Originals v Replicas

[Peter Mallett]

I suppose I'm in the facsimile camp for obvious reasons.

If we look at the CC Racing Capri thread we can see that the chances of running or even finding an original with continuous history are minimal.

Therefore if we want to see group 1, (or 1.5) cars racing we have to rely on facsimiles. I suspect that this is because these cars were non works entries.

There is an argument to say thal post '66 cars are not historic but nevertheless they represent a significant era in motorsport.

So in this case I would generally go with the facsimile as defined by Max.

[simon drabble]

Originally Posted by Andrew Fellowes

Not being legally minded I don’t know how “We don’t want you” stands up in court against “The FIA/MSA says I am eligible”.

The event regs might have to be worded skilfully.

If it is a championship and the refused car has run in the championship I think you are right but races such at Top Hat, Gentlemen Drivers, Goodwood and Silverstone GP support races are invitation races so its their party and they can invite who they like!

[zefarelly]

I consider anything up to 1980 or so historic these days Peter

that includes me !!!

agreed Simon, which is why theres always somewhere to race virtually anything, although some are better than others. I would like to contest a championship properly some time to see how I get along, but until I organise it ( ) I'll stick with what I'm doing

[John Turner]

I wonder if we can categorise the cars:-

1) Truly original racing cars, little changed (or not at all) from their time when they were last used in contemporary racing, perhaps only raced for a season or two. Never restored and now display the patina of their age, wear and tear. Very rare in this form and probably confined to museums and the odd demonstration.

2) Original cars with a documented provenance and history (but with maybe some gaps in 'known' history); have been subject to development, initially to keep them competitive in contemporary racing but more recently to respond to safety requirements and the demands of maintenance. Will obviously have had many components rebuilt or replaced over the years, which means of course that advantages will have been taken to utilise modern materials and tuning knowledge, for example, on the internals in an engine rebuild. May also have had to be restored after long lay off or major crash damage. These are the cars that we liken to George Washington's axe that Andrew Fellowes is concerned about. However, I suggest that this category is likely to represent a substantial proportion of cars in the historic racing scene today, along with category 3, below.

3) Replica cars based on originals; built because the originals no longer exist or are rare and prohibitively expensive to acquire for many who simply want the pleasure of enjoying historic racing. They are built using as many original components as possible and are in most respects of similar spec to those defined in 2) above; they may have been developed gradually from road cars or built from scratch with competition in mind from the outset. These are the cars referred to by Zef and his, Simon's and Peter's are examples.

4) Continuation (or 'facsimile' as Mosley calls them) cars; these are in fact new cars built by the manufacturers (or descendants!) of the originals, in short production runs to cater for demand and cash in on the burgeoning historic racing scene. Whilst built ostensibly to original specification, they will incorporate, inevitably, the use of modern knowledge and technology in terms of performance and safety.

5) Much modified original cars that are catered for by their respective car clubs and have their own series or form part of a larger series. Examples would be the glorious DB4s that slug it out at AMOC events or the more extreme versions of the MGB V8s. Probably closest in spirit to the old modsports cars.

6) Specials or perhaps, we should call these 'Goodwood' cars although they may be allowed to compete elsewhere on occasion. These are old cars modified almost beyond recognition in terms of performance (and possibly appearance). The saloon car races at the Goodwood Revival seem to contain a number of these, but the Alvis TC21/100 Grey Lady that the late Gerry Marshall drove is the outstanding example. Its performance and appearance bear little relationship to the Grey Ladies that occasionally graced saloon car racing in the 1950s. Nevertheless, a fantastic car and a joy to watch, but where, outside of Goodwood does it fit in?

Now you may regard the above categorisation as a simplification, and it is! I have no doubt we could break it down even more but where do you draw the line? I have taken no account of the regs required by different clubs or series organisers. The tyre debate is an issue clearly (see the Spa thread) and there are a number of issues around safety features in historic racing cars that have been discussed, and will no doubt continue to be discussed in other threads. The purpose of this was to contribute to the debate and see if broadly you agree with the above categories.

[simon drabble]

John I think that you have the essence of it all there - my Lotus Cortina definately fits into the 3 cat and my Merlyn 2 cat. If cat 4 were run as an invitation class then I would have no problems.
Difficult to see the last cat as anything other than an indulgence and cat 5 as a dying breed as more meetings require FIA sorry HTP papers!

[zefarelly]

Spot On John

I'm 3 ! and as SImoin stated, a vast majority of saloons fall into this category, especially as until the mid late 60's thats exactly what they where.

I know Ford Supplied Willment with cars, and Lotus, presumably BMC had their own race dept, these where probably the first 'works' teams ???

If only I had any ones and twos !

[midgetman]

John's got it right re Cat 5 - and Simon's summary is correct. It is a dying breed, but vital for those whose cars are old, and not seen by the powers-that-be as "Classic". I foresee that it will continue amalgamating so that it becomes "old car racing" rather than marque-centric, as a backwater away from the "historic" scene but without the ballyhoo of paperwork! Should keep the prices down too, but there'll be some blood on the carpet as specs/regs are aligned.

Downside is, they're not welcome in any "interesting" meetings. Still, who knows which way the pendulum will swing next - wherever there's good racing I suppose.

[johnh875]

Very comprehensive capture there John. If you restrict category 3 to road car based classes (how else to you construct a replica based on an original?), what is the difference between those and category 4 (pure racing/sports cars I assume)? They seem to be the equivalent version of different types of cars (unless people are constructing Lotus Cortinas from scratch?).

Re cat 3 I hope you would not be requiring a Lotus Cortina (for example) replica to be based on an original Lotus Cortina road car, on three grounds:
1. There are few enough of those remaining without subjecting them to the dangers of racing, and for less common cars this could be a handful,
2. What difference would there be in starting from an "ordinary" Cortina, and
3. The cost difference would be substantial, in a type of racing where most competitors are self-funded and have finite resources.

[John Turner]

I wasn't trying to create a set of rules or guidelines; merely trying to categorise in accordance with the current situation. I don't think we should get too model specific either. However, since you have raised it, I wouldn't want to see a genuine original road going Lotus Cortina (can't be too many of those about!) converted to racing. Whilst I'm no expert on Lotus Cortinas, I'm assuming that most racing 'replicas' that now newly appear on the track start out by utilising ordinary Cortina Mk1 as donor cars in respect of shells (getting rarer too, I would imagine). And yes, I do see a substantial difference between category 3 & 4, although I agree that the former will contain mostly cars based on road going vehicles and 4 (at the moment, anyway) racing/sports cars. The latter are being built professionally, in short production runs, in bespoke workshop/factories, using all newly manufactured components, for profit. That is not the case for category 3.

[zefarelly]

2 door MK1 shells are getting scarce is good condition particularly ( I'm guarding my stash !!!) most if not all race MK1's are 2 door, and LC's are generally reshells or have had extensive restoration work, I think for other lesser marques road cars are converted, as they provide a good sound basis Alfa GTA's as an example probably fall under the same category as LC's

there are still heavily modified saloons out there being raced in other series, my guess is the more valuable marques will be subject to 'restoration' in the coming years as the values change to justify it. Therefore Cat 4's returning to Cat 3's !

[simon drabble]

Originally Posted by zefarelly

2 door MK1 shells are getting scarce is good condition particularly ( I'm guarding my stash !!!) most if not all race MK1's are 2 door, and LC's are generally reshells or have had extensive restoration work, I think for other lesser marques road cars are converted, as they provide a good sound basis Alfa GTA's as an example probably fall under the same category as LC's

Alfa GTA's are expensive to create as they have ali roofs and panels so in fact the number of GT's that are ungraded to GTA is small - this is why there are many more L-C's than GTA's..... but L-C's are quicker!!

[zefarelly]

As there are more LC's around now than where ever made, the value of Standard and GT 2 doors has gone up as a consequence, I be the same applies for the alfas because the roof can be 'transfered' if the rest gets bent !

[simon drabble]

I think race GTs have probably gone up because you have shown that they can be peddled quite quickly! The Sprint GT's sadly are a heavy old beast so are quite limited in their racing appeal

[zefarelly]

We're just loosening up and getting into the swing . . . wait till I build my new engine

I've seen road cars hit nearly 1ok so it only a matter of time before people start faking GT's as well as LC's !

[Al Weyman]

I think theree is a gulf of differnce between a limited run hand fabricated car like a Lola T70 or Chevron being reproduced than a Lotus Cortina or GT. The T70 type cars will always be able to be reproduced purely because they were hand built then and would be hand built now but a steel replica M1 1 Cortina bodyshell or similar would be hugely expensive to reproduce as the body presses would run into hundreds of thousands. Having said that you can by a complete Chevrolet Camaro in bits I believe if sites like Classic Camaro are anythingto go by from floor an to roof and could probably reassemble one if you so desired. Mind you knowing some of the replica USA panels I have fitted it would probably end up 4 inches shorter and two inches taller. :-)

[Andrew Fellowes]

As Al has indicated we are in danger of confusing two different things here, put simply, road cars and race cars.

I have no problem with old, genuine road cars being modified to fit homologation rules (example Cortinas). I do have a problem that apparently, a race history for a race car is longer required (example Lola T70).


If you have moment, have a look here, http://www.cams.com.au/content.asp?P...s&ObjectID=213
it’s the Australian system. To be accepted as a race car is very strict, if for instance you bought a T70 new from Lola in the 60’s but never raced it, you wont get a run here!

[Andrew Fellowes]

I guess John that I do have to accept Historic cars for what they are today. Perhaps this is the only way to unite Europe with a code that is easier to police than the existing system.

Several MSA’s in Europe not only don’t care about historics, they don’t have the time to care. Fake histories, fake cars, incorrectly identified cars, complicit organisers, none of this should have happened. The shake out has started, court cases are happening at last, things are definitely going to get better.

[johnh875]

Originally Posted by John Turner

I wasn't trying to create a set of rules or guidelines; merely trying to categorise in accordance with the current situation. I don't think we should get too model specific either.

I understand that, I just wanted to make sure I was on the same page.

I agree with zef’s comment about “ordinary” Cortinas becoming rarer as the good shells become LC/GT replicas (for road use as well as racing). I was only using the Lotus Cortina as an example, there are many other cases.

Al – I believe you can buy brand new complete 1969 Camaro body shells (not sure about other years) as you can MGB and Mini. I dare say new Lotus Elan chassis (aftermarket) come in this category too.

A further point to Andrew’s post – the biggest race meetings in Australia in terms of entry numbers would be historic meets, perhaps the top 3 or 4. The requirement of a racing history (except for road car based classes) has not hurt numbers.

[zefarelly]

Originally Posted by Andrew Fellowes

As Al has indicated we are in danger of confusing two different things here, put simply, road cars and race cars.

I have no problem with old, genuine road cars being modified to fit homologation rules (example Cortinas). I do have a problem that apparently, a race history for a race car is longer required (example Lola T70).


If you have moment, have a look here, http://www.cams.com.au/content.asp?P...s&ObjectID=213
it’s the Australian system. To be accepted as a race car is very strict, if for instance you bought a T70 new from Lola in the 60’s but never raced it, you wont get a run here!

Race cars built as race cars never hit the road, and roadgoing race cars always did, ie saloons and rally cars, so I think the definition is fairly clear.

Did anyone really buy a T70 as a road car ? few people bought GT40's as road cars, and whats the difference ? to stop them from racing is ludicrous in my opinion, theyre racing cars ? who cares if its got racing history, if its correctly prepared to period spec let it go !

I agree theres a lot of shady areas, road going elans becoming 26R racers for example, and you can buy a whole elan new anyway, this is what make s a total mockery of it all, I'm pretty sure you could build a brand new Mini Cooper, MG Midget or MGB as well . . .just as well as they're all rust buckets from new

[John Turner]

Lots of great input here, but, just to clarify; I really felt that I had avoided part of the confusion discussed by having categories 3 & 4 separate. I realise that there would remain 'grey' areas'. It's a difficult call, but I'm sure we are all agreed that historic racing, in whatever form, is worth keeping and policing properly, without loads of acrimonious disputes and protests about what is eligible for what.

[zefarelly]

Agreed John, there's obviously a big difference between race cars and production cars from a historic point of view as well

[Al Weyman]

Did anyone really buy a T70 as a road car ?

I tried to buy one once from Paul Hawkins to use as a road car, if I remember correctly he called me a 'Crazy Limey *astard but raise the cash and its yours', unfortunately he died in an Oulton Park crash before I could raise the dosh (£750 was a lot of money for a poorly paid spanner man in the 60's!). Also in later years my accountant John LaForte used one as a road car and it was often seen around the streets of Mill Hill in North London. Trouble was every time I went in to discuss my accounts all he wanted to talk about was the Lola and motor racing!

[Andrew Fellowes]

Originally Posted by zefarelly

to stop them from racing is ludicrous in my opinion, theyre racing cars ? who cares if its got racing history, if its correctly prepared to period spec let it go !

Yes its hard on some, but what it has achieved is that every car that races here is genuine.

The Historic Vehicle Identity Form has the same requirement in Europe and in Australia, Clause 8.3 asks for Competition History as contemporary car, something that has for some reason been ignored in Europe ever since the CM 250F's.

I still don't understand that one.

[Peter Nightingale]

Originally Posted by Andrew Fellowes

Yes its hard on some, but what it has achieved is that every car that races here is genuine.

The Historic Vehicle Identity Form has the same requirement in Europe and in Australia, Clause 8.3 asks for Competition History as contemporary car, something that has for some reason been ignored in Europe ever since the CM 250F's.

I still don't understand that one.

All very well ,but what about group Nc in australia, the ADMINISTRATION by CAMS and its eligibility officers is nothing but a joke, when it comes to genuine cars & models raced in the period, EG FORD RS 1600 BDA........

[Peter Nightingale]

Originally Posted by Andrew Fellowes

I guess John that I do have to accept Historic cars for what they are today. Perhaps this is the only way to unite Europe with a code that is easier to police than the existing system.

Several MSA’s in Europe not only don’t care about historics, they don’t have the time to care. Fake histories, fake cars, incorrectly identified cars, complicit organisers, none of this should have happened. The shake out has started, court cases are happening at last, things are definitely going to get better.

About time notice was taken of what you have said by the appropriate people & historic car authorities down under...