have to ask who set these rules and regulations,evidently they were not racers,to use a phrase,who voted them in and what is their agenda ?You have to wonder about these folks,are they for the sport or not,you hear politicians going down the line "Lets make it easier for business to do there business" ,and this is how it should work for MSNZ when coming to setting rules etc,"what makes it easier for people to go race there car etc.It is plain to see that this is not happening,you have a bunch of decision makers who have no concept at what they are doing to the sport,regretfully lot of it now is "arse covering" in case of an accident etc.

[khyndart in CA]

I think it is a way of phasing racing out without making it an official announcement.
They hate the noise, the pollution, the danger, they want the land for better use etc. etc.
We are a thing of the past so let's enjoy it while we can !

[rf84]

MNZ have a Chief Technical Officer and two Assistant Technical Officers. They are paid employees of MNZ and not elected.

[928]

I think NZ is going the same way as eeeff wun, change the rules but do not let cars race properly. race rule books

[Ross Hollings]

Whats their history and have they ever competed in anything.Bit like the current government perhaps all they have ever done is University .

[rf84]

Who knows Ross? They seem to promulgate the rules and implement them. Whether or not they have any relevant experience and/or whether the proposed changes have to be approved by anyone else at MNZ is one of those mysteries that causes so many competitors to get very frustrated with the way MNZ is run. But who are we to question them? We (every affiliated car club member) are just the "mugs" who pay for their running costs. Their AGCM is coming up next month. Who knows what is on the agenda so we can have some input? Very few people. After the AGCM will we get to learn what was discussed/decided? Highly unlikely.

[nigel watts]

Who knows Ross? They seem to promulgate the rules and implement them. Whether or not they have any relevant experience and/or whether the proposed changes have to be approved by anyone else at MNZ is one of those mysteries that causes so many competitors to get very frustrated with the way MNZ is run. But who are we to question them? We (every affiliated car club member) are just the "mugs" who pay for their running costs. Their AGCM is coming up next month. Who knows what is on the agenda so we can have some input? Very few people. After the AGCM will we get to learn what was discussed/decided? Highly unlikely.

Well I would suggest that the folk who pay [that's YOU] organise yourselves and DEMAND some answers. They, MNZ, exist because of YOU and NOT the other way around.

[rf84]

"MNZ exist because of YOU and NOT the other way around".
Agree 100% Nigel. Pity that they seem to not understand that. I have tried to get answers over the years. Twice I have written to members of the Executive but they did not have the decency to reply. The General Manager did respond to one letter. Repeated attempts to get changes via the local Club have failed. MNZ produce some very good on-line newsletters and could possibly alleviate some of the criticisms levelled against it by being more transparent about what happens at the AGCM.

[ERC]

Although I am a bit out of it now, I suspect that much of it has to do with personnel on board at the time. Rather like a change of government, the incumbents need to front up and maybe, just maybe, there are people there now who are more pragmatic rather than idealistic?

In the case of Dave Silcock's Jag and my own car, they COULD have signed them off if they wanted to and all would be a lot rosier. How many others got caught in the same trap but just walked away from the sport? How many cars are just parked up in sheds because of their attitude and rules, not to mention gross overcharging at every step?

I still cannot see why my car is parked next to the car of the person who built my cage and my engine, as well as his own, and his not only has about double the horsepower, but competes in circuit racing and Targa type rallies, yet his cage is still legal and mine is not, yet mine was only ever built as a road car, with the expectation of maybe an occasional sprint or hillclimb, but it made sense to put in a cage whilst the bodyshell was stripped and to partially futureproof for any subsequent owner. Not submitting the paperwork in time as an excuse for not passing it, (even tough they'd already given permission to paint the car years earlier), is not helping anyone. Arse covering? They would have been in far deeper doo-doo if I'd removed the cage and full harness belts and then had a fatal!

What really irked was that although I applied for a logbook which was granted, apparently, when MSNZ found out that the LVVTA had passed the cage, they were going to cancel the logbook! Encouraging us to participate? I don't think so Tim.

[bill hollingsworth]

Racing has divided into two camps, the corporate, professional group and the amateurs. The ruling bodies cater for the former.

[nigel watts]

Well from what I'm hearing, you guys, the competitors, are not happy about the way motoorsport is run in NZ so you need to organise yourselves and challenge MSNZ as it seems to me that the tail is wagging the dog. There are far more of you than there is of them and since you are effectively paying them they should be fully accountable to you. You, the competitors ARE motorsport in NZ and MSNZ doesn't seem to understand that basic fact. You, as a group, need to remind them of that fact.

[nigel watts]

Racing has divided into two camps, the corporate, professional group and the amateurs. The ruling bodies cater for the former.

Yes, but there are far more of you in the amateur camp so you need to make yourselves heard, or go on strike so to speak. If nobody does anything nothing will ever change.

[ERC]

Unfortunately Nigel, each club only gets one conference vote, whether they have 20 members or 400 members, but they pay a levy for each member. If you are a member of say the HRC and the BMW club and TACCOC, MSNZ collects 3 levies.

This is going over old ground for many of us, but potential changes to better serve the active competitors, have been thwarted by a plethora of smaller clubs with no interest whatever in either racing or rallying, yet they have the right to vote on any and every issue.

Effectively, two small clubs with a total of 40 members, none of whom may be racers, carry twice as much weight as say BMW with over 150 active members, out at several meetings a year - where they also pay a $60 MSNZ levy for every meeting. Any attempts to change the voting system to better represent the drivers have been overturned.

MGCC Auckland with over 400 members made the decision to pull out of MSNZ and therefore the levies they had to pay, with active motorsport members shifting to a sub branch - MG Motorsport, where levies are paid.

It sound simple Nigel, but unless all the larger active clubs, split into groups of 20, where each block/sub-section then gets a vote, nothing is really going to change. I could see massive changes for the benefit of us all with 20 BMW, 20 MG, maybe 10 Alfa Romeo groups voting... Carry that over to all the other larger clubs and you can see how the amateurs could indeed effect change.

The other options are for an outlaw organisation - or for VCC to change their eligibility rules from just pre 1961 cars, to a second group of pre 2000 cars! That would be just brilliant. Leave MSNZ for the modern Sing Songs, Falcodores and Toymotors. Job done.