The MSA have changed their name and logo
Discussion
300bhp/ton said:
I'm a club scutineer, so I'm quite familiar with some parts of the Blue Book.
EDIT: the below turned into a bit of a ramble, not sure I'm really making a point or just waffling....
My concern is the cost of being able to use certain vehicles for certain events, can be difficult or costly. As is getting into certain types of events.
Some of this might be aimed at individual clubs, but as a rule they base their rules and opinions on those from the MSA.
Sometimes it can be silly little things, like you can't take the carpet or door cards off and club dependent will either not be allowed to enter at all or end up in a specials class against truly purpose built vehicles.
Engine size categories also seem a little crazy, such as allowing something like a 1.8 160hp Caterham to compete (complete with no interior as they don't have any). Or a EP9 Civic Type R with over 200hp. But 3.9 litre MGB with 182hp might not be allowed or have to go in a different class.
Rallying or similar events seem to always be very expensive to get into, because you need a lot of prep and safey gear. I'm not saying this isn't a good idea, but for £99-120 I can go and drive flat out round a race track with nothing more than a crash helmet in cars capable of 200mph and 0-100mph in well under 10 seconds.
However if I want to drive a 100hp car on the same race track as part of a tarmac rally I need a £1500-3500 roll cage, certified race suits, gloves, boots, belts, etc etc.
There also seems little place for allowing common sense. I heard reports earlier in the year that a car was turned away from a historic rally because the rollcage was too safe. The owner had built the cage to more modern standards with additional fixed cross bars over the doors, the original homoligation papers for the vehicle didn't have these. I know of another historic event, a circuit one. Where an Alvis was turned away because it was the wrong shade of blue.
In the off road world there have been issues with tyre lists, where the MSA removed a load of tyres people actually used. for grass roots motorsport having to suddenly replace 4-8 tyres, which might be your only ones simply because they are no longer on a list is pretty pointless really.
I just wonder sometimes if there needs to be an easier way to allow people to come and use their vehicles at grass roots events. The only thing you really need is some for of liability insurance should anyone fall over or get hit. All drivers should be signing on to say they take full responsibility for their actions.
I don't know how they do it in the USA, but I know they can run a rally event in an open area and people turn up like we would here for a track day and they essentially run a mini stage rally in their road going cars, no cages, no over burdening regs. To do the same here would require a lot of investment in a vehicle and gear. My angle here is, how many young people mess about racing on the roads or in a Tesco's carpark? Far too many. If motorsport could give them a place to come and do similar, but in a more controlled environment, then it would be safer overall. But the cost is just too high.
A lot of what you talk about is as much to do with club/series rules. Most of which are drawn up by those who actually take part in the series. To be honest if you have any sense you build the car to the series you want to take part in. You don't build a car and then see what you can do with it. As you pointed out taking door panels off a car may move it from a standard to a modified class. So why do it? EDIT: the below turned into a bit of a ramble, not sure I'm really making a point or just waffling....
My concern is the cost of being able to use certain vehicles for certain events, can be difficult or costly. As is getting into certain types of events.
Some of this might be aimed at individual clubs, but as a rule they base their rules and opinions on those from the MSA.
Sometimes it can be silly little things, like you can't take the carpet or door cards off and club dependent will either not be allowed to enter at all or end up in a specials class against truly purpose built vehicles.
Engine size categories also seem a little crazy, such as allowing something like a 1.8 160hp Caterham to compete (complete with no interior as they don't have any). Or a EP9 Civic Type R with over 200hp. But 3.9 litre MGB with 182hp might not be allowed or have to go in a different class.
Rallying or similar events seem to always be very expensive to get into, because you need a lot of prep and safey gear. I'm not saying this isn't a good idea, but for £99-120 I can go and drive flat out round a race track with nothing more than a crash helmet in cars capable of 200mph and 0-100mph in well under 10 seconds.
However if I want to drive a 100hp car on the same race track as part of a tarmac rally I need a £1500-3500 roll cage, certified race suits, gloves, boots, belts, etc etc.
There also seems little place for allowing common sense. I heard reports earlier in the year that a car was turned away from a historic rally because the rollcage was too safe. The owner had built the cage to more modern standards with additional fixed cross bars over the doors, the original homoligation papers for the vehicle didn't have these. I know of another historic event, a circuit one. Where an Alvis was turned away because it was the wrong shade of blue.
In the off road world there have been issues with tyre lists, where the MSA removed a load of tyres people actually used. for grass roots motorsport having to suddenly replace 4-8 tyres, which might be your only ones simply because they are no longer on a list is pretty pointless really.
I just wonder sometimes if there needs to be an easier way to allow people to come and use their vehicles at grass roots events. The only thing you really need is some for of liability insurance should anyone fall over or get hit. All drivers should be signing on to say they take full responsibility for their actions.
I don't know how they do it in the USA, but I know they can run a rally event in an open area and people turn up like we would here for a track day and they essentially run a mini stage rally in their road going cars, no cages, no over burdening regs. To do the same here would require a lot of investment in a vehicle and gear. My angle here is, how many young people mess about racing on the roads or in a Tesco's carpark? Far too many. If motorsport could give them a place to come and do similar, but in a more controlled environment, then it would be safer overall. But the cost is just too high.
Getting the "competitor" to say they take full responsibility for their actions. Has no more legal prescient than an organiser saying they take "no responsibility for any loss or damage".
Having just returned from a rally where 2 competitors who probably owe there lives to the strength of there roll cages and FHR, then no I don't want to see rally cars (or any other car) taking a backward step regarding safety.
Allowing road going cars into sprints and hillclimbs is an attempt to get more people into motorsport. Yes there are more safety concerns for these vehicles.
Edited by Drumroll on Wednesday 14th November 19:04
Drumroll said:
300bhp/ton said:
Sometimes it can be silly little things, like you can't take the carpet or door cards off and club dependent will either not be allowed to enter at all or end up in a specials class against truly purpose built vehicles.
Engine size categories also seem a little crazy, such as allowing something like a 1.8 160hp Caterham to compete (complete with no interior as they don't have any). Or a EP9 Civic Type R with over 200hp. But 3.9 litre MGB with 182hp might not be allowed or have to go in a different class.
A lot of what you talk about is as much to do with club/series rules. Most of which are drawn up by those who actually take part in the series. To be honest if you have any sense you build the car to the series you want to take part in. You don't build a car and then see what you can do with it. As you pointed out taking door panels off a car may move it from a standard to a modified class. So why do it? Engine size categories also seem a little crazy, such as allowing something like a 1.8 160hp Caterham to compete (complete with no interior as they don't have any). Or a EP9 Civic Type R with over 200hp. But 3.9 litre MGB with 182hp might not be allowed or have to go in a different class.
However it is impossible to build a car that is multi discipline. You end up being compromised in all disciplines which is quite frustrating. This should not be the case. We need to be encouraging club level motorsport not making it too difficult / expensive to take part in.
What I would like is a car that can do everything from autosolos, autotests and Targas and then stage rallying; Possibly even rallycross and even circuit stuff as well but it is an impossible ask.
what I have ended up with is a road rally spec mk2 Escort which is also stage logbooked. An RS2000 on a single 38 dgas carb but with full cage, dated belts and seats etc (£1500 worth) which gives me ~130bhp ish on skinny tyres.
It is almost quick enough as a road rally car(apart from the driver) and way too slow as a stage rally car. I can't improve it for stage without giving up on road / Targa. I have reached the limits of the regs in one discipline and can go no further.
The choice I have is to remain compromised for stage (a bit sad) or to give up on Targa completely.
and don't get me started on the tyre rules. I have ~40 rims with various tyres on them that can only be used on certain events........
The only other option is to end up with 2 cars.
and then if I want to go circuit racing, I will definitely need another car....
So to do a bit of club mixed motorsport in any semi-competitive way, I probably need 3 cars or to accept that I can take part but be uncompetitive in every event....
300bhp/ton said:
EDIT: the below turned into a bit of a ramble, not sure I'm really making a point or just waffling....
That's okay - my reply will probably be just waffling too. I sort of see the point you're trying to make, but I don't really see how most of the problems you talk about are MSA problems, or that they're solvable.300bhp/ton said:
Sometimes it can be silly little things, like you can't take the carpet or door cards off and club dependent will either not be allowed to enter at all or end up in a specials class against truly purpose built vehicles.
Hmmm... I do hillclimbing and sprinting and you see this all the time, people moaning because they have to run in Mod Prod because they've removed their door trims or carpets. My response is "well, don't remove the door trims or carpets then", because the rules have been around longer than me and it's hardly difficult to understand them especially now there's a thousand forums and other guides on the web. 300bhp/ton said:
Engine size categories also seem a little crazy, such as allowing something like a 1.8 160hp Caterham to compete (complete with no interior as they don't have any). Or a EP9 Civic Type R with over 200hp. But 3.9 litre MGB with 182hp might not be allowed or have to go in a different class.
The MSA say I can't do sprints in my Transit Connect van. That doesn't bother me because I did my research and bought a vehicle that I can use for sprints, that fits with the existing regulations and that's competitive in its class. It cost £2.5k. There's always a class in which you can run a 3.9 litre MGB, but it's ridiculous to expect that there will always be a class in which its competitive. 300bhp/ton said:
Rallying or similar events seem to always be very expensive to get into, because you need a lot of prep and safey gear. I'm not saying this isn't a good idea, but for £99-120 I can go and drive flat out round a race track with nothing more than a crash helmet in cars capable of 200mph and 0-100mph in well under 10 seconds.
However if I want to drive a 100hp car on the same race track as part of a tarmac rally I need a £1500-3500 roll cage, certified race suits, gloves, boots, belts, etc etc.
But you can't have separate regs for "rallying in a forest", "rallying on closed roads", "rallying at Epynt", "rallying around an old WW2 airfield" and "rallying around Brands Hatch". The whole premise of rally regs is that the car is safe so the venue doesn't need to be. If you choose to enter a rally at a safe venue it's still a rally and needs to conform to the necessary regs. However if I want to drive a 100hp car on the same race track as part of a tarmac rally I need a £1500-3500 roll cage, certified race suits, gloves, boots, belts, etc etc.
I'd also slightly challenge the analogy. I'm about a second quicker around a lap of Castle Combe at a sprint on List 1A tyres than I am if I do a trackday there on List 1B tyres. I could drive around all day at the track day without my heart rate increasing very much, but after 1.75 laps at a sprint I'm shaking. Partly that's because at the track day I know the circuit barely has any marshals and there's no paramedic and rescue crew, and partly because we all try MUCH harder when there's a plastic trophy at stake. I'm extremely grateful that MSA sprints and hillclimbs are properly organised with the safety systems in place.
300bhp/ton said:
There also seems little place for allowing common sense. I heard reports earlier in the year that a car was turned away from a historic rally because the rollcage was too safe. The owner had built the cage to more modern standards with additional fixed cross bars over the doors, the original homoligation papers for the vehicle didn't have these. I know of another historic event, a circuit one. Where an Alvis was turned away because it was the wrong shade of blue.
Again, I struggle to find much sympathy. We all know that historic rallying is for period vehicles running to period specifications. Most people would read the regs before fitting a cage to their car. There would be plenty of events they could enter (i.e. a non-historic stage rally), just not one where they'd be competing against people who have read the regs and have vehicles that conform. This really isn't hard. 300bhp/ton said:
In the off road world there have been issues with tyre lists, where the MSA removed a load of tyres people actually used. for grass roots motorsport having to suddenly replace 4-8 tyres, which might be your only ones simply because they are no longer on a list is pretty pointless really.
I'll give you that one. 
300bhp/ton said:
In the off road world there have been issues with tyre lists, where the MSA removed a load of tyres people actually used. for grass roots motorsport having to suddenly replace 4-8 tyres, which might be your only ones simply because they are no longer on a list is pretty pointless really.
Was that change not down to venues saying "use ATs or you can't use our land"? I think the regs on mudflaps were introduced around the same time for the same reason.The differing rules across disciplines can be baffling. Why did the MSA ban Andy Burton's car from stage rallying but, with a couple of mods, he could compete at the same venue in a comp safari? I know the overall average speeds in comp safaris are less but that doesn't mean there are sections where he'd reach the same speeds as he did on rallies. Very strange.
One thing I am disappointed with is that they've illustrated their strategy document with a Fiesta WRC and a Hyundai WRC, it would've been nice to show eg a J1000 Micra or something else more "grass roots". Never mind, hopefully the changes that have started will continue and MUK will achieve their aims of promoting the sport properly etc.
Drumroll said:
To be honest if you have any sense you build the car to the series you want to take part in. You don't build a car and then see what you can do with it. As you pointed out taking door panels off a car may move it from a standard to a modified class. So why do it?
The trouble here is, if you have plenty of money to spend on motorsport this isn't an issue. But for many, those potential members whom would bulk the numbers out at events/clubs, money is often the restrictive bit.Edited by Drumroll on Wednesday 14th November 19:04
To expand on this, I'm not really talking about people who "build" cars for a specific event. I mean people who simply already own a car and want to now use it for some grass roots motorsport activities. The car may have been "built" or "modded" 10 years prior to wanting to have a go at a form of competition. These cars are also likely to be used for more than just motorsport also.
And then to further this, if you want to have a go at more than one type of event. The current regs make this quite difficult or impossible unless you own multiple vehicles, when in reality one vehicle would probably suffice.
Edited by 300bhp/ton on Thursday 15th November 13:52
fat80b said:
However it is impossible to build a car that is multi discipline. You end up being compromised in all disciplines which is quite frustrating. This should not be the case. We need to be encouraging club level motorsport not making it too difficult / expensive to take part in.
What I would like is a car that can do everything from autosolos, autotests and Targas and then stage rallying; Possibly even rallycross and even circuit stuff as well but it is an impossible ask.
what I have ended up with is a road rally spec mk2 Escort which is also stage logbooked. An RS2000 on a single 38 dgas carb but with full cage, dated belts and seats etc (£1500 worth) which gives me ~130bhp ish on skinny tyres.
It is almost quick enough as a road rally car(apart from the driver) and way too slow as a stage rally car. I can't improve it for stage without giving up on road / Targa. I have reached the limits of the regs in one discipline and can go no further.
The choice I have is to remain compromised for stage (a bit sad) or to give up on Targa completely.
and don't get me started on the tyre rules. I have ~40 rims with various tyres on them that can only be used on certain events........
The only other option is to end up with 2 cars.
and then if I want to go circuit racing, I will definitely need another car....
So to do a bit of club mixed motorsport in any semi-competitive way, I probably need 3 cars or to accept that I can take part but be uncompetitive in every event....
What you are seeking does not exist in any sport, why would you expect it in motorsport?What I would like is a car that can do everything from autosolos, autotests and Targas and then stage rallying; Possibly even rallycross and even circuit stuff as well but it is an impossible ask.
what I have ended up with is a road rally spec mk2 Escort which is also stage logbooked. An RS2000 on a single 38 dgas carb but with full cage, dated belts and seats etc (£1500 worth) which gives me ~130bhp ish on skinny tyres.
It is almost quick enough as a road rally car(apart from the driver) and way too slow as a stage rally car. I can't improve it for stage without giving up on road / Targa. I have reached the limits of the regs in one discipline and can go no further.
The choice I have is to remain compromised for stage (a bit sad) or to give up on Targa completely.
and don't get me started on the tyre rules. I have ~40 rims with various tyres on them that can only be used on certain events........
The only other option is to end up with 2 cars.
and then if I want to go circuit racing, I will definitely need another car....
So to do a bit of club mixed motorsport in any semi-competitive way, I probably need 3 cars or to accept that I can take part but be uncompetitive in every event....
You want to be able to build a car that can WIN in many disciplines. Not just compete (which you can as you say) but you want to win. Which other sport that is so equipment-dependant can allow you to win in many disciplines?
Cycling? Which bike would you use to win a road race, cyclocross race, mountain bike race, BMX race, time trial, omnium etc?
Sailing? Does the same yacht win round-the-world races as would win on a handling course on a reservoir?
Athletics? Would you use the same shoes for sprinting on a blaze track as running a cross-country race in the mud, and expect to win?
That issue is nothing to do with regulation, it's everything to do with people being competitive and wanting to win, and having the funds to do so. That's just life isn't it? Your Escort can compete on many many disciplines, so you are already doing better than many others.
Club level motorsport is cheap and easy to compete in.
No sport is cheap and easy to win at, is it?
Every single sport requires time, dedication and in many cases money, to be a winner.
DelicaL400 said:
Was that change not down to venues saying "use ATs or you can't use our land"? I think the regs on mudflaps were introduced around the same time for the same reason.
No they removed specific makes/treads from certain lists. But happened to be treads that were used by a lot of the competitors. It did get a work around in the end. And I believe the latest proposal, although not yet a rule is to get rid of the tyre lists completely. Which is probably a good thing.Galveston said:
Hmmm... I do hillclimbing and sprinting and you see this all the time, people moaning because they have to run in Mod Prod because they've removed their door trims or carpets. My response is "well, don't remove the door trims or carpets then", because the rules have been around longer than me and it's hardly difficult to understand them especially now there's a thousand forums and other guides on the web.
I know it's in the regs. But I'm questioning if it should be? The advantage anyone would have by removing door cards is either none, or not enough to make a difference. At least at club level. For professional motorsport I think it's more valid. Just not a grass roots events.And it goes back to sometimes people only have so much money to spend on this. A good friend of mine has a TR7 Sprint that he has built up as a bit of a rally replica. So he has removed the carpet and headlining. Because he doesn't need them for a weekend fun car. Plus they leak a bit, so wet carpets aren't exactly something you want.
He has decided after doing this that he'd like to use the car for a bit of fun motorsports. Being penalised for no headlining is somewhat silly in the grand scheme of things. Having it or not (it's thin vinly in a TR7) will not impact speed or stage/section times.
And of course some cars, such as Caterhams and the like don't have any interior anyhow, so can run in essentially the same state and often in the same class, or what should be the same class.
We had this with the ALRC fairly recently for Comp Safari, there was a move to want to make vehicles "modified class" if they took the carpet or door cards off. The motion was eventually quashed when I pointed out that people in a Discovery or Freelander may want to pull the carpets out because they get wet and covered in mud for such events and will end up rotting and stinking. Not because they believe there is a speed advantage.
Galveston said:
The MSA say I can't do sprints in my Transit Connect van. That doesn't bother me because I did my research and bought a vehicle that I can use for sprints, that fits with the existing regulations and that's competitive in its class. It cost £2.5k. There's always a class in which you can run a 3.9 litre MGB, but it's ridiculous to expect that there will always be a class in which its competitive.
I'm not disputing this. But what if you already had a vehicle and didn't have another £2.5k to spend on something else? That is IMO a barrier.And to only divide classes by engine CC seems rather short cited for an organisation that should know a bit about cars and engines.
e.g. a 3.9 Rover V8, a pretty common engine in the UK used in countless vehicles. Is an old school OHV engine. It'll sound great, but the reality is if it's road engine you are talking 180-240hp from one. Very similar to a good modern DOHC 2.0-2.5 litre Inline 4 or V6. But Rover V8's will mostly tend to grouped into classes with Turbocharged motors or modern V8's making 300-400hp.
I'm not saying there is an easy answer, but such things can turn people away from wanting to compete. And some events/disciplines won't even let more than 4 cylinder cars compete. Even if larger engines make less power and are slower. Which again seems odd to me.
300bhp/ton said:
Galveston said:
Hmmm... I do hillclimbing and sprinting and you see this all the time, people moaning because they have to run in Mod Prod because they've removed their door trims or carpets. My response is "well, don't remove the door trims or carpets then", because the rules have been around longer than me and it's hardly difficult to understand them especially now there's a thousand forums and other guides on the web.
I know it's in the regs. But I'm questioning if it should be? The advantage anyone would have by removing door cards is either none, or not enough to make a difference. At least at club level. For professional motorsport I think it's more valid. Just not a grass roots events.And it goes back to sometimes people only have so much money to spend on this. A good friend of mine has a TR7 Sprint that he has built up as a bit of a rally replica. So he has removed the carpet and headlining. Because he doesn't need them for a weekend fun car. Plus they leak a bit, so wet carpets aren't exactly something you want.
He has decided after doing this that he'd like to use the car for a bit of fun motorsports. Being penalised for no headlining is somewhat silly in the grand scheme of things. Having it or not (it's thin vinly in a TR7) will not impact speed or stage/section times.
And of course some cars, such as Caterhams and the like don't have any interior anyhow, so can run in essentially the same state and often in the same class, or what should be the same class.
We had this with the ALRC fairly recently for Comp Safari, there was a move to want to make vehicles "modified class" if they took the carpet or door cards off. The motion was eventually quashed when I pointed out that people in a Discovery or Freelander may want to pull the carpets out because they get wet and covered in mud for such events and will end up rotting and stinking. Not because they believe there is a speed advantage.
Galveston said:
The MSA say I can't do sprints in my Transit Connect van. That doesn't bother me because I did my research and bought a vehicle that I can use for sprints, that fits with the existing regulations and that's competitive in its class. It cost £2.5k. There's always a class in which you can run a 3.9 litre MGB, but it's ridiculous to expect that there will always be a class in which its competitive.
I'm not disputing this. But what if you already had a vehicle and didn't have another £2.5k to spend on something else? That is IMO a barrier.And to only divide classes by engine CC seems rather short cited for an organisation that should know a bit about cars and engines.
e.g. a 3.9 Rover V8, a pretty common engine in the UK used in countless vehicles. Is an old school OHV engine. It'll sound great, but the reality is if it's road engine you are talking 180-240hp from one. Very similar to a good modern DOHC 2.0-2.5 litre Inline 4 or V6. But Rover V8's will mostly tend to grouped into classes with Turbocharged motors or modern V8's making 300-400hp.
I'm not saying there is an easy answer, but such things can turn people away from wanting to compete. And some events/disciplines won't even let more than 4 cylinder cars compete. Even if larger engines make less power and are slower. Which again seems odd to me.
Using CC and a standard formula for turbos etc. has been the standard way to sort most classes out for many years. to change it now would cause more problems then it would solve.
Again the removal of so called "cosmetics" of a car have all been agreed, it is not just done on a whim.
This has moved away from a chat about what they ought to do into a people with cash talking about what they race and what rules should be.
You are already involved, the MSA should be about retaining those that are, but more so about making it easier to get involved at a decent level, not autosolo and targa stuff that is very club level and not really that interesting to the casual fan who might want to try something.
If you really want to, you will do those things, there are but thousands of people who would love to race, if they could, but there is no incentive. No easy way in, no enticement. This is a tough world for motorsport, there are hundreds of things you can do.
Woldnt it be great if racing of any kind was as easy to get into as swimming, football or something.
it is not poeeible for that really, but it can be more attainable, and the MSA do very little about that, relying on a staid model and very ltitle in the way of going out there and reaching those with little money or facilities to run a car.
You are already involved, the MSA should be about retaining those that are, but more so about making it easier to get involved at a decent level, not autosolo and targa stuff that is very club level and not really that interesting to the casual fan who might want to try something.
If you really want to, you will do those things, there are but thousands of people who would love to race, if they could, but there is no incentive. No easy way in, no enticement. This is a tough world for motorsport, there are hundreds of things you can do.
Woldnt it be great if racing of any kind was as easy to get into as swimming, football or something.
it is not poeeible for that really, but it can be more attainable, and the MSA do very little about that, relying on a staid model and very ltitle in the way of going out there and reaching those with little money or facilities to run a car.
Instead of looking at the problems all the time chunder, what would be your option to get more involved? Targa rallies are becoming more popular, you would know that if you were actually involved instead of just moaning.
Club motorsport is the building block that everything else is built on.
Club motorsport is the building block that everything else is built on.
300bhp/ton said:
I know it's in the regs. But I'm questioning if it should be? The advantage anyone would have by removing door cards is either none, or not enough to make a difference. At least at club level. For professional motorsport I think it's more valid. Just not a grass roots events.
And it goes back to sometimes people only have so much money to spend on this. A good friend of mine has a TR7 Sprint that he has built up as a bit of a rally replica. So he has removed the carpet and headlining. Because he doesn't need them for a weekend fun car. Plus they leak a bit, so wet carpets aren't exactly something you want.
He has decided after doing this that he'd like to use the car for a bit of fun motorsports. Being penalised for no headlining is somewhat silly in the grand scheme of things. Having it or not (it's thin vinly in a TR7) will not impact speed or stage/section times.
And of course some cars, such as Caterhams and the like don't have any interior anyhow, so can run in essentially the same state and often in the same class, or what should be the same class.
I do see your point, but I also think the existing regs are sensible and already cover a broad spectrum. Focussing on hills and sprints (because that's what I'm currently au fait with, though I've done loads of different club motorsport) there are categories for...And it goes back to sometimes people only have so much money to spend on this. A good friend of mine has a TR7 Sprint that he has built up as a bit of a rally replica. So he has removed the carpet and headlining. Because he doesn't need them for a weekend fun car. Plus they leak a bit, so wet carpets aren't exactly something you want.
He has decided after doing this that he'd like to use the car for a bit of fun motorsports. Being penalised for no headlining is somewhat silly in the grand scheme of things. Having it or not (it's thin vinly in a TR7) will not impact speed or stage/section times.
And of course some cars, such as Caterhams and the like don't have any interior anyhow, so can run in essentially the same state and often in the same class, or what should be the same class.
Standard Cars - literally that, as they left the production line.
Road Going Production - modified, but road legal and retaining trim
Modified Production - modified, can be completely stripped out
Road going specialist cars (e.g. Caterhams)
Modified specialist cars
Racing cars - single-seaters of various engine sizes
Sports Libra - anything else
You can fit most things into there somewhere, but the problem comes from the safety requirements for the 'faster' categories. If you enter a standard Renault Clio minus its door cards them you're into Mod Prod and need a cage, seat, HANS etc.
Of course, I'm a grumpy old b
d with a completely standard Renault Clio that retains its door cards because I know there's no point removing them. But more to the point, the whole point of the 'Standard Car' category is that it's ridiculously simple for newcomers or people like me who just can't be arsed with the hassle of a modified car anymore. The MSA are positively encouraging a cheap and easy entry point to the sport - a £500 Clio 172 would be plenty competitive enough for a decent driver to win a plastic pot. Within that category, there have to be some rules and making it 'standard only' just seems completely and utterly logical to me. I will also make the point that AutoSolos provide an opportunity for any road legal car to compete. You may not be competitive in a TR7 Sprint replica (though as usual a decent driver in anything will beat half the field), but you'd have a whole load of fun.
300bhp/ton said:
But what if you already had a vehicle and didn't have another £2.5k to spend on something else? That is IMO a barrier.
You can do AutoSolos, as above. As I think someone else said above, it's a bit ridiculous to expect all cars to be eligible for all types of event. 300bhp/ton said:
And to only divide classes by engine CC seems rather short cited for an organisation that should know a bit about cars and engines.
There is a hillclimb and sprint championship (Classic Marques, I think it's called) that has a handicap system based on a number of vehicle parameters. I believe they all rock up at a rolling road somewhere at the beginning of the season to measure power and be weighed. But to me that's a whole load of hassle I couldn't ever be bothered with, and surely to a newcomer that's also a rather big step to take. chunder27 said:
Woldnt it be great if racing of any kind was as easy to get into as swimming, football or something.
it is not poeeible for that really, but it can be more attainable, and the MSA do very little about that, relying on a staid model and very ltitle in the way of going out there and reaching those with little money or facilities to run a car.
Anyone can try karting at their local indoor track for £20. You can do an AutoSolo with a £10 club card for a £40 entry fee in any road going car. You can compete at hills and sprints or targa rallies in completely standard cars, with a minimum of safety gear. Basic types of club motorsport are already ridiculously accessible.it is not poeeible for that really, but it can be more attainable, and the MSA do very little about that, relying on a staid model and very ltitle in the way of going out there and reaching those with little money or facilities to run a car.
Galveston said:
Anyone can try karting at their local indoor track for £20. You can do an AutoSolo with a £10 club card for a £40 entry fee in any road going car. You can compete at hills and sprints or targa rallies in completely standard cars, with a minimum of safety gear. Basic types of club motorsport are already ridiculously accessible.
But not at all well publicised. If we agree that stopping young guys sliding around on tea trays in a car park is a good thing, I’d argue that rather than changing a logo or name, the MSA would be better putting its funding into letting those guys know what they can do with their standard or (usually) fairly lightly modified road car for 20 quid and no risk of attracting the wrong sort of attention.
If that’s the next step, that’s great too. But I question why there needs to be a name change incurring expense around the sport in order to attract more people in. One does not need to follow the other.
And as an aside, I’m also a bit disappointed and concerned at using WRC cars to advertise themselves. Yes they’re aspirational but they’re also almost exclusively the playthings of very rich old men in the uk rally scene. How about giving those car park drifters some race cars as inspiration that they could actually envisage themselves attaining?
thepawbroon said:
What about Targa rallying? It is precisely what you describe. No safety gear, no requirement for the vehicle other than a warning triangle and possibly spill kit. I've done some in my standard £400 Suzuki Ignis. I've organised two. The problem is that they are not well publicised, nor understood. The Motorsport UK announcement says they will do more to solve that problem, but anyone with have an ounce of determination could find a decent, fun, cheap grass roots motorsport event.
Yep, targas are great entry level events. Been doing them for years now with my son as nav, he started naving at 12. We've had a great time, he can't wait to drive on one, maybe next year building on the autotesting he's done since 14. Pick the right event and the car needs nothing more than a bit of tape on the battery lead, a spill kit, warning triangle and a first aid kit, if you spend anything more than £25 on prep you've gone for the premium option!!
The entry fee quite often includes lunch and evening feast, so a bit of social as well.
Classic/Historic cars don't have to to be limited to four pot, two carb chokes or single cam, event by event dispensations can be had via the organisers.
There is a thread going on the club motorsport section on here about targas.
Clubbie motorsport is alive and well, despite the doom mongering.
Hopefully the light touch approach from motorsport UK will continue.
Make hydraulic handbrakes free on Targas for all cars (unless the venue owners have a problem with them) and allow in car video and I'd never look jealously at a stage rally again!
Wingo.
300bhp/ton said:
Do they still not allow this? I can see the reasons for it, but it's sad representation of the times we live in, when organisations are scared and afraid to allow things to be filmed.
As far I know it's because targas are classed as road rallies. Rather than allow for video on off public highway tests on targas and keep the ban on for all events classed as road rallies that are "competitive" on the public highway the restriction stays in place. Sure they are some targa test venues that are sensitive to video, but IMHO the majority are not.
The in car video is a great way to promote motorsport, help training/coaching as well as settle those navigator/driver post events debates as to who needs to write left and right on their hands or put left right stickers on the dash
Wingo
The thing is, people who are already doing events are going to wax lyrical and say how great it is, fair enough, you think targa and autosolos are great and cheap, of course you do, you are doing them, I don't. I like stuff more interesting than that, more exciting, more visceral, so it is never going to appeal, it will only appeal to a minority even smaller than those who have a real desire to compete but not at such a low, rather basic level.
My ideas are grander, get all the big names at an event, make it free, hand out rides, tickets, get youth up close and personal with drivers, teams, engineers. Get them out there on track, off road, expose them to the actual thrill. Not in simulators, although that is party of it, but in life, I am sure plenty of stars would be up for it, they do elsewhere.
Competing is for bare faced enthusiasts, they will do it almost regardless of cost. But there has to be a way in for people who want to try, dabble, not commit to a garage, a trailer, a tow car, thousands of pounds on equipment that they might not use much, cars that are safe but not having to be rebuilt to compete in. You might say these things are all necessary, but I disagree, there are other ways.
You can talk all you like about autosolo or targa, but that does not engage with anyone other than the kind of people it is designed to engage with, overly enthusiastic people who like being in clubs.
it is NEVER going to attract the thousands of race fans who want more.
Perhaps my view is impossible, but I simply think the MSA could do a lot more, many barriers are in place for people who have a passing interest and with a little push would compete, most of them monetary, and I think initiallly the MSA could help a lot with that.
My ideas are grander, get all the big names at an event, make it free, hand out rides, tickets, get youth up close and personal with drivers, teams, engineers. Get them out there on track, off road, expose them to the actual thrill. Not in simulators, although that is party of it, but in life, I am sure plenty of stars would be up for it, they do elsewhere.
Competing is for bare faced enthusiasts, they will do it almost regardless of cost. But there has to be a way in for people who want to try, dabble, not commit to a garage, a trailer, a tow car, thousands of pounds on equipment that they might not use much, cars that are safe but not having to be rebuilt to compete in. You might say these things are all necessary, but I disagree, there are other ways.
You can talk all you like about autosolo or targa, but that does not engage with anyone other than the kind of people it is designed to engage with, overly enthusiastic people who like being in clubs.
it is NEVER going to attract the thousands of race fans who want more.
Perhaps my view is impossible, but I simply think the MSA could do a lot more, many barriers are in place for people who have a passing interest and with a little push would compete, most of them monetary, and I think initiallly the MSA could help a lot with that.
chunder27 said:
The thing is, people who are already doing events are going to wax lyrical and say how great it is, fair enough, you think targa and autosolos are great and cheap, of course you do, you are doing them, I don't. I like stuff more interesting than that, more exciting, more visceral, so it is never going to appeal, it will only appeal to a minority even smaller than those who have a real desire to compete but not at such a low, rather basic level.
My ideas are grander, get all the big names at an event, make it free, hand out rides, tickets, get youth up close and personal with drivers, teams, engineers. Get them out there on track, off road, expose them to the actual thrill. Not in simulators, although that is party of it, but in life, I am sure plenty of stars would be up for it, they do elsewhere.
Competing is for bare faced enthusiasts, they will do it almost regardless of cost. But there has to be a way in for people who want to try, dabble, not commit to a garage, a trailer, a tow car, thousands of pounds on equipment that they might not use much, cars that are safe but not having to be rebuilt to compete in. You might say these things are all necessary, but I disagree, there are other ways.
You can talk all you like about autosolo or targa, but that does not engage with anyone other than the kind of people it is designed to engage with, overly enthusiastic people who like being in clubs.
it is NEVER going to attract the thousands of race fans who want more.
Perhaps my view is impossible, but I simply think the MSA could do a lot more, many barriers are in place for people who have a passing interest and with a little push would compete, most of them monetary, and I think initiallly the MSA could help a lot with that.
The more I see of what you write, the less I think you actually know about Motorsport. The way you dismiss autosolos and Targa's is an example of this.My ideas are grander, get all the big names at an event, make it free, hand out rides, tickets, get youth up close and personal with drivers, teams, engineers. Get them out there on track, off road, expose them to the actual thrill. Not in simulators, although that is party of it, but in life, I am sure plenty of stars would be up for it, they do elsewhere.
Competing is for bare faced enthusiasts, they will do it almost regardless of cost. But there has to be a way in for people who want to try, dabble, not commit to a garage, a trailer, a tow car, thousands of pounds on equipment that they might not use much, cars that are safe but not having to be rebuilt to compete in. You might say these things are all necessary, but I disagree, there are other ways.
You can talk all you like about autosolo or targa, but that does not engage with anyone other than the kind of people it is designed to engage with, overly enthusiastic people who like being in clubs.
it is NEVER going to attract the thousands of race fans who want more.
Perhaps my view is impossible, but I simply think the MSA could do a lot more, many barriers are in place for people who have a passing interest and with a little push would compete, most of them monetary, and I think initiallly the MSA could help a lot with that.
This may come as a shock to you but Motorsport does not exist to suite your warped view of it.
Galveston said:
Anyone can try karting at their local indoor track for £20. You can do an AutoSolo with a £10 club card for a £40 entry fee in any road going car. You can compete at hills and sprints or targa rallies in completely standard cars, with a minimum of safety gear. Basic types of club motorsport are already ridiculously accessible.
not surre they are ridiculously accessible. You have to go and find them, then deal with an archaic motor club that is stuck in the 1960's and deal with petty politics and bureaucracy. A target market would be the max power brigade in as much as they have an interest in cars and will spend money on them. But I can't see the old boys at a motor club welcoming these ruffians to their 12 car event. Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff