My statement reflects the vague and generic rules that seem to be in place,
and so the extremely wide range of interpretations that can occur, coupled
with a reluctance on the part of many organizations to enforce their rules.
I raised some examples, but maybe you feel that running slicks and 1430 cc
engines in 1959 Austin Sprites isn't cheating. Of course it isn't if the
rules of the race say it's ok, but I think a consensus would agree that a
car like that wouldn't be considered a legal Vintage car anywhere. But I've
run against them at several venues including ones which ban such cars not
only in the rules of the club but also in the supplemental reg's of the
event. Yes, I could have protested, but the organizers aren't blind and if
they don't care then I'm not going to waste my time. I vote with my
dollars, and if I have a good time at an event then I go back, and for me
having a good time is far more personal than whether some other guy is cheating!
Suppose the rules of your organization said "Threaded Heim type joints may
not be used in any suspension component". What interpretation of that rule
would you feel would support the use of threaded Heim joints for some or all
of the suspension joints in a car. Suppose the rules said that "all
bodywork must be of the same material and thickness as originally produced".
What interpretation would support fiberglass components on a metal bodied
car. Suppose the rules said "Track width no greater than 1" wider than
originally produced" What interpretation would support 4" wider? I could
go on, I suppose but you get the point. I can show up at most events where
rules of the sort mentioned, which are pretty common, aren't being followed.
I've said, of VARAC (where I'm both a scrutineer and often a member of the
Eligability commitee), that I can find rules violations on 90% of the cars
in the paddock. Including my own. Thats because it's impractical to
prepare a car to meet the letter of our rules and have a safe and
competitive car. Example: we're not allowed to modify the inner fenders of
our cars for tire clearance. I have to run Dunlop 450L-13 tires, which are
the smallest racing tire available in a 13" size. That tire, mounted on a
stock Midget 4 1/2" rim, fouls the rear wheel arches of a stock quarter
elliptic Midget. So I moved the inner fenders. I'm cheating, but I'm also
doing the best I can to follow the rules of my club.
According to our rules, you can't add an anti-sway bar or a panhard rod to a
car unless it came with one from the factory or you can document that
someone had a commerially available kit in the time period of the car (in
our case, pre 1962). I personally would make a sway bar in an afternoon and
would expect racers of the day to have done the same. Is it legal or not?
Strict interpretation says it's illegal, a reasonable approach says it's ok.
Mini's, to be raced, normally get lowered from factory settings by about 2
1/2 ", through a combination of settling of the rubber springs and actually
lowering the car. The rules say the car can be lowered a maximum of 1". So
all the Mini's are cheating, even though that's how they were raced in their
time period originally. Who's right?
As I said in my post, it really boils down to whether you think you're being
honest in your interpretation of your rules, or if you know you're really
circumventing not only the letter but also the spirit of your rules. When
Smokey Yunick built his famous 7/8 scale car, he knew he was cheating, and
he didn't care. In the same way, I think many vintage competitors know they
are cheating and they don't care. But many others are just doing the best
they can to stay within their honest interpretation of the spirit of their
rules and build a reasonable car to drive (myself included here).
So I apologise if I offended you with my statement. But I stand by it,
because by personal experience I believe it to be true. As you may be able
to sense, this is a source of frustration for me, and has been for some
time. It's why I raced with HSR almost exclusively for the past few years
(and HSR venues are a hell of a commute from Toronto!) because if there
aren't any (discernable) rules, then I don't get upset when they're broken!
racingly yours, Brian Evans
At 04:27 PM 07/07/97 -0400, you wrote:
>In a message dated 97-07-07 13:41:57 EDT, you write:
>
><< Both ideas are proven to be totally
> flawed, as you point out that vintage racers are a pretty big bunch of
>cheats!
> >>
>
>Now, that's a rather harsh statement. Why should vintage racers be any
>different about "rule interpretation" than any other racers??? Part of
>racing is using and/or interpreting the rules to your advantage....its been
>going on since there's been racing. Many races have been won on the drawing
>board, in the fabrication shop, and in the pits as there have been on the
>track. If you think vintage is different, then you're either very naive, or
>don't know much about racing.....................
>
>Myles
>
>
|