CSCC Future Classics
Discussion
A discussion on another forum has made me realise that the humble Porsche 924 might be the ideal car for the 1601-2000cc Future Classics class.
They handle well and loads were built for the BRSCC/ PDA 924 series so there must be loads still available. They are not at all expensive to buy already race prepared either (c£3-4K) and parts are still available. I know that one or two already race in FC and their class opposition normally includes: Lancia Beta, Alfa GTV (Bertone and Alfetta) and 2 litre MR2. It would be great if a few more from the 924 race series could be persuaded to come out & try CSCC "Future Classics". 924s could become the "weapon of choice" for the 1601 to 2000cc "Future Classic" class. Could even have an unofficial 924 class.
Another advantage is that the 924 would also be eligible for the CSCC invites to the Nurburgring races (models have to have been pre 1981 to be eligible as the CSCC broadly fits in to the ADAC "Youngtimer" categories). The 924 must be one of the chaepest and most robust cars for that sort of caper!
What alternatives are there for 1601-2 litre FC? I guess I can only really think of alternatives such as 2 litre TR7 and Triumph Dolomite Sprint, 2 litre Capris, Opel Mantas, 1700cc Alfa Sprints, early Maxda RX7, POrsche's own 914 or 914/6 and cars that are already eligible for Tin Tops such a VW Golfs and Scrrocos and the like. However, how many of these sorts of cars are in (racing) captivity? Not that many.
I know that the CSCC is trying to strengthen the participation of 1970s under 2 litre cars within "Future Classics" so maybe this will give more competition. I also think that the main opposition to a 924 could come from Mk1 MR2 and MX5s (albeit that they are in the 1600 class) if a few more of those can be attracted from their own series' to try the CSCC's "mini-enduro" format.
They handle well and loads were built for the BRSCC/ PDA 924 series so there must be loads still available. They are not at all expensive to buy already race prepared either (c£3-4K) and parts are still available. I know that one or two already race in FC and their class opposition normally includes: Lancia Beta, Alfa GTV (Bertone and Alfetta) and 2 litre MR2. It would be great if a few more from the 924 race series could be persuaded to come out & try CSCC "Future Classics". 924s could become the "weapon of choice" for the 1601 to 2000cc "Future Classic" class. Could even have an unofficial 924 class.
Another advantage is that the 924 would also be eligible for the CSCC invites to the Nurburgring races (models have to have been pre 1981 to be eligible as the CSCC broadly fits in to the ADAC "Youngtimer" categories). The 924 must be one of the chaepest and most robust cars for that sort of caper!
What alternatives are there for 1601-2 litre FC? I guess I can only really think of alternatives such as 2 litre TR7 and Triumph Dolomite Sprint, 2 litre Capris, Opel Mantas, 1700cc Alfa Sprints, early Maxda RX7, POrsche's own 914 or 914/6 and cars that are already eligible for Tin Tops such a VW Golfs and Scrrocos and the like. However, how many of these sorts of cars are in (racing) captivity? Not that many.
I know that the CSCC is trying to strengthen the participation of 1970s under 2 litre cars within "Future Classics" so maybe this will give more competition. I also think that the main opposition to a 924 could come from Mk1 MR2 and MX5s (albeit that they are in the 1600 class) if a few more of those can be attracted from their own series' to try the CSCC's "mini-enduro" format.
jimbobs said:
Quick question - are MK1 MX5s (as raced in the Ma5da series) eligible for the Future Classics? I thought the cars had to be from the '80s?
Yes they are eligible and at least one has raced with us. Very competitive in the 1300-1600 class. Cars for FC should be from the 70s & 80s. 1990 is the cutoff, I think, although some later cars are allowed on an invitation basis at the discretion of the club. The MX5 was introduced in 1989, I think. fieldl said:
Ssshh it will only be another car that is much quicker than us 
Hi Lee,Having driven both my car and a well prepared Integra I was struggling to see where the advantage was in the former to say the least.. So no hiding behind your car.
Anyway, what's done is done and while it was all handled quite badly (any late changes of mind based on an individual example rather than the principle will always be, as appears to be the case here) there are no hard feelings either way. I managed to cancel hotels etc so there was no extenuating financial fallout.
My car is eligible for FC as has been mentioned and I've done a few of them, but given the nature of FC I was looking for some more racing on the weekend and only one race was a struggle to justify. Shame.
I have a more modified RX7 in build for IPRA Australia which I'll be racing in the UK next year (hopefully!) and will get that into an FC or two. No question of that for Tin Tops as it's four linked, axle dampers, flared arches, etc etc..
S.
Hi Stacy, I think the issue was that RX7s don't really fit into the "saloon" or "hatchback" description of CSCC Tin Tops. An RX3 would have been fine, I think!
Check the regs about flared arches etc in Future Classics. I think that FC also requires standard size and shape bodyshells (although alternative materials can be used).
Check the regs about flared arches etc in Future Classics. I think that FC also requires standard size and shape bodyshells (although alternative materials can be used).
Andy, can't see how that was the case - in the first instance the MSA/FIA lay down the designation of a saloon/hatchback not the CSCC, and the FB (1st gen model in question) was most assuredly homologated as a saloon, meets the internal dimension requirements laid down in Group A, and indeed won the BTCC.. Secondly there was an explicit acceptance of the car previously after some fact finding. All this was known at the outset, and indeed I could have been engaged in the subsequent discussions.
Some things are probably best to take on the chin Sir. Hugo apologised and was obviously put in a difficult position, and I'm happy to leave it at that.
Future Classics lays down a silhouette requirement only, so wheel arches are not a problem. Indeed I seem to recall a TR7 on a previous FC outing sporting the same. I'll wait to see if the arches do become a problem, but as we'll be shaking the car down and are thus unlikely to upset any applecarts hopefully it won't be a problem. Or should I read more into your statement?
If an RX3 was eligible then I'd be disappointed as there was no such communication to me. When pressed on the reversal Hugo could only say that it "was deemed not in the spirit" which might appear rather high handed if there was more dialogue appropriate, so I'm sure it's not the case.
S.
Some things are probably best to take on the chin Sir. Hugo apologised and was obviously put in a difficult position, and I'm happy to leave it at that.
Future Classics lays down a silhouette requirement only, so wheel arches are not a problem. Indeed I seem to recall a TR7 on a previous FC outing sporting the same. I'll wait to see if the arches do become a problem, but as we'll be shaking the car down and are thus unlikely to upset any applecarts hopefully it won't be a problem. Or should I read more into your statement?
If an RX3 was eligible then I'd be disappointed as there was no such communication to me. When pressed on the reversal Hugo could only say that it "was deemed not in the spirit" which might appear rather high handed if there was more dialogue appropriate, so I'm sure it's not the case.
S.
Edited by stacy on Saturday 3rd October 19:06
stacy said:
Andy, can't see how that was the case - in the first instance the MSA/FIA lay down the designation of a saloon/hatchback not the CSCC, and the FB (1st gen model in question) was most assuredly homologated as a saloon, meets the internal dimension requirements laid down in Group A, and indeed won the BTCC.. Secondly there was an explicit acceptance of the car previously after some fact finding. All this was known at the outset, and indeed I could have been engaged in the subsequent discussions.
Some things are probably best to take on the chin Sir. Hugo apologised and was obviously put in a difficult position, and I'm happy to leave it at that.
Future Classics lays down a silhouette requirement only, so wheel arches are not a problem. Indeed I seem to recall a TR7 on a previous FC outing sporting the same. I'll wait to see if the arches do become a problem, but as we'll be shaking the car down and are thus unlikely to upset any applecarts hopefully it won't be a problem. Or should I read more into your statement?
If an RX3 was eligible then I'd be disappointed as there was no such communication to me. When pressed on the reversal Hugo could only say that it "was deemed not in the spirit" which might appear rather high handed if there was more dialogue appropriate, so I'm sure it's not the case.
S.
Hi Stacy, I'm talking from a personal point of view, not a CSCC POV, so my comments are not gospel, just my summise, particularly my comments about RX3s! Have you got one?Some things are probably best to take on the chin Sir. Hugo apologised and was obviously put in a difficult position, and I'm happy to leave it at that.
Future Classics lays down a silhouette requirement only, so wheel arches are not a problem. Indeed I seem to recall a TR7 on a previous FC outing sporting the same. I'll wait to see if the arches do become a problem, but as we'll be shaking the car down and are thus unlikely to upset any applecarts hopefully it won't be a problem. Or should I read more into your statement?
If an RX3 was eligible then I'd be disappointed as there was no such communication to me. When pressed on the reversal Hugo could only say that it "was deemed not in the spirit" which might appear rather high handed if there was more dialogue appropriate, so I'm sure it's not the case.
S.
Edited by stacy on Saturday 3rd October 19:06
Again, I shouldn't read too much in to my statement about wheel arches and silhouettes - you need to check with the club office, as they will have the official view - but I understood that the "silhouette" reg referred to the view of the car in every plain.
Gassing Station | UK Club Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff