HSCC Saloons / Historic Racing Saloons Register (HRSR)

[rogerwills]

Second time at this post – first time I wrote for 20 minutes and all was lost!

I received today a letter from HRSR regarding their recent AGM where there was a lively debate about oversize engined cars running in the series.

Along with the letter is a voting form that will determine how the series is run for 2009 and beyond so if you are a member of HRSR and race a saloon I would encourage you to vote.

The background is that in 2000 at the AGM it was proposed that all cars running in HRSR would need to run engines as per homologation papers as many cars at that time were running oversize engines. As I understand what happened at that time, anyone with an oversize engine could race until 2003 but no new oversized engine cars would be allowed. There was also some form of freeze on selling a car to another competitor if it had an oversize engine. Anyhow, that’s not that important. Apparently they then agreed not to enforce this for 2004 and it has remained that way with some cars running oversize engines in 2007 (and they will be out in 2008 as well). I believe that no new cars are allowed with oversize engines.

The debate at the 2007 AGM was if going forward, oversize engined cars should be allowed and we are now being asked to vote. This is to determine if only the oversized engine cars currently allowed to run are allowed to continue running but no new oversize engines or if anyone can run an oversize engine.

I feel the third option should have been included – that by say 2009, no oversize engine cars at all should be eligible! I missed my right to participate in the AGM so have myself to blame for not being part of the democratic process.

My issue with this is that it diminishes from the quality of racing for competitors in FIA cars (except Mustangs or other V8s) to compete with other cars of their type. For me, my 1600cc FIA Cortina can never hope to compete with a Cortina running a 2 litre twin cam and 4 wheel discs. Also the hot Anglias (running 1300cc as 100E or 1500cc as 105E), 2010cc Alfas, etc all mean that there have been few FIA cars competing recently, except again Mustangs which pack the muscle to run with these far quicker cars.

We are not all out there for overall honours and there is always a race to be had with the cars around you. But for me it’s a big negative of the HSCC saloon racing and detracts from the great racing they have in other series.

The argument regularly aired is that FIA cars often run near the front of the grid and have been very successful. My experience is that this is true of a Mustang but even the best driver in an FIA Cortina is going to be left in the dust by most of the hot cars running outside homologation spec.

If the series opens up for more oversize engine cars from 2009 and beyond, then it is unlikely to attract too many FIA cars in my opinion. I feel they should move to homologated specs over a reasonable period to keep to the spirit of historic racing as is currently widely recognised.

There has of course been huge debate on this issue on these forums, in the paddock and countless bars. Clearly one can see which way I will be voting and if anyone needs help with which box to tick on the form, please let me know!

I would encourage everyone to vote who has an interest. And perhaps we can conduct some form of debate / discussion here as well.

Roger

[Al Weyman]

Go 454 Roger go 454, no sod it go the whole hog, 501ci!

Oh and I always copy (ctrl C) and paste (ctrl V) a long post to the clipboard just incase it gets lost, it saves putting your fist through the monitor!

I don't race with them as my car is post 70 but if I did you would definitely have my vote keep em stock capacity and seal the engines.

[rogerwills]

One more observation. The vote is open to all members from 2007. But why? This is about the future of the series. Anyone who is currently a member should be entitled to vote, not only last year's members.

[morninggents]

Originally Posted by rogerwills

One more observation. The vote is open to all members from 2007. But why? This is about the future of the series. Anyone who is currently a member should be entitled to vote, not only last year's members.

Roger
Thank you for the comments of your thread opener. It is indeed the HRSR committee's desire that all members vote on this issue. Hopefully all comments will be as constructive as yours, whether for or against.

The reason for restricting the vote to 2007 members is twofold :

1. We only have around 35 registered members so far for 2008 against 65 members in 2007.

2. The issue was a proposal at the 2007 AGM held in early December. However, it has been a hot topic for several years and the discussion at the AGM was 'spirited' with several alternatives raised from the floor as well as some members wanting no change from the status quo and some wanting all oversize engines to be banned. It was agreed that it would be left to the committee to filter the suggestions made and to put a proposal to the members that best fitted both the original proposal and the suggestions from the floor. Bear in mind that no proposal was requested for the AGM agenda that banned all oversize engines. Given that we were to make a proposal stemming from the AGM it was then fair that only those entitled to be at the AGM should be given a vote on the issue - hence the restriction to the 2007 membership.

Peter Wray

[simon drabble]

sadly as the committee is increasingly being added to by fellow hot rod owners it is unlikely to ever change. The ironic part is that Alfa Romeo didn't even produce a 2 litre engine until the early 70's so the whole thing is more modsports than historic pre 66.
I am sure that this series does have a place in racing but I personally dont think its with the HSCC as it dilutes the other series.
I stopped racing with HRSR when they reversed the decision to go "legit" on engine sizes.

[terence]

Thankfully there does now seem to be more people who want to have legally sized engines etc that are more inline with the FIA Regs,saddly it would seem that if all of the registered members were made to comply the number would decrease from 35.

[morninggents]

Originally Posted by simon drabble

sadly as the committee is increasingly being added to by fellow hot rod owners it is unlikely to ever change. The ironic part is that Alfa Romeo didn't even produce a 2 litre engine until the early 70's so the whole thing is more modsports than historic pre 66.
I am sure that this series does have a place in racing but I personally dont think its with the HSCC as it dilutes the other series.
I stopped racing with HRSR when they reversed the decision to go "legit" on engine sizes.

Actually, the three new committee members all run 1600cc Lotus Cortinas. These cars have to run at a minimum weight of 825 kg ( 905kg including 80 kg for the driver) whereas an App K 1600 Lotus Cortina can run at 751 kg. As both the HRSR class car and the FIA class car run the same type and size of tyres the difference is then between engine power, suspension and brakes for the HRSR car against the 74 kg weight advantage of the App K car.

I understand that a good App K engine gives around 178 bhp (so 237 bhp/tonne) and a HRSR spec 1600 gives around 185 bhp (224 bhp/tonne).
The App K car has around a 6% power to weight ratio advantage to offset the braking and suspension deficiencies.

Are you now classing all HRSR class cars as 'Hotrods' rather than only the oversize engine cars?

[simon drabble]

maybe you could outline what else makes them non FIA.... I think possibly discs all round which is a great advantage. This is not a personal dig (although all HRSR hot rod owners seem to think so) its just that it comes across as an extraordinary set of rules which have been designed to accomodate some cars that are obsolete everywhere else. Why not m ake it proper Group 5 and let in 911's and twin cam Anglia's atc... or make it true to 66 (which could include some non FIA mods as ran in 66) but to have this mish mash of rules is illogical.
Why do you allow 2 litre Alfa's when that engine wasn't even produced until the mid 70's?
I see John Penfold's old car is on the mkt with car dealer Mike Abbas advertised as having FIA papers - that is a joke, the car is as far removed from an FIA Alfa as my L200 is....

[morninggents]

Originally Posted by simon drabble

maybe you could outline what else makes them non FIA.... I think possibly discs all round which is a great advantage. This is not a personal dig (although all HRSR hot rod owners seem to think so) its just that it comes across as an extraordinary set of rules which have been designed to accomodate some cars that are obsolete everywhere else. Why not m ake it proper Group 5 and let in 911's and twin cam Anglia's atc... or make it true to 66 (which could include some non FIA mods as ran in 66) but to have this mish mash of rules is illogical.
Why do you allow 2 litre Alfa's when that engine wasn't even produced until the mid 70's?
I see John Penfold's old car is on the mkt with car dealer Mike Abbas advertised as having FIA papers - that is a joke, the car is as far removed from an FIA Alfa as my L200 is....

Not taken personally, Simon. We do want constructive comment from all interested parties.

The main differences are brakes and suspensions. Discs are allowed all round but the benefit is not so great as the limiting factor is the grip (or non-grip!) of the Dunlop CR 65s that we run like the FIA cars. Too much brake makes the tyres slide. The main benefit is the ease of front to rear bias.
Suspension has to use the same design of the original (i.e. using a Cortina as an example, McPherson strut with TCAs and anti-roll bar at front and leaf springs with radius rods or coil springs with radius rods and 'A' bracket at the back0. We then allow additional locating rods such as tramp bars, watts linkages and panhard rods.
Gearboxes must use original design cases but 'dog' engagement and 5 speeds are allowed. hewland did a 5 speed box in period but only for 1.0 and 1.3 Anglias as they are not strong enough for Twin cam power outputs.

The 2 litre engine is allowed for Alfas and Cortinas under the same family regulation.

I can't comment on the ex John Penfold as I haven't seen the ad and it's not an HRSR matter. If the owner of the car registered to enter the App K classes at HRSR races it would have to produce, and comply with, the FIA papers as a 1600cc car.

[Good Times]

Simon, The Alfa ran in the USA with a overbored 1750cc. motor 1953cc.
So the 2 litre Cortina & Alfa are fine.
Group5 did not start until 1968.
Zef, nice to see you will race with HRSR, keep out of the way of those Mini,s & Imp,s.
Have fun this year & keep the protest,s to a minimum.

[zefarelly]

Originally Posted by Good Times

Simon, The Alfa ran in the USA with a overbored 1750cc. motor 1953cc.
So the 2 litre Cortina & Alfa are fine.
Group5 did not start until 1968.
Zef, nice to see you will race with HRSR, keep out of the way of those Mini,s & Imp,s.
Have fun this year & keep the protest,s to a minimum.

fantastic PR there for the HRSR

maybe I'll go to Dijon with U2TC instead afterall

[simon drabble]

Originally Posted by Good Times

Simon, The Alfa ran in the USA with a overbored 1750cc. motor 1953cc.
So the 2 litre Cortina & Alfa are fine.
Group5 did not start until 1968.
Zef, nice to see you will race with HRSR, keep out of the way of those Mini,s & Imp,s.
Have fun this year & keep the protest,s to a minimum.

thanks for the info - what year did the Americans do that and was that Alfa themselves or are you saying that a clubbie bored one out - if so I guess that comes back to what everyone is saying, namely that you are running to Group 5. That is fine but why not run to complete Gp5 rather than a hybrid of it so that a few committee members and their mates cars are catered for given they cant race them anywhere else....
I am not sure of the relevance of the Imps and Mini's and protests - have the driving standards slipped since I was last out with them a few years ago?

[simon drabble]

maybe Morning Gents could enlighten us as to how many of the 35 registered members are running FIA legal cars. Where are Top Hat on this? In the days of Julius he was moving towards only allowing FIA cars but I think that was relaxed to a degree....

[terence]

Originally Posted by simon drabble

maybe Morning Gents could enlighten us as to how many of the 35 registered members are running FIA legal cars. Where are Top Hat on this? In the days of Julius he was moving towards only allowing FIA cars but I think that was relaxed to a degree....

I think that perhaps the backlash of the organiser's allowing the oversized engine's is now coming to the fore .Masters and HSCC have started the ball rolling [Perhaps an off shoot of Jeremys action at Silverstone a couple of years ago].I must say that it is about time and I hope this apparent trend continues.HSCC have proven that it can work,so if people want to race thier hotrods then let them go elsewhere.

[morninggents]

Originally Posted by simon drabble

maybe Morning Gents could enlighten us as to how many of the 35 registered members are running FIA legal cars. Where are Top Hat on this? In the days of Julius he was moving towards only allowing FIA cars but I think that was relaxed to a degree....

Simon
I can't tell you how many are running FIA legal cars but of the 35 registered so far for 2008 there are 10 entered in the App K classes. In 2007 there were 19 out of 65 members in the App K classes, so consistently around 29 percent.

[Al Weyman]

Unfortunately giving competitors the vote as to what happens in a championship/series can also give it the kiss of death and I should know as this was the start of the rot setting in in ModProds when a group of determined people backing a mate and also joining the club to get a vote forced something through that was alien to the original concept of the regs I laid down.

When we set the whole thing up it was based on being a driver demorcratic championship but sadly this did not work out especially when one of the first things to go was the buying/selling plate rule because in the end some people unfortunately need to be protected from the excesses of their own spending, they just cannot help themselves.

I have now come round to the think that a better system is like we have in CTCRC which is as in government we elect a committee to make decisions not have a vote on every rule change. This is not to say suggestions cannot be made or put to the floor at the AGM but the final decision good or bad must be made by the commitee and if you don't like as I pray will happen to 'Our Ken' in London, vote them out next year. Can you imagine what it would be like if every decision taken in parliament had to be put to the people via a referendum!

[Peter Mallett]

To be reasonable, if you want to run a car like this why not run it with the HSCC? It is after all their class and club.

I can see the FIA legal point, but not everyone wants to spend that amount to race. If you don't like the class then don't enter. There are plenty of other places to race an FIA car unless you consider the other places to be "bent" in which case the argument is self defeating.

I really think it is close to what was known as Group 5 touring cars (1967) and as such I'd be more inclined to complain that they don't allow Porsche 911s rather than ask them to restrict themselves to FIA App K. This class has a rightful place in history thus it follows that a club with "Historic" in its name would be a logical place. Of course if the other word was "Sportscar" you might have an argument but as that is no.................. Oh wait!

Superspeed Anglia anyone?

[GORDON STREETER]

Did somebody mention Anglia's
And its on my 1000th post

[simon drabble]

Peter you are right - it is Group 5. In which case allow twin cam Anglia's in as well as 911 etc.. but stop the 2 litre Alfa's as that is not correct to any period......

[Peter Mallett]

Fair comment. Perhaps they would, I might consider running one too.

[simon drabble]

twin cammed Anglia were rapid in period - driven by many including John Burbage later an E Type driver and whose obituary is in this week's Autosport. Around where I live he is as well known for his very good baker's shop! His son raced bikes I think I am right in saying....

[one-two]

The episode with the MGB's at Silverstone seems to have gone down as an unqualified success. It wasn't, necessarily. It thinned out an already thin grid and contributed to the end of the Classic Sports Car series and its replacement by what's now known as the Guards Trophy in which - some would say - a small number of FIA-compliant cars are continuously lapped by a group of faster and later sports racers. I'm not saying it wasn't right to do it - just that it was a bit more complicated than those who weren't involved seem to think. Maybe there is a lesson for the saloons there, maybe not.

[terence]

Overall I'd have said that at least it did remind people of the powers held at the top,it also showed up those with non-complient car's.I have a feeling we'll be see-ing quite a bit more of this sort of thing. If you have seen the new Masters Entry forms you'll see that for yourself.Personaly,I really hope this has the desired effect at long last.As the action thinning the grid is concerned,if the organizers had engine capacitys properly policed,they would not have had to get Jeremy involved in the first place.

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by simon drabble

twin cammed Anglia were rapid in period - driven by many including John Burbage later an E Type driver and whose obituary is in this week's Autosport. Around where I live he is as well known for his very good baker's shop! His son raced bikes I think I am right in saying....

Gawd. 1975 I had a 1500 GT engined Anglia. Great fun but a bit scary.

[john ruston]

There are lots of Jeremy"s involved in racing.Its that sort of name.Which one are you talking about?