The MSA have changed their name and logo

[Drumroll]

So the MSA now want to be known as Motorsport UK complete with new logo. Wonder how much that exercise cost and how much will it costs clubs and officials to change all their paperwork, clothing etc. Already heard They (MSA) will not be paying for scrutineers new branded clothing.

[Drumroll]

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?

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]

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.

Engine sizes V horse power V bhp/tonne have all been looked at and different series look at them differently, as you allude there is no easy answer. Generally though how cars are classed/grouped have been agreed with competitors. There will always be winners and losers whatever system you use.

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.

[Drumroll]

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.

[Drumroll]

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.

This may come as a shock to you but Motorsport does not exist to suite your warped view of it.

[Drumroll]

"not bloody timekeeping marshalling, none of that stuff, competing, and doing something worthwhile not driving round cones in ASDA"

So chunder are you saying timekeepers and marshals are not worthwhile.? I was out on the Pokerstars Rally last weekend and the marshals and timekeepers who where out on in the wind and rain Friday night deserve medals, not derision from you. Also several of those marshals/timekeepers also compete, they were putting something back into the sport. Something you clearly don't.

You moan that people have a go at you, but if you actually stood back and read your posts there is no wonder.