tvr grantura help needed
Discussion
Thurner Fan said:
Not really for this thread but what I've heard is that the FIA have recently had it pointed out to them that TVR slightly modified the Grantura MkIII chassis for production of the Grantura 1800S, the Kamm-tailed version in late 1964. They did this to allow them to use a common chassis to build both Granturas and Griffiths. By making the top engine rails run parallel rather than tapering toward the bulkhead they created more space to allow the Griffith's V8 engine to fit and they also carried out some slight repositioning/reshaping of some other tubes to allow them to get the gearbox in and provide adequate strength. These modifications and what gave rise to them are documented on page 175 of Peter Filby's 2010 book "TVR : The Early Years".
No changes were made to any of the suspension pickup points or the position of the wheels, as compared to the standard Grantura MkIII chassis. However, I have heard that the FIA bods may decide that the chassis change constitutes a material enough difference to prevent the future issue of HTPs for the Kamm-tailed cars.
The problem for many existing round-tailed Grantura MkIII racers might prove to be that until very recently the only available replacement chassis for those with irreparable crash damage has been the 1800S version, due to a single source situation. Thus, many existing round-tailed Grantura MkIII race cars have been built around what is actually the 1800S chassis. Of course, having a valid FIA-issued HTP is not actually required for many of the popular race series currently favoured by Grantura racers and so it may not be an issue for many of them.
So the Fia may now be trying to ban a chassis made in 64 for a Griff when it is fitted to a Grantura but not when it is fitted to a Griff? is it not feasible that a crashed Grantura in 64 could have been re-built with a griffith chassis all in period. All this Fia stuff getting a tad too anal for my liking.No changes were made to any of the suspension pickup points or the position of the wheels, as compared to the standard Grantura MkIII chassis. However, I have heard that the FIA bods may decide that the chassis change constitutes a material enough difference to prevent the future issue of HTPs for the Kamm-tailed cars.
The problem for many existing round-tailed Grantura MkIII racers might prove to be that until very recently the only available replacement chassis for those with irreparable crash damage has been the 1800S version, due to a single source situation. Thus, many existing round-tailed Grantura MkIII race cars have been built around what is actually the 1800S chassis. Of course, having a valid FIA-issued HTP is not actually required for many of the popular race series currently favoured by Grantura racers and so it may not be an issue for many of them.
Also have to question where any performance advantage is gained with some slightly different bent tube when pick up points are un altered... I would think that Granturas are uncompetitive enough against elans without hampering them further?? Also in the end I would think the Fia are on shaky ground when both chassis are comfortably in period…there are a whole load of mods that they could be concentrating on out of period!!
N.
Edited by heightswitch on Saturday 28th June 13:29
heightswitch said:
Is it not feasible that a crashed Grantura in 64 could have been re-built with a griffith chassis all in period.
Yes it is. It is also feasible that one or two late production round-tailed Granturas were built on 1800S/Griffith chassis as there would probably have been quite a few going spare after the early 1965 dock strike that halted export of Griffith kits to the US. It is documented in the Filby book (p.200) that the old style round-tailed bodywork was still being used on Granturas produced up until mid-1965. However, I am told that no original example of such a car is currently known to exist (i.e. an original unrestored car with round tail bodywork but a 'parallel rails' chassis).Apparently no decision has been made as yet and it may be some time until the FIA gather whatever evidence it thinks it needs before making such a decision. But, with a lot of people having to reapply for their HTPs fairly soon the question is likely to be asked sooner rather than later. Having given HTPs to several 1800S cars over the past few years the FIA needs to get its ducks in a row. The fear could be that face-saving will prove more important to them than any consideration as to actual performance advantages or otherwise.
Edited by Thurner Fan on Sunday 29th June 07:27
Adrian@ said:
Is there an aggrieved feeling floating around, the FIA having been 'almost mislead' going on here, that they can 'feel' that they can retrospectively correct that, with the updated information that has been 'found'.
Adrian@
Adrian, you can only "find" something if it's been lostAdrian@
thegamekeeper said:
Adrian, you can only "find" something if it's been lost
Here, here Gamekeeper. And it is well remembered that on more than one occasion you have highlighted on this forum that there are more than bodywork differences between the MkIII and the 1800S.It is a pity that whoever informs the FIA bods isn't as clued up as they should be.
TF
Edited by Thurner Fan on Saturday 28th June 21:04
Edited by Thurner Fan on Saturday 28th June 21:04
Thurner Fan said:
Here, here Gamekeeper. And It is well remembered that on more than one occasion you have highlighted on this forum that there are more than bodywork differences between the MkII and the 1800S.
It is a pity that whoever informs the FIA bods isn't as clued up as they should be.
TF
£££££££££ and some more!!It is a pity that whoever informs the FIA bods isn't as clued up as they should be.
TF
Best,
D.
Thurner Fan said:
Not really for this thread but what I've heard is that the FIA have recently had it pointed out to them that TVR slightly modified the Grantura MkIII chassis for production of the Grantura 1800S, the Kamm-tailed version in late 1964. They did this to allow them to use a common chassis to build both Granturas and Griffiths. By making the top engine rails run parallel rather than tapering toward the bulkhead they created more space to allow the Griffith's V8 engine to fit and they also carried out some slight repositioning/reshaping of some other tubes to allow them to get the gearbox in and provide adequate strength. These modifications and what gave rise to them are documented on page 175 of Peter Filby's 2010 book "TVR : The Early Years".
No changes were made to any of the suspension pickup points or the position of the wheels, as compared to the standard Grantura MkIII chassis. However, I have heard that the FIA bods may decide that the chassis change constitutes a material enough difference to prevent the future issue of HTPs for the Kamm-tailed cars.
The problem for many existing round-tailed Grantura MkIII racers might prove to be that until very recently the only available replacement chassis for those with irreparable crash damage has been the 1800S version, due to a single source situation. Thus, many existing round-tailed Grantura MkIII race cars have been built around what is actually the 1800S chassis. Of course, having a valid FIA-issued HTP is not actually required for many of the popular race series currently favoured by Grantura racers and so it may not be an issue for many of them.
I am not sure what the FIA is planning and if I do understand the discussion right, but as I know and can see from my homologation papers these models (chassis) are homologated! No changes were made to any of the suspension pickup points or the position of the wheels, as compared to the standard Grantura MkIII chassis. However, I have heard that the FIA bods may decide that the chassis change constitutes a material enough difference to prevent the future issue of HTPs for the Kamm-tailed cars.
The problem for many existing round-tailed Grantura MkIII racers might prove to be that until very recently the only available replacement chassis for those with irreparable crash damage has been the 1800S version, due to a single source situation. Thus, many existing round-tailed Grantura MkIII race cars have been built around what is actually the 1800S chassis. Of course, having a valid FIA-issued HTP is not actually required for many of the popular race series currently favoured by Grantura racers and so it may not be an issue for many of them.
FIA Recognitionnumber 68: TVR MKIII with 1622cc engine in 1962.
Year of manufactur is 1962, Recognition is August 1962.
There is no chassis number mentioned on the Recognition paper nor is a
picture of the chassis in the document.
This chassis is the first MKIII chasssisnumber supposedly 8/xxx
The very first MKIII built in 1962 had chassisnumbers 8/...
FIA Recognitionnumber 160: TVR MkIII.1800 with engine 1798cc,
Year of Manufacture is 1963, but the Recognition is April 1964,
Chassisnumber is 9/601. There is also no picture of the chassis in the
document.
This is supposedly the modified (Griffith) MKIII chassis with MKIII body.
FIA Recognitionnumber 237: TVR MKIV 1800S with engine 1798cc in October 1966.
Chassisnumber 18/001...050
This is the manxtail body with the modified Griffith chassis
In my opinion this means that the MKIII 1800 with chassisnumber 9/001 is the wider Griffith chassis wich was the only chassis they have built after the introduction of the Griffith in 1963.
The Griffith 200 is homologated with the manxtailbody in 1965.
It has chassisnumber 200/5/001
If I have a look in my older list of chassisnumbers from the club there are also some Grantura 1800S listed with chassis number 65/5/....
So I do not understand what the intension of the FIA is. The Grantura MKIII was homologated with two "different" chassis. The first in 1962 the second in 1963. In the homologation papers there is also no word about the chassis tubes that could point to the differencies of these chassis.
But we will see what the FIA desides even if their reason will be incomprehensible.
Regarding the question in the beginning of this topic:
It could also be a Vixen S1. As far as I know were the early Vixens also offered with MG engines.
K.W.
Edited by Granturas on Monday 30th June 09:44
Edited by Granturas on Monday 30th June 09:57
Edited by Granturas on Monday 30th June 11:33
I would agree that those are indeed the three homologated versions of the Grantura.
But, I don't believe the last line of what you have said about the MkIII 1800 is correct
Also, the Griffith-modified chassis used in the 1800S and the one we are discussing didn't actually come into being until mid-1964. The timeline is important here and it is absolutely true that the Griffith was first conceived in October 1963, when the V8 was first shoehorned into a Grantura MkIII chassis in Jack Griffith's workshops. But, this was only a crudely built prototype 'special' and it was only after this first car was shipped to the UK for the factory to examine in early 1964, that it was decided that a properly engineered second prototype should be built. This was when the chassis modifications we are talking about were first made, by David Hives and his colleagues in Blackpool.
By stretching the imagination and looking at the coincident timing it could be imagined, as you are doing, that 9/601, the car noted in the April 1964 MkIII 1800 homologation papers, was fitted with the newly-modified Griffith-ready chassis. But, this seems to be highly unlikely because every under-bonnet photograph or surviving example of an original unmodified/unrepaired Grantura with chassis number 9/6XX shows the tapering top engine rails and straight crossbar. If someone could produce a photo of an original round-tailed car with the later Griffith-ready chassis then that could be extremely important for owners of Appendix K prepared Kamm-tailed Granturas. Of course, if could cause problems for the owners of the round-tailed cars(!).
As far as the FIA are concerned, my understanding is that, as well as the homologation papers, they use whatever other information they find that they deem to be relevant in judging compliance with Appendix K rules. The concern I have heard voiced is that IF this becomes something they think matters and they can't find a photo or a surviving unmodified example of a Griffith-modified chassis in a round-tailed car then they could stop issuing papers to the Kamm-tailed cars.
I would reiterate that all this is only a rumour at the moment, albeit from a well-informed source, and it would be very difficult to establish that the differences between the two versions of the chassis confer any kind of performance advantage whatsoever. But, for those who followed the saga surrounding Griffith bodywork this may end up having depressingly familiar ring to it. Or it may all go away and be forgotten about and minds just concentrated on the racing. Let us hope so.
TF
But, I don't believe the last line of what you have said about the MkIII 1800 is correct
Granturas said:
FIA Recognitionnumber 160: TVR MkIII.1800 with engine 1798cc,
Year of Manufacture is 1963, but the Recognition is April 1964,
Chassisnumber is 9/601. There is also no picture of the chassis in the
document.
This is supposedly the modified (Griffith) MKIII chassis with MKIII body.
and I would, therefore, disagree with your opinionYear of Manufacture is 1963, but the Recognition is April 1964,
Chassisnumber is 9/601. There is also no picture of the chassis in the
document.
This is supposedly the modified (Griffith) MKIII chassis with MKIII body.
Granturas said:
In my opinion this means that the MKIII 1800 with chassisnumber 9/601 is the wider Griffith chassis wich was the only chassis they have built after the introduction of the Griffith in 1963.
It is well-documented in the marque literature and period road tests that the MkIII 1800 came into production in Autumn 1963 and used exactly the same chassis as the MkIII that was introduced in April 1962. The main performance-related changes were limited to the obvious increase in engine size, the addition of a second unsprung damper ahead of the rear wheel and the option to have a factory-fitted limited slip differential. There were also some trim changes and some reprofiling around the rear number plate area. But the chassis was unchanged from the standard MkIII and so it had the same tapering top engine rails. It also had the straight cross-member in between the engine and radiator, as opposed to a slightly U-shaped one that features on the later 1800S chassis.Also, the Griffith-modified chassis used in the 1800S and the one we are discussing didn't actually come into being until mid-1964. The timeline is important here and it is absolutely true that the Griffith was first conceived in October 1963, when the V8 was first shoehorned into a Grantura MkIII chassis in Jack Griffith's workshops. But, this was only a crudely built prototype 'special' and it was only after this first car was shipped to the UK for the factory to examine in early 1964, that it was decided that a properly engineered second prototype should be built. This was when the chassis modifications we are talking about were first made, by David Hives and his colleagues in Blackpool.
By stretching the imagination and looking at the coincident timing it could be imagined, as you are doing, that 9/601, the car noted in the April 1964 MkIII 1800 homologation papers, was fitted with the newly-modified Griffith-ready chassis. But, this seems to be highly unlikely because every under-bonnet photograph or surviving example of an original unmodified/unrepaired Grantura with chassis number 9/6XX shows the tapering top engine rails and straight crossbar. If someone could produce a photo of an original round-tailed car with the later Griffith-ready chassis then that could be extremely important for owners of Appendix K prepared Kamm-tailed Granturas. Of course, if could cause problems for the owners of the round-tailed cars(!).
As far as the FIA are concerned, my understanding is that, as well as the homologation papers, they use whatever other information they find that they deem to be relevant in judging compliance with Appendix K rules. The concern I have heard voiced is that IF this becomes something they think matters and they can't find a photo or a surviving unmodified example of a Griffith-modified chassis in a round-tailed car then they could stop issuing papers to the Kamm-tailed cars.
I would reiterate that all this is only a rumour at the moment, albeit from a well-informed source, and it would be very difficult to establish that the differences between the two versions of the chassis confer any kind of performance advantage whatsoever. But, for those who followed the saga surrounding Griffith bodywork this may end up having depressingly familiar ring to it. Or it may all go away and be forgotten about and minds just concentrated on the racing. Let us hope so.
TF
There is a huge amount of disquiet with the FIA and HTPs for historic race cars at the moment.
As some of you may be aware we have all been informed that all HTPs cease to be valid from the end of this year and that we will all need to have our cars re-inspected and new papers issued at a cost of roughly £1000 per car for smaller engines and £2000 per car for larger engines - oh and the new HTPs are only valid for 5 years. Given that an HTP, like an MOT, is a piece of paper that confirms compliance to the homologation papers on a particular date and everything can be different the following day, it all seems rather pointless - except for the FIA who have seen the popularity of historic racing and are making a money grab. I have spoken to Brits, Dutch and Germans this weekend at Spa. who are all saying they will not get their cars re-papered and I can see race organisers who wish to maintain grids in 2015 dropping the requirement for HTPs to 'appendix K compliant'
What is more there are rumours - like the one being spread by Thurner Fan - that certain marques and models will no longer be eligible. This includes Morgan SLRs, Marcos 1800s and TVR Granturas with Kamm tails. It is all rather stupid given that the FIA have no problem issuing papers for a brand new lightweight E type, Lister, Lola and others which has been remanufactured using CAD/CAM design, modern materials using TIG welding and for example you can build a Mini Cooper S from a standard Mini rather than an original Cooper. In some EU countries you don't even need an identity to get HTP ie they are 'air cars' manufactured from new.
IMHO from both the interior and the ID the spanish car is a MKIV - as far as I am aware all the MkIII 1800s have identities in the format xx/x/xxxx. FYI I cannot think of a race Grantura without a replacement chassis of the generic type ie it fits MkIIIs, MkIVs, early Vixens and Griffiths.
BTW Thurner Fan, you are obviously very knowledgeable about early TVRs, so it is a pity you do not come out of the woodwork and reveal your true identity or do you have something to hide?
As some of you may be aware we have all been informed that all HTPs cease to be valid from the end of this year and that we will all need to have our cars re-inspected and new papers issued at a cost of roughly £1000 per car for smaller engines and £2000 per car for larger engines - oh and the new HTPs are only valid for 5 years. Given that an HTP, like an MOT, is a piece of paper that confirms compliance to the homologation papers on a particular date and everything can be different the following day, it all seems rather pointless - except for the FIA who have seen the popularity of historic racing and are making a money grab. I have spoken to Brits, Dutch and Germans this weekend at Spa. who are all saying they will not get their cars re-papered and I can see race organisers who wish to maintain grids in 2015 dropping the requirement for HTPs to 'appendix K compliant'
What is more there are rumours - like the one being spread by Thurner Fan - that certain marques and models will no longer be eligible. This includes Morgan SLRs, Marcos 1800s and TVR Granturas with Kamm tails. It is all rather stupid given that the FIA have no problem issuing papers for a brand new lightweight E type, Lister, Lola and others which has been remanufactured using CAD/CAM design, modern materials using TIG welding and for example you can build a Mini Cooper S from a standard Mini rather than an original Cooper. In some EU countries you don't even need an identity to get HTP ie they are 'air cars' manufactured from new.
IMHO from both the interior and the ID the spanish car is a MKIV - as far as I am aware all the MkIII 1800s have identities in the format xx/x/xxxx. FYI I cannot think of a race Grantura without a replacement chassis of the generic type ie it fits MkIIIs, MkIVs, early Vixens and Griffiths.
BTW Thurner Fan, you are obviously very knowledgeable about early TVRs, so it is a pity you do not come out of the woodwork and reveal your true identity or do you have something to hide?
Edited by Fiscracer on Monday 30th June 17:36
Thurner Fan said:
It is well-documented in the marque literature and period road tests that the MkIII 1800 came into production in Autumn 1963 and used exactly the same chassis as the MkIII that was introduced in April 1962. The main performance-related changes were limited to the obvious increase in engine size, the addition of a second unsprung damper ahead of the rear wheel and the option to have a factory-fitted limited slip differential. There were also some trim changes and some reprofiling around the rear number plate area. But the chassis was unchanged from the standard MkIII and so it had the same tapering top engine rails. It also had the straight cross-member in between the engine and radiator, as opposed to a slightly U-shaped one that features on the later 1800S chassis.
Also, the Griffith-modified chassis used in the 1800S and the one we are discussing didn't actually come into being until mid-1964. The timeline is important here and it is absolutely true that the Griffith was first conceived in October 1963, when the V8 was first shoehorned into a Grantura MkIII chassis in Jack Griffith's workshops. But, this was only a crudely built prototype 'special' and it was only after this first car was shipped to the UK for the factory to examine in early 1964, that it was decided that a properly engineered second prototype should be built. This was when the chassis modifications we are talking about were first made, by David Hives and his colleagues in Blackpool.
By stretching the imagination and looking at the coincident timing it could be imagined, as you are doing, that 9/601, the car noted in the April 1964 MkIII 1800 homologation papers, was fitted with the newly-modified Griffith-ready chassis. But, this seems to be highly unlikely because every under-bonnet photograph or surviving example of an original unmodified/unrepaired Grantura with chassis number 9/6XX shows the tapering top engine rails and straight crossbar. If someone could produce a photo of an original round-tailed car with the later Griffith-ready chassis then that could be extremely important for owners of Appendix K prepared Kamm-tailed Granturas. Of course, if could cause problems for the owners of the round-tailed cars(!).
As far as the FIA are concerned, my understanding is that, as well as the homologation papers, they use whatever other information they find that they deem to be relevant in judging compliance with Appendix K rules. The concern I have heard voiced is that IF this becomes something they think matters and they can't find a photo or a surviving unmodified example of a Griffith-modified chassis in a round-tailed car then they could stop issuing papers to the Kamm-tailed cars.
I would reiterate that all this is only a rumour at the moment, albeit from a well-informed source, and it would be very difficult to establish that the differences between the two versions of the chassis confer any kind of performance advantage whatsoever. But, for those who followed the saga surrounding Griffith bodywork this may end up having depressingly familiar ring to it. Or it may all go away and be forgotten about and minds just concentrated on the racing. Let us hope so.
TF
It is well possible that you are right allthough my English is only good enough for understanding of 50 %.Also, the Griffith-modified chassis used in the 1800S and the one we are discussing didn't actually come into being until mid-1964. The timeline is important here and it is absolutely true that the Griffith was first conceived in October 1963, when the V8 was first shoehorned into a Grantura MkIII chassis in Jack Griffith's workshops. But, this was only a crudely built prototype 'special' and it was only after this first car was shipped to the UK for the factory to examine in early 1964, that it was decided that a properly engineered second prototype should be built. This was when the chassis modifications we are talking about were first made, by David Hives and his colleagues in Blackpool.
By stretching the imagination and looking at the coincident timing it could be imagined, as you are doing, that 9/601, the car noted in the April 1964 MkIII 1800 homologation papers, was fitted with the newly-modified Griffith-ready chassis. But, this seems to be highly unlikely because every under-bonnet photograph or surviving example of an original unmodified/unrepaired Grantura with chassis number 9/6XX shows the tapering top engine rails and straight crossbar. If someone could produce a photo of an original round-tailed car with the later Griffith-ready chassis then that could be extremely important for owners of Appendix K prepared Kamm-tailed Granturas. Of course, if could cause problems for the owners of the round-tailed cars(!).
As far as the FIA are concerned, my understanding is that, as well as the homologation papers, they use whatever other information they find that they deem to be relevant in judging compliance with Appendix K rules. The concern I have heard voiced is that IF this becomes something they think matters and they can't find a photo or a surviving unmodified example of a Griffith-modified chassis in a round-tailed car then they could stop issuing papers to the Kamm-tailed cars.
I would reiterate that all this is only a rumour at the moment, albeit from a well-informed source, and it would be very difficult to establish that the differences between the two versions of the chassis confer any kind of performance advantage whatsoever. But, for those who followed the saga surrounding Griffith bodywork this may end up having depressingly familiar ring to it. Or it may all go away and be forgotten about and minds just concentrated on the racing. Let us hope so.
TF
The other thing is, that I have learned not to trust the books 100 % and also I do not trust all the infos one gets from the manufacturer. I try to trust only my eyes and the photos as you mention.
It would be nice to discuss those things in front of a real car when I am in UK next time (Beaulieu). If you have the same thoughts please contact me.
K.W.
Fiscracer said:
There is a huge amount of disquiet with the FIA and HTPs for historic race cars at the moment.
I have spoken to Brits, Dutch and Germans this weekend at Spa. who are all saying they will not get their cars re-papered and I can see race organisers who wish to maintain grids in 2015 dropping the requirement for HTPs to 'appendix K compliant'
I have also spoken to a few racers who are so fed up with the inconsistency of the FIA behaviour that they are considering not even bothering with an HTP. I agree with your prediction that if enough come to this view then there'll be a tipping point and organisers will stop requiring the HTP.I have spoken to Brits, Dutch and Germans this weekend at Spa. who are all saying they will not get their cars re-papered and I can see race organisers who wish to maintain grids in 2015 dropping the requirement for HTPs to 'appendix K compliant'
Fiscracer said:
FYI I cannot think of a race Grantura without a replacement chassis of the generic type ie it fits MkIIIs, MkIVs, early Vixens and Griffiths.
My wandering around various paddocks over the years suggests that most race Granturas have indeed had their chassis' replaced with the Griffith/1800S version. But, there are a few around with the original chassis:http://www.historicracer.com/features/1963-tvr-gra... (the under-bonnet photo shows the horizontal cross-member between the engine and radiator)
http://people.zeelandnet.nl/serel/NickLees8642.htm (no known under-bonnet photo on-line)
http://people.zeelandnet.nl/serel/PhilHooper9688.h... (no known under-bonnet photo on-line)
http://people.zeelandnet.nl/serel/MichelBillion-re... (no known under-bonnet photo on-line)
Fiscracer said:
BTW Thurner Fan, you are obviously very knowledgeable about early TVRs, so it is a pity you do not come out of the woodwork and reveal your true identity or do you have something to hide?
Well, I may be lodged in the woodwork as you say but don't consider myself as having anything to hide! As I've said before, whatever knowledge I have comes from careful reading of the books and also wandering around various historic paddocks and speaking to people for years, although not as often as I would like. Just a fan of the marque and the Grantura model in particular.BTW, I think KW is right in that not everything in the books is accurate!
TF
An interesting thread and there certainly is a lot of discussion around the race paddocks at the moment about HTP renewal. Personally I'm not rushing to renew despite the offer of a discount for an early application. Of the people that I have spoken to, almost all have said they do not intend to re-apply for HTP as there is a belief that most clubs will accept cars with expired HTPs. Unless you want to enter premier events such as Le Mans Classic they seem to be likely to become irrelevant. Also there is no guarantee that having paid for and received your HTP that the FIA might not decide to revoke it at some point on some new technicality or indeed change to an annual renewal! After all when I obtained mine I believed it was for life.
Granturas said:
alphaone said:
Will you also be going to the Pre 80s meeting ?
Might do so, depending on where and when it takes place?K.W.
Best,
D.
Instead of looking at whether a chassis rails is tapered or straight with a bend, which gives no performance advantage, it might be rather more constructive if the FIA actually ensured cars comply with their papers and that they comply with the homologation. That means no 1950cc or larger engines, no 4 synchro gearboxes, no 1800 B engines in 8/xxx chassis cars, no overdrive gearboxes, no modified uprights or adjustable wishbones, no moved suspension pick ups, no moved anti roll bars etc etc etc
I was talking to a young lady with an E type at the weekend. An FIA scrutineer had complained about the fact the plug leads on her car had been changed from red on her papers to blue but failed to notice that the iron head and block had been replaced with a wide angle head in alloy and an alloy block. That level of scrutiny and knowledge says it all.
PS Well done to Jon Wolfe for two cracking drives in his V8 Tuscan at Spa at the weekend
I was talking to a young lady with an E type at the weekend. An FIA scrutineer had complained about the fact the plug leads on her car had been changed from red on her papers to blue but failed to notice that the iron head and block had been replaced with a wide angle head in alloy and an alloy block. That level of scrutiny and knowledge says it all.
PS Well done to Jon Wolfe for two cracking drives in his V8 Tuscan at Spa at the weekend
This issue has popped up a few times in the past.
One simple solution would be to send your racing cars stateside and have fun running our lovely circuits....Laguna , road america, etc. were you will be more than welcome.
After all, your money goes a lot further than our Monopoly paper!
TF, you will see TVRs running factory chassis as well!
Best,
D.
One simple solution would be to send your racing cars stateside and have fun running our lovely circuits....Laguna , road america, etc. were you will be more than welcome.
After all, your money goes a lot further than our Monopoly paper!
TF, you will see TVRs running factory chassis as well!
Best,
D.
Grantura MKI said:
The Sunday of Beaulieu. I will be doing both again this year. You need to come along this year at the new venue....all details are listed on the club website.
Best,
D.
Sorry David, I am not a club member any more.Best,
D.
Is it that Sandtoft near Doncaster?
I will talk to you about going there at Beaulieu.
K.W.
Pre 80s meeting is Sunday September 7th - would be great to see you all there
http://www.sandtoft.org.uk/index.html
http://www.sandtoft.org.uk/index.html
Gassing Station | TVR Classics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff