For production cars, I agree with everything you've said. The two prod.
cars that I built had tons of period racing history - all of it on the
street, and all of it highly illegal! Just 'cause some wimp cars got run
on a track (everybody going the same direction - I mean , really...) don't
mean these road warriors can't come out and play in their declining years :)
Brian
Hey Wm. - I'm buying a new guitar, and I got the '64 Bandmaster out of the
garage - if I get my chops together maybe we can have some fun Friday night
at the track next year. Brian
At 10:21 AM 11/7/00 -0500, Wm. Severin Thompson wrote:
>My .02 and a few cents more....
>
>I've never understood the need for a car, especially a production car, to
>have had racing history for it to be eligible. It always seemed as if it was
>an exclusionary tactic at best. Sort of... "I found mine... you go find
>yours..."
>
>I've always though that period preparation was the real key issue, not
>history. Consider that few "time capsule" cars exist. Most race cars of the
>era were constantly modified and updated to the then current spec... and to
>be properly prepared for the spirit of vintage racing, must be reverse
>engineered, rebuilt, or...gasp..."recreated". (Lot's of cars with "history"
>out there that have nothing but a number plate in common with the original
>identity.)
>
>So, if I made the rules, any car of the correct vintage (not vintage
>replica) qualifies. Most organizations, right or wrong, (and probably right)
>tech cars mostly on a safety basis, while eligibility and correct for class
>modifications are given a quick sideways glance.
>
>The thing that chaps my as most... is selective rule enforcement. A buddy of
>"so and so", or the guy that's "run with us for a long time that way" is
>allowed, yet others are excluded. Rules for everybody, or rules for nobody
>ought to be...well... the rule.
>
>WST
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Brian Evans <brian@uunet.ca>
>To: <Tombread@aol.com>; <derek.lola@home.com>; <vintage-race@autox.team.net>
>Cc: <gnagy@intrepid.net>
>Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 8:58 AM
>Subject: Re: But IS it a Vintage Racer? (was Eastlake)
>
>
> > As Derek said, this can be debated (choke, spew) ad nauseam by folks (like
> > me) who enjoy that sort of thing. My answer is that for a racing car
> > (sports racer or formula type) the car had to at least be constructed in
> > the period in question and should have been actually raced. Later
> > editions, even though identical (Cobras, the various one or two off
> > recreations, the Crossle sports racers now in production again) don't
> > qualify. This lets cars that were built in 1965, say, but were kept as
> > spares and not raced into the mix, and lets out cars that are modern
> > replicas even if made by the original guys in the original factory on the
> > original jigs, etc. Production cars is a bit more lax (but getting
> > trickier as Mini's were still in production till August - can you say 2000
> > Cooper-S in vintage racing).
> >
> > So the answer to your question is "no". In my opinion, for whatever that
> > may be worth.
> >
> > Cheers, Brian
> >
> > At 08:28 AM 11/7/00 -0500, Tombread@aol.com wrote:
> > >Are Shelby Cobra replicas bona fide"vintage" racecars?
> > >
> > >tom
> > >
> > >
> > >Tom Butters
> > >The Greens Fork Group
> > >Creative Communications Services
> > >765-886-5098
> > >public relations & marketing
> >
> > Brian Evans
> > Director, Strategic Accounts
> > UUNET, A WorldCom Company
> >
Brian Evans
Director, Strategic Accounts
UUNET, A WorldCom Company
|