Optimistic or not?

[Fiscracer]

See

http://www.racecarsdirect.com/listing/37795/tvr_gr...

Not sure I'd entirely agree with the description - in it's one race it was 12 secs a lap slower than Messrs Ashworth and Begbie (who DNF'd) and behind 6 MGBs and 3 other Granturas at the end.

On the other hand makes it pushes the prices of other race prepared early TVRs northwards along with many other pre 66 cars

[Thurner Fan]

Wonder if it is actually a pre-66 built car that was road registered in 1966 (see D plate) or whether it is a later car that has been built to the homologated spec for the MkIII 1800 and, therefore, eligible for pre-66 historic racing.

[heightswitch]

The costs of everything TVR seem to be shooting skyward at the moment.

I think they all have a value based upon what they cost to build which reflects the asking price. an Fia car costs a fair bit to screw together. People keep putting the asking prices up and cars keep selling...Its a shame that so many are leaving the UK though.

Historically TVR's were always owned by a small band of impoverished enthusiast fettlers and prices remained realistic. This is also no longer the case which is pushing the cars away from proper enthusuast owners and into the hands of private collectors and speculators which in my view is not a very good thing!

N.

[Fiscracer]

Thurner Fan said:

Wonder if it is actually a pre-66 built car that was road registered in 1966 (see D plate) or whether it is a later car that has been built to the homologated spec for the MkIII 1800 and, therefore, eligible for pre-66 historic racing.

It is definitely a MkIII rather than a MkIV as I checked the chassis no at Silverstone a few weeks ago. I'm not sure that a later car can get FIA papers in the way you suggest although I believe one of the other 1800S's with older pre 66 FIA papers is actually a MKIV.

In principle I agree with Neil as the cars do cost a fortune to build properly. Hopwever Ian Bankhurst's has not sold privately and it has period race history with Paddy Gaston and won the Fordwater Trophy at Goodwood Revival. It was only bid to £36k at auction last year.

[Thurner Fan]

Fiscracer said:

Thurner Fan said:

Wonder if it is actually a pre-66 built car that was road registered in 1966 (see D plate) or whether it is a later car that has been built to the homologated spec for the MkIII 1800 and, therefore, eligible for pre-66 historic racing.

It is definitely a MkIII rather than a MkIV as I checked the chassis no at Silverstone a few weeks ago. I'm not sure that a later car can get FIA papers in the way you suggest although I believe one of the other 1800S's with older pre 66 FIA papers is actually a MKIV.

My understanding is that nowadays it is perfectly possible to take a Grantura that was built after 31 Dec 1965 and obtain FIA papers that conform to the Mk3 1800 spec (homologation No. 160). This is just as feasible as turning what was originally an earlier Mk3 with factory-fitted 1622cc ‘B’ engine into the later Mk3 1800 complete with all the best racing bits. The majority of today’s racing Granturas have probably followed this latter route due to the fairly limited number of original (round-tailed) Mk3 1800 cars that were built (around 35 to 40?).

Given the FIA’s current policy of effectively ignoring chassis numbers, the MSA inspector won’t pay any attention to the originality of the car or its original build date and will only concern himself checking that the vehicle in front of him meets the required spec. So, as several have done in the past few years, it is feasible to build what is effectively a complete replica of a Mk3 1800 and get it papered. And, personally, as long as the specifications are carefully checked I don’t see anything much wrong with that.

On a related point, I am not sure whether anyone has ever come up with proof positive that a Kamm-tailed Grantura ever competed in a pre-66 International event and, as far as I am aware, pre 66 homologation papers were never issued for a TVR Grantura with the later rear profile. However, for some reason the FIA seem to have been less picky with regard to body shape than they were with the long-running Griffith saga and so there are now several Kamm-tailed cars that have fairly recently been given FIA papers.

To muddy the waters a little there were, of course, two versions of the Kamm-tailed Grantura. The Mk3 1800S was built between November 1964 and October 1965 (with chassis numbers in the format 65/5/xxxx) and then again, after the company had changed hands, during the first half of 1966 (chassis numbers 18/xxx). The outwardly similar Mk4 1800S was brought in from around mid-66 to September 1967. Confusingly, there was no change in chassis number format and the runs overlapped due to the financially-driven TVR policy of using up all the old bits and pieces to make some earlier spec cars even after a new model had been introduced! However, the Mk4 had some distinct differences, most importantly a slightly wider track front and rear and an engine position a few inches forward of that in the Mk3 so as to accommodate an improved, MGB-sourced heater box. This setup continued to be used for the predominantly Ford-engined Vixen that followed in Autumn 1967.
So, when issuing papers to any Mk4 derived race cars it is presumed that the FIA-sanctioned inspectors have paid close attention to these important dimensions but, assuming the car has been appropriately modified, there doesn’t seem to be anything stopping a car that left the factory in 1966 or 1967 as a Mk4 being presented for certification as a compliant pre-66 Mk3 1800(S) Grantura.

And the more the merrier I say as they are great little cars to see racing.

[heightswitch]

Thurner Fan said:

Given the FIA’s current policy of effectively ignoring chassis numbers, the MSA inspector won’t pay any attention to the originality of the car or its original build date and will only concern himself checking that the vehicle in front of him meets the required spec. So, as several have done in the past few years, it is feasible to build what is effectively a complete replica of a Mk3 1800 and get it papered. And, personally, as long as the specifications are carefully checked I don’t see anything much wrong with that.

Wasn't this the whole Purpose of HTP though? To allow replicas to be built where it was deemed that an original car was too rare to risk on a circuit!
I always felt that this was a fair way to allow a correctly specced car to be built without the cloak and dagger but it seemed to open up a whole different can of worms!!

I much prefer my old addage IE to run something in Historic racing that is old , rather than just looks old.

My chassis is Brazed!!

Not many racing cars can lay claim to that.

Personally I just like to see old cars racing which are built to the spirit of the rules running in original configuration. I guess the old what is original question was always the bug bear of racing TVR's

N.

[Thurner Fan]

heightswitch said:

Thurner Fan said:

Given the FIA’s current policy of effectively ignoring chassis numbers, the MSA inspector won’t pay any attention to the originality of the car or its original build date and will only concern himself checking that the vehicle in front of him meets the required spec. So, as several have done in the past few years, it is feasible to build what is effectively a complete replica of a Mk3 1800 and get it papered. And, personally, as long as the specifications are carefully checked I don’t see anything much wrong with that.

Wasn't this the whole Purpose of HTP though? To allow replicas to be built where it was deemed that an original car was too rare to risk on a circuit!
I always felt that this was a fair way to allow a correctly specced car to be built without the cloak and dagger but it seemed to open up a whole different can of worms!!

I much prefer my old addage IE to run something in Historic racing that is old , rather than just looks old.

My chassis is Brazed!!

Not many racing cars can lay claim to that.

Personally I just like to see old cars racing which are built to the spirit of the rules running in original configuration. I guess the old what is original question was always the bug bear of racing TVR's

N.

I agree with you. And anyone racing a 40 or 50 year old car that hasn't had most of its crucial bits replaced is probably taking a big risk. So what is really meant by 'original'.

As long as the car is to the correct spec (including engine capacity of course) and is built in the spirit of historic competition what's there to grumble with? If, as a consequence of the current HTP process we end up with a situation where we have, say 50 TVR Grantura Mk3 1800 out there racing (when only 35-40 ever left the factory) then I would say that is a high grade problem to face. And if people are more worried about seeing these old cars as an investment or just a once or twice a year entry ticket to big events then they should probably go and spend their on museum pieces rather than race cars.

TF

Edited by Thurner Fan on Tuesday 12th July 08:12

[heightswitch]

Thurner Fan said:

I agree with you. And anyone racing a 40 or 50 year old car that hasn't had most of its crucial bits replaced is probably taking a big risk. So what is really meant by 'original'.

As long as the car is to the correct spec (including engine capacity of course) and is built in the spirit of historic competition what's there to grumble with? If, as a consequence of the current HTP process we end up with a situation where we have, say 50 TVR Grantura Mk3 1800 out there racing (when only 35-40 ever left the factory) then I would say that is a high grade problem to face. And if people are more worried about seeing these old cars as an investment or just a once or twice a year entry ticket to big events then they should probably go and spend their on museum pieces rather than race cars.

TF

Edited by Thurner Fan on Tuesday 12th July 08:12

I agree.
personally I would love to see the market flooded with early cars to reduce their values to allow them to remain in my financial grasp!! I fear they will be shortly out of my reach, which is both a good and bad thing!!

N

[Fiscracer]

Thurner Fan said:

I agree with you. And anyone racing a 40 or 50 year old car that hasn't had most of its crucial bits replaced is probably taking a big risk. So what is really meant by 'original'.

As long as the car is to the correct spec (including engine capacity of course) and is built in the spirit of historic competition what's there to grumble with? If, as a consequence of the current HTP process we end up with a situation where we have, say 50 TVR Grantura Mk3 1800 out there racing (when only 35-40 ever left the factory) then I would say that is a high grade problem to face. And if people are more worried about seeing these old cars as an investment or just a once or twice a year entry ticket to big events then they should probably go and spend their on museum pieces rather than race cars.

TF

Edited by Thurner Fan on Tuesday 12th July 08:12

I quite agree

Thurner Fan said:

Fiscracer said:

Thurner Fan said:

Wonder if it is actually a pre-66 built car that was road registered in 1966 (see D plate) or whether it is a later car that has been built to the homologated spec for the MkIII 1800 and, therefore, eligible for pre-66 historic racing.

It is definitely a MkIII rather than a MkIV as I checked the chassis no at Silverstone a few weeks ago. I'm not sure that a later car can get FIA papers in the way you suggest although I believe one of the other 1800S's with older pre 66 FIA papers is actually a MKIV.

My understanding is that nowadays it is perfectly possible to take a Grantura that was built after 31 Dec 1965 and obtain FIA papers that conform to the Mk3 1800 spec (homologation No. 160). This is just as feasible as turning what was originally an earlier Mk3 with factory-fitted 1622cc ‘B’ engine into the later Mk3 1800 complete with all the best racing bits. The majority of today’s racing Granturas have probably followed this latter route due to the fairly limited number of original (round-tailed) Mk3 1800 cars that were built (around 35 to 40?).

Given the FIA’s current policy of effectively ignoring chassis numbers, the MSA inspector won’t pay any attention to the originality of the car or its original build date and will only concern himself checking that the vehicle in front of him meets the required spec. So, as several have done in the past few years, it is feasible to build what is effectively a complete replica of a Mk3 1800 and get it papered. And, personally, as long as the specifications are carefully checked I don’t see anything much wrong with that.

On a related point, I am not sure whether anyone has ever come up with proof positive that a Kamm-tailed Grantura ever competed in a pre-66 International event and, as far as I am aware, pre 66 homologation papers were never issued for a TVR Grantura with the later rear profile. However, for some reason the FIA seem to have been less picky with regard to body shape than they were with the long-running Griffith saga and so there are now several Kamm-tailed cars that have fairly recently been given FIA papers.

To muddy the waters a little there were, of course, two versions of the Kamm-tailed Grantura. The Mk3 1800S was built between November 1964 and October 1965 (with chassis numbers in the format 65/5/xxxx) and then again, after the company had changed hands, during the first half of 1966 (chassis numbers 18/xxx). The outwardly similar Mk4 1800S was brought in from around mid-66 to September 1967. Confusingly, there was no change in chassis number format and the runs overlapped due to the financially-driven TVR policy of using up all the old bits and pieces to make some earlier spec cars even after a new model had been introduced! However, the Mk4 had some distinct differences, most importantly a slightly wider track front and rear and an engine position a few inches forward of that in the Mk3 so as to accommodate an improved, MGB-sourced heater box. This setup continued to be used for the predominantly Ford-engined Vixen that followed in Autumn 1967.
So, when issuing papers to any Mk4 derived race cars it is presumed that the FIA-sanctioned inspectors have paid close attention to these important dimensions but, assuming the car has been appropriately modified, there doesn’t seem to be anything stopping a car that left the factory in 1966 or 1967 as a Mk4 being presented for certification as a compliant pre-66 Mk3 1800(S) Grantura.

And the more the merrier I say as they are great little cars to see racing.

Hello Jim - you give yourself away - only one person has that much knowledge of the Grantura history and FIA position

[heightswitch]

Yep I thought JL too.
I am interested in your Take on the current Griffith situation!! My car was built to comply with HTP at the time but obviously time marches on and because principally of the body changes my car can now not be Fia Registered..I feel this is a shame since Mechanically my car is probably very "honest" in terms of its layout and materials.

N.