Return-Path: <rharring@idirect.com>
Received: from rly-xd02.mx.aol.com (rly-xd02.mail.aol.com
[172.20.105.167]) by air-xd01.mail.aol.com (v77.14) with ESMTP; Fri,
01 Dec 2000 17:09:42 -0500
Received: from phobos.idirect.com (phobos.idirect.com [207.136.80.181])
by rly-xd02.mx.aol.com (v76_r1.19) with ESMTP; Fri, 01 Dec 2000
17:09:02 1900
Received: from r (on-ham-a53-02-16.look.ca [216.154.51.208]) by
phobos.idirect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id RAA84224 for
<JWoesvra@aol.com>; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 17:04:19 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <001a01c05be2$fb3a1c80$d0339ad8@r.-harrington>
Reply-To: "R. Harrington" <rharring@idirect.com>
From: "R. Harrington" <rharring@idirect.com>
To: <JWoesvra@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Modifications (was: RE: Mechanical Failures)
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 17:06:00 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
Jack:
In the early sixties our rules were quite different from SCCA. We ran
"improved production" which allowed some pretty liberal mechanical
modifications. Basically the block had to be stock, but could be bored to
the class displacement limit, and the cam had to be in its original
location, all else was free. When we changed to SCCA rules, a large number
of competitors were upset that they had to pay money
to change their cars to go slower.
Bob H.
-----Original Message-----
From: JWoesvra@aol.com <JWoesvra@aol.com>
To: WSpohn4@aol.com <WSpohn4@aol.com>; brian@uunet.ca <brian@uunet.ca>;
S800Racer@aol.com <S800Racer@aol.com>; vintage-race@autox.team.net
<vintage-race@autox.team.net>; agallo@pcfl.net <agallo@pcfl.net>
Date: Friday, December 01, 2000 2:30 PM
Subject: Re: Modifications (was: RE: Mechanical Failures)
>In a message dated 12/01/2000 10:51:02 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>WSpohn4@aol.com writes:
>
><<
> Without digging through much old material, long stored away, I do recall
>that
> the Canadian rules were much more liberal, at least in the engine area,
> allowing carbs that would have put you into sports racing with SCCA.>>
>
> When I started racing in 1964 we ran often at Waterford near Detroit. I
>remember that the rules of the organizers (OCSRRC) said "Canadian Improved
>Production moves up one class". I also think that CASC used a modified FIA
>system that roughly followed SCCA production classes.
>
>FIA group two and beyond had "free" induction systems. This legitimates the
>Weber DCOE series for most cars racing under FIA "period" regulations.
>
>jw
|