FIA Appendix 7 and the use of "recontructed,etc" in competio

FIA Appendix 7 and the use of \"recontructed,etc\" in competio

Seeing the on going discussion about read and "faux"in the GT40 I would like you all to read this FIA web site, Appendix K chapter 7 and others: You can build a car with new components, and provided they are the same as in the period, the car would be approved for racing

Which means that the the Willment no 1087,88,89 are eligible, Safir's and also (according to their claims of "according to original plans" H&M, SP and Goran) can compete in historic events.

The MSA (the UK scrutineering body)is not happy with this rulings from the FIA as this opens the door to dupicates and will cause owners of the "real" historic cars to consider that it is far easier/cheaper to compete in a replica!

How did the Ferrari "community" stop the use of the 250GTO Fafre.... 250LM...... and others. Is this a GT40 specific problem?

Thank you for your comments

Roel

Re: FIA Appendix 7 and the use of \"recontructed,etc\" in competio

The organizers of an event decide who they wish to let enter. The new FIA papers simply try to describe what a car is and what it's not. Original cars are issued one type and others another assuming they're deemed to be built to "original standards".

Not every owner of an original car is interested in vintage racing it and this is a way to fill up the grid.

It's neither good nor bad it simply is what it is.

Re: FIA Appendix 7 and the use of \"recontructed,etc\" in competio

Wow, for replica guys you sure are snobs! It is not that the original cars are being forced out of vintage racing. Quite the opposite. The original cars don't show up. When was the last time you saw a Ferrari Daytona or GTO compete in a vintage race? Ever see a GT40 MK4 run? The prices of these cars, not copies, have made the owners stay home and that is a sad state of affairs for vintage racing in general. The FIA understands that, why don't you? If the car is virtually identical to the original what is the difference? Hell, most of the original cars that are left have been repaired or restored or completely remanufactured anyway. Jim's Lola is a perfect example. Although it is a nice restoration, it is certainly no longer the car John Surtees sat in, with the nicks and dents of it's racing life. The question of originality will be a continual argument as long as we vintage race. I don't expect it to ever come to a conclusion because people buy these cars for different reasons. If only racers or only collectors owned these cars I suspect a common understanding could be achieved. HHH, do you race your car?
The new Lolas are being built to original specs. What makes you think they will out perform the old cars? The old cars have been updated throughout their racing life for safety and speed.The only advantage the new car will have is the knowledge of those updates. Bigger motors??? Cheating??That's been going on since the beginning of time, what's your point?
My point is, if all you want to see at a vintage race is old english sporty cars and formula vees, keep up the attitude. I suspect they will be MOSTLY original.
Bill

Re: FIA Appendix 7 and the use of \"recontructed,etc\" in competio

[ QUOTE ]
Wow, for replica guys you sure are snobs! It is not that the original cars are being forced out of vintage racing. Quite the opposite. The original cars don't show up. When was the last time you saw a Ferrari Daytona or GTO compete in a vintage race? Ever see a GT40 MK4 run? The prices of these cars, not copies, have made the owners stay home and that is a sad state of affairs for vintage racing in general. The FIA understands that, why don't you? If the car is virtually identical to the original what is the difference? Hell, most of the original cars that are left have been repaired or restored or completely remanufactured anyway. Jim's Lola is a perfect example. Although it is a nice restoration, it is certainly no longer the car John Surtees sat in, with the nicks and dents of it's racing life. The question of originality will be a continual argument as long as we vintage race. I don't expect it to ever come to a conclusion because people buy these cars for different reasons. If only racers or only collectors owned these cars I suspect a common understanding could be achieved. HHH, do you race your car?
The new Lolas are being built to original specs. What makes you think they will out perform the old cars? The old cars have been updated throughout their racing life for safety and speed.The only advantage the new car will have is the knowledge of those updates. Bigger motors??? Cheating??That's been going on since the beginning of time, what's your point?
My point is, if all you want to see at a vintage race is old english sporty cars and formula vees, keep up the attitude. I suspect they will be MOSTLY original.
Bill

[/ QUOTE ]

As Bill points out there are very few "Original" Cars that remain original. J6 is pretty close but SL 71-32 isn't (Mark Donohue not John) and even though I have driven J6 up Charles Driveway at the FOS and 0846 and 002C at the Historic Targa Florio that is really rallying/demonstration as opposed to Vintage racing.

Did you see the photo of Bill's car hard charging in The Vintage MotorSports Annual? Fantastic. What's not to like?

(Me Driving J6 up Charles Driveway)

Re: FIA Appendix 7 and the use of \"recontructed,etc\" in competio

[ QUOTE ]
When was the last time you saw a Ferrari Daytona or GTO compete in a vintage race?

[/ QUOTE ]

Last year, Monterey Historics grid. ~15 GTOs /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif Good point though Bill. Note that the Chaparral cars only did parade laps and probably for that same reason.

It's interesting how sanctioning bodies vary so greatly within the US. Look at Group 5 HSR versus SVRA versus my local SOVREN and you wouldn't be able to get a matched grid. While it is wheel to wheel competition modifications would vary drastically. Is that not a deterrent for one with a historically significant car?

I think the time has come to allow “period correct” replicas and continuations to these grids. Just don’t let anyone in the paddock close enough to identify faux vs. real! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
I crawled all over J4 in Monterey and unfortunately learned scrutineering disqualified Jim because he was running platinum tip spark plugs. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beerchug.gif

Re: FIA Appendix 7 and the use of \"recontructed,etc\" in competio

I am not sure about the excuse that the original cars don't show up. I have never attended a major historic race other than the west coast. (Although we will be running with the Vintage Trans-Am tour this year at Lime Rock and Watkins Glen) But out here we regularly turn away cars from the classes that we most care about. I have spoken to Steve Earle who runs the Monterey Historics and Wine Country Classic and he regularly turns away over 20 cars in the Cobra, Corvette, GT350 group. The same applies to the FIA group which includes GT40, Lola's etc.
My 2 cents is that as long as you are able to field a group of original cars with legitimate pedigree every effort should be made to do so. If at some point in time you are no longer able, then introduce the continuation cars. Granted, I also hope that the values of these cars never stop the owners from bringing them out for the public to see. Nothing against the guy who goes out an purchases a "new" 7000 series cobra and wants to race it. But it is not the same car as a 22,000 race mile old warhorse no matter how well maintained. Just my opinion, which my girlfriend says is not worth much.

Re: FIA Appendix 7 and the use of \"recontructed,etc\" in competio

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When was the last time you saw a Ferrari Daytona or GTO compete in a vintage race?

[/ QUOTE ]

Last year, Monterey Historics grid. ~15 GTOs /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif Good point though Bill. Note that the Chaparral cars only did parade laps and probably for that same reason.

It's interesting how sanctioning bodies vary so greatly within the US. Look at Group 5 HSR versus SVRA versus my local SOVREN and you wouldn't be able to get a matched grid. While it is wheel to wheel competition modifications would vary drastically. Is that not a deterrent for one with a historically significant car?

I think the time has come to allow “period correct” replicas and continuations to these grids. Just don’t let anyone in the paddock close enough to identify faux vs. real! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
I crawled all over J4 in Monterey and unfortunately learned scrutineering disqualified Jim because he was running platinum tip spark plugs. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beerchug.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

??? J4 at the time was owned by Geroge and I don't think it was entered to race.

Re: FIA Appendix 7 and the use of \"recontructed,etc\" in competio

"I have spoken to Steve Earle who runs the Monterey Historics and Wine Country Classic and he regularly turns away over 20 cars in the Cobra, Corvette, GT350 group. The same applies to the FIA group which includes GT40, Lola's etc."

It's been a while since an original MK-IV (One that raced at Le Mans or Sebring on the day) ran in one of Steves races. I did demo laps in 2003 in J6 but J6 hasn't vintage raced for over 10 years nor is it likely to ever again.

That's the point. Bill and Tom do race their MK-IV's and IMO that is a good thing.

Re: FIA Appendix 7 and the use of \"recontructed,etc\" in competio

Curses Batman, foiled again. My juvenile attempt at humor was thwarted by a keyboard foe paw. Meant J6! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Re: FIA Appendix 7 and the use of \"recontructed,etc\" in competio

[ QUOTE ]
Curses Batman, foiled again. My juvenile attempt at humor was thwarted by a keyboard foe paw. Meant J6! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Re: FIA Appendix 7 and the use of \"recontructed,etc\" in competio

I'm not a seasoned race fan, but I am the type who would attend such an event if it were available locally. Let's assume I showed up on race day and saw a whole bunch of GT40's racing against each other. I would not be astute enough to know which of them were original cars created in the 1960's and which might be cars made recently and allowed to run under these new rules. It is equally likely that as an interested but uninformed observer, I would not know that there might be differences or advantages relative to either group. I guess if it were possible that the original cars built in the '60's could be upgraded to match the technical advantages that the new cars feature it might not make much difference and I would support them all racing together--after all, the rules would allow the types of modifications that would create an "even playing field". However, now that I have been made aware of this controversy, I support the idea of filling the field with as many true, original cars as possible if the event is billed as a "Vintage Race". What to do with the "continuation" cars is a puzzle--maybe form a separate class for them? Maybe they could race at the same time but be reported in different classes.

Too simplistic??

YD,E./PNB

Re: FIA Appendix 7 and the use of \"recontructed,etc\" in comp

Last year, Monterey Historics grid. ~15 GTOs Good point though Bill. Note that the Chaparral cars only did parade laps and probably for that same reason.

Jim
The other Jim (Hall) was probably waiting to sell some of the continuation Chapparal 2E's for Historic racing. I have no say only an opinion on continuatey or real. I agree with Doug that if you have new cars they should be running in a seperate class.
In Goodwood Revival last year a GT40 was allowed to race with a track engine which was larger that the normal 289 for the period. However withe GT40's running with Gurney Weslake Heads and 6 spoke BRM wheels which were available only after the 1966 cut off date. And Cooper Monaco sports cars from 1963/4 producing 520 BHP when they could only muster 300-340BHP in 1963/4. Surely different classes are the only fair system?
Regards Allan /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beerchug.gif

Re: FIA Appendix 7 and the use of \"recontructed,etc\" in comp

No pre-66 cars should run with wide wheels, vented discs or anything larger than a 289; Gurney-Weslake heads should never be on a pre-66 entered car.
Wheel are free in FIA if they use the original dimensions.

At Goodwood some cars not only run LARGE engines, but the latest trick is carbon-fibre bodies, 70/80 kg's less than original........

Re: FIA Appendix 7 and the use of \"recontructed,etc\" in comp

You still don't get it. Vintage racing is not just Goodwood and Monterey. The only reason The GTOs were there was because Ferrari was the featured marque.THEY DON'T SHOW AT OTHER RACES. To split into more than one race for cars that don't show is rediculous especially when there is minimal track time to begin with.I am not talking about Mustangs , Corvettes and Camaros that are always in large numbers and cheap to copy. I am talking about cars that you just never see at the track. If you had been doing this as long as I have you would understand how things have changed and it is all because of the value of the original cars. BTW, it is Original cars using carbon and other non period stuff so I still don't get your point.
Bill
Bill

Re: FIA Appendix 7 and the use of \"recontructed,etc\" in comp

Bill

I get your point. If I am lucky I may be able to attend
Monterey once before I die..it's just too far, too expensive
a trip for me. I've been to Lime Rock and the Glenn a few times and have seen a few GT40s and Lolas run...but not many. I'd love to see a grid full of these great cars,
which will not happen around the country unless the rules are loosened. And Steve Earl aside....I gotta believe
most track owners/promoters would welcome that.

MikeD

Re: FIA Appendix 7 and the use of \"recontructed,etc\" in comp

Bill
My point is not that they are original or not. I give you the example of Goodwood revival only from my experiences. The GT40's that attend are original. My point is if Lord March has a cut off date for the event of 1966. Why have one law for one party and not the same law for them all. That is that all cars must be as they were in 1966. No BRM 6 spoked wheels, no Gurney Weslake heads and no Cooper Monacos producing 520 BHP! If he makes David Piper's 250LM run on Borranis and then allows a ATS Daytona Coupe to race that was only built in 1995 to race. Where is the logic surely they should be run under different classes? One year he could not get Martin Corvell P1084/1004 to enter because it would have to be put back into 1966 configuration. I can understand the idea to keep the grid as large as possible. Thus making allowances for larger engines at the last minute. But if you had classes for cars that were modified with parts after the time limit. Or cars that were not assembled at the timelimit. All parties would be racing on a fair level. Otherwise I see no point in historic racing. The classes in the 1960's were on engine capacity and the technology at the time. Some of the Historic Racing cars that are now racing are pushing the design and performance parameters of the cars beyond their original envelopes. In 1968 the Gulf Le mans cars i.e. uses new technology in their construction; carbon fibre strands in their body work. Will we see GT40's in historic racing with full Carbon Fibre bodywork running in the same class??? I do not want to see an original car mutilated (I have seen a GT40 have its front modified to get more air) because its cannot complete with the non-period cars that have 50BHP more power from Gurney Weslake Heads!!!
Regards Allan

Re: FIA Appendix 7 and the use of \"recontructed,etc\" in comp

Alan,
I agree with you. The cars should be "as run" for the period they represent.Those are the FIA rules. The problem is the promoter. If they are not willing to enforce that basic rule it is a free for all. In the US there is Monterey where the racing is so staged you are told who will cross the finish line 1st, 2nd and 3rd. The cars are very original and it is a wonderful show, NOT a race. Then there is the BRIC now renamed the NIC where the numbers are all important. Before the huge wreck it was a "run what you brung race". There were corvettes and camaros with 400 inch small blocks. It was and still is pretty tight racing but many of the cars would not be able to run where there were strict period rules. Then there are the organizations where the rules are very important. More important than the racing. This is where I mostly race. There are still cheaters but at least no big engines and new era stuff on the cars. There are some concession due to the fact that parts are no longer available and safety is probably the most important focus.
Another point is that some of these classes run cars that span a period of 10 years or more. In racing that is an eternity.Can Am is a perfect example. Can Am was a totaly open style of racing. Is a 425 inch small block legal? By the 1966 rules it was, but, know one could hold one together. Is it fair to make them run with big block McLarens?
What about the driver/ owner? Most are as old or older than the cars. They buy a car and somehow ownership equates to driving skill. When they find out they are not up to the task they do one of 2 things. Realize it and drive the show within their limitations or cheat to compensate for their lack of skill.
Most people forget that this is just a show. No money just fun and entertainment. It is a place where you can take your friends and children to see the great cars of the past.No one, not even the drivers remember who won the race 30 minutes after it is over. If this is a big deal to a spectator or a driver, find another style of racing.
Bill

Re: FIA Appendix 7 and the use of \"recontructed,etc\" in comp

Bill
Perhaps in the case of Goodwood the answer is simple; if Lord March enforced the 1966 limited precisely he would get no cars at all?
Regards Allan

allanfeldman said:

Bill
Perhaps in the case of Goodwood the answer is simple; if Lord March enforced the 1966 limited precisely he would get no cars at all?
Regards Allan

Click to expand...

Actually, I can run Gurney Weslake heads at Goodwood and be within the
letter of the law.