Goodwood Festival of Speed - Hill Record

[Stephen Green]

Well the crash and politics merge. Then there's the question of public liability insurance. One goes hand in hand with the other I'm afraid, and so that's exactly the reason it wasn't posted as a hill record in my opinion.

[SJ Spode]

I never thought the idea of the Festival was to do with outright speed & records, rather an opportunity for fans to see a wide variety of cars, drivers up close.

Perhaps Graeme Wight saw it as an opportunity to raise Hillclimb's profile???

[Stephen Green]

There have always been those who do 'timed' runs, and those who do 'demonstration' runs as pointed out in the programme. It has become a bit of a 'thing' to try and break the hill record over the past few years, certainly with the greater number of F1 teams that grace the occasion. In fairness, a racing driver is just that and unless asked/instructed to do otherwise, will always go for the record.

I've been to the last 7 (I think) FOS and they get better each year. I would urge anyone who hasn't been to try and make next years event as Lord March has a different theme to the weekend every year.

[james_williams]

If you think Goodwood is good then try Shelsley Walsh on 17th/18th August 2002. There won't be any F1 cars there but all the runs are timed, and everyone goes for it, from tiny 1000cc Minis to 'Jnr' in his Gould. There will be a host of powerful cars with Judd, DFR and Cosworth engines. No demo runs here, as Tony Marsh said "Goodwood is great, but Shelsley is real". This year there will be the big screen again so you can watch all the action from the paddock. There is also a class for old racing Ferraris.
It will be an excellent meeting to go and watch some proper Hillclimbing.

[THR]

great meeting that is! last year they had a few unsilenced cars, and a v12 ferrari sounds lovely unsilenced about 3ft away from your legs!! mmmmmmmmmm

[Woolley]

Can't work out the problem with Goodwood - it must be some sort of circuit licence deal, but it doesn't make sense. If it's just demo's then an F1 is reaching the ton in a couple of seconds anyway, and if their doing burn outs and something breaks, it's just as dangerous in terms of bursting through hay bails. If it's not demo's then why do Autosport go in about McNish being so fast, and then ignore the guy who was two seconds faster? In my view they should either make it fully competitive and be open and honest about the times, or don't time it all and let everyone play. Being devious about it just increases the danger, because if you're on post you have no idea if the next guy is going for it or not. Give me real Hill-Clombs any day.

[Stephen Green]

It does say in the programme whether they are timed or demonstration runs.

[Stuart Hill]

Originally posted by Stephen Green
It does say in the programme whether they are timed or demonstration runs.

So, by your statement, you are suggesting that anyone seeing in the programme that Mcnish is doing a demonstration run could take this to mean that he is not "going for it" ??? BUT HE DID!!!!!!

So what's your point Stephen ??

[Stuart Hill]

Originally posted by SJ Spode
Perhaps Graeme Wight saw it as an opportunity to raise Hillclimb's profile???

As somebody who has known Junior through hillclimb events for sometime now, I would just like to state "for the record" his comments to me about Goodwood. In the main he was saying how immensley proud he was to have been invited and he wouldn't have missed it for the world as it was a golden opportunity to promote Speed Hillclimbing. Also bear in mind that his wife gave birth to twins the day before he left for Goodwood. If that is not commitment to the sport, I don't know what is.

If they are not bothered about records, then why is ANY run timed??

That way, we wouldn't have to worry about who is or isn't "on it".

[Stuart Hill]

Re: the last post...
This was supposed to be from Mrs Crazy Stu but the system screwed up. The last post is her comments alone.

Thank you all.

[Stephen Green]

Stu,

I was trying to say that they publish in the programme whether it is a timed or demonstration run. What the driver does when he is on the hill is his own/the teams business. Going back a little I was trying to make the point that in my opinion insurance matters were largely responsible for some teams doing 'demonstration' runs rather than timed.

I wasn't trying to say one was right and the other not, merely trying to offer an explanation. I hope you didn't take it the wrong way?

Stephen.

[Woolley]

I never take anything wrong - if you wish to offend me ever, you have to tell me first, else I take it as a joke! We're all running around the same thing, it would be interesting to see what the official reason is? The only real question is why Autosport makes a big deal over someone being second-fastest, without mentioning the bloke who was fastest, when times are supposed to count for nothing. Someone suggested at the week-end that it could be the F1s can't be timed as it counts as testing, but then, you wouldn't want to be timed if you're a multi-million pound industry being beaten by a cottage operation...

Oop the bonks, as they say in the Midlands!

[ozywoodwards]

yes, but then you'd expect a small family cafe to make better cream teas than McDonalds. F1 should, and probably do, realise that they can't expect to be better than a specialist at a different type of motorsport to their own.

[james_williams]

I think that the Goodwood festival is a fantastic event, but it is really designed more for the spectator than the competitor. It gives the public chance to get close to cars and celebrities that they normally wouldn't have chance to. They can also see the cars running up close up the hill. Whether there is a licencing problem, I do not know.

I am sure some drivers 'go for it' but I feel that the event is just a fantastic opportunity to see F1 and other cars up close. I think that the Hill Record is a novelty and each year they want to see an F1 car break it. If a hillclimb car smashes it by 3-4 seconds then that novelty will be lost for a few years. There is no doubt that the current crop of top hillclimb competitors will all be quicker than an F1 car up a hillclimb course, including Goodwood.

Hillclimbing and F1 are very different displines so comparing the two cars is unfair. A hillclimb car could not beat an F1 car in a GP. Therefore, Goodwood will always be about the spectacle rather that the outright Hill Record.