Jim: Check Kas's books; they weren't running stock axles even when the Spit's
were current. I agree with your theory. I can go to the committee and argue
that a billet crank is installed for reliability, then take that engine on the
track and rev it higher than the guy with a stock crank. Been there done that!
I just thought we were doing this for fun. Nobody told me there was so much at
stake. Where were the big prize monies, pretty girls, and slick ads last
weekend. I thought it was all for grins. There has to be a line somewhere. If
Bobby's only advantage for pulling all that extra weight around is just
breaking less I think George can give him that. But...the great OZ has spoken
and we should respect that.
George even made a point of coming to me and telling me that when the '39
Wetheroth midget comes to the track it has to be correct to run. In that case
you can all have a hoot as I shift my Model A three speed, pump the hand fuel
pump like a maniac down the front straight, and pull the hand brake while
making the sign of the cross going into turn one! The only way to make it more
vintage is to delete the safety harnesses, and wear my dad's old Cromwell
helmet and a T shirt. Oh...the roll bar will be removable considering they
weren't required when the car was current.
Ed
Jim <britbits@tiu.net> wrote:
Ahhh... reliability. That's where the slippery slope starts.
In autocross (I admit it, I'm from the wrong side of the tracks ;)
reliability equates to performance, ie if you know you can push your car
harder it gives you an advantage.
The same in theory applies to racing.
When I ran with CVAR in the mid 90s what we did was called "exhibition at
speed", not racing. So, reliablity on track means lower chances for
breakdowns... less chance for accidents... good thing. Less chance for
unfortunate incidents that could jack up the insurance.
If we're gonna call it racing, like they do now... then reliabilty is an
advantage. So what if your checker cab is at the back of the pack... you
KNOW deep in your mind that if you have to punt your competition off the
track just short of the finish line that your bumpers will let you do so
without anyone seeing the scratches in the paint. It's reliable.
Whereas, if we're gonna go vintage racing... well.. it should be in
something that is vintage. Otherwise we're just running Nascar "looks like
a real car" type cars.
If I can't accept the liability of running stock Spitfire axles on the
track... then maybe I should find a car more robust. Like a Checker Cab.
Just my .02
Cheers,
Jim
Dallas
'76 Spitfire DM autocrosser
'61 Morris Mini 1275S vintage racer
-----Original Message-----
From: fot-bounces+britbits=tiu.net@autox.team.net
[mailto:fot-bounces+britbits=tiu.net@autox.team.net] On Behalf Of Bob
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2008 9:11 PM
To: igofaster@charter.net
Cc: fot-request@autox.team.net; fot@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: [Fot] T50 gearbox CVAR and my GT6
SCCA in Florida was not concerned and a fellow GT6 driver with a T50 was
told by SVRA that they too were not particularly concerned with the T50.
The stock T50 gearing is very similar to a GT6 with OD. So there is no
advantage other than reliability.
BobD
Fot mailing list
Fot@autox.team.net
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/fot
You are subscribed as edwardbarnard@prodigy.net
_______________________________________________
http://www.team.net/donate.html
Fot mailing list
Fot@autox.team.net
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/fot
|