Appendix K clarification,Imp

[John D]

Hi guys,I am posting here in the hope that the collective 10/tenths knowledge base would be able to help clarify a couple of questions.

A friend,Doc Fredrik Knutsen,well known Imp racer,is having a bit of bother with the App K rules,which,to me,make no real-world sense.

I realise that,whilst the engine block issue may well be a problem,surely the transmission query must be wrong.

George Bevans and every other Imp I have read of,in period,used Jack Knight gear ratios.Certainly Bevans 3 championship years,his and all the other Imps competing in the British championship used them.

I will insert Docs'original enquiry,copied from another forum below,in the hope that some light could be shed on the subject.

Thanks in advance

John

Docs' post-
"As people who frequent this forum may have noticed, my son Matt and I run Imps in Historic racing in the Nordic countries.
The rules are as per FIA Appendix K, we run to period G2, ie 1970-72. So, if you try to build a car close to the 1971 Bevan specs, you would be a shoo-in for an HTP, right?
Not so. Unfortunately.
Turns out there are two major obstacles.
One is to do with engine blocks. It seems that the FIA will not allow the use of the 930 Sunbeam block, despite the difficulties of obtaining the "straight-edge" Imp blocks over here. Three of our pool of 998 race engines are built on 930 blocks, while the fourth is a pukka Hartwell-built engine in the Imp block, built for me originally in 1979, and unused since a 1982 re-build.
Having the three "new" engines re-done to pacify the FIA will be a financial stretch, not only in finding suitable blocks and having them machined for 998 liners, but also to find Imp crankshafts, having them nitrided, fitted with steel flywheels, and balanced. With the 930 crank using five flywheel bolts, neither of these items are interchangeable with those of the Imp.
The other problem concerns the transmission. Now, there is no doubt that in period, alle the cars ran 4-sp Knight dog boxes.
However, the FIA has decreed that removing synchro rings was not App K legal back then, so, incredibly, Knight dog boxes are not legal in 2010, in Historic racing cars that purport to reproduce the 1970-72 era.
The Chrysler c/r synchro boxes had ratios for cars running 12" wheels in rallies, but when using rear tyres like those run by Bevan in 1971 the gearing is all wrong. It appears that there is a company in Finland that does any Imp ratios you want, for a synchro box, which is what you need to placate Mr FIA. But I am looking at about four grand to have a new c/r synchro box built up...and I have got three racing Imps...
I have one original synchro box which works pretty well, but my other car, which is the re-shelled 1970 Ivor Goodwin car, came with the gearbox that was fitted to the car in 1971, a Knight four-speed dog box and for the sake of originality on a car with a continous racing history, I am most reluctant to fork out for a "new" and different gearbox.
So, do any of the British Impsters have an HTP? And if so, to whats pecs are the cars with reagrd to engine blocks and transmissions?
Any comment would be much appreciated."

[terence]

Not being an expert on Imp's,but having had similar issue's with a car I had been involved with,hopefully this will be of help.You are quite correct about the 'Standard' blocks being rare,however,they can be obtained,the thing about the Dog Box is that they were never homologated in period,the FIA will not accept that design,I had months of mailing/telephone call's trying to get them accepted for the Three Sync MGB Gearbox,all a total waste of time/energy!
Likewise for the 930 Block,if it was not homologated 'in period',it will not be accepted as a suitable replcement.
Anyone would get the impression that the FIA are not particularly helpful.!!

[MGDavid]

Appendix K is ALL about what's on the homologation forms, and if it's not, it should be.
If your cars don't conform to Appendix K then go and race them somewhere else;

[John D]

Hmmm.I'm genuinely puzzled and I'm a novice about this kind of stuff,just thought I'd try to help.
So,even though it's known and proven that parts were fitted and used,in period,in British and European championships,they aren't allowed in historic racing nowadays?

Have I got that right?

John.

[Jeremy Hall]

Originally Posted by John D

Hmmm.I'm genuinely puzzled and I'm a novice about this kind of stuff,just thought I'd try to help.
So,even though it's known and proven that parts were fitted and used,in period,in British and European championships,they aren't allowed in historic racing nowadays?

Have I got that right?

John.

Hmm , not necessarily. I seem to recall that the Bevan Imps in Touring car racing in the 70's were not running to Appendix J but to the RAC rules.If so that would rule out the car specifications. Equally those cars running in the RAC Rally championships-or to RAC rallying regulations-for sure were not running Appendix J. At that point your friend in the Nordic countries has a problem.
In FIA Historic motor sport being old and /or period correct does not automatically mean that it will comply with Appendix K.

[John D]

Thanks Jeremy and Terence,I'm slowly beginning to realise that this Appendix K thing is a bit of a minefield.
I've done a search and whilst there are a lot of posts about the implications of App K,there isn't much about what it actually is.
More research needed,I fear.

[Doc Knutsen]

Originally Posted by John D

Hmmm.I'm genuinely puzzled and I'm a novice about this kind of stuff,just thought I'd try to help.
So,even though it's known and proven that parts were fitted and used,in period,in British and European championships,they aren't allowed in historic racing nowadays?

Have I got that right?

John.

That is it, precisely. The 1970-72 RAC British Touring Car Championship winner, the Bevan Imp, would not be eligible to race in FIA Period G2 races to-day. If you had mothballed this car, you would need to build an new gearbox for it to be legal to-day, using parts that were not even available in 1970-72.

[ministrator]

Originally Posted by MGDavid

Appendix K is ALL about what's on the homologation forms, and if it's not, it should be.
If your cars don't conform to Appendix K then go and race them somewhere else;

A truth with modifications...I've been racing a Cooper S in pre-65 (F) since 2004. Let me tell you - however much these cars conform to App K, they are nothing like the cars used back in 1965. Most of them are purpose-built racers with stiffened shells, serious roll cages, billet cranks, F1-spec rods & pistons, dogshift boxes (watch any incar video from last years Goodwood-race), speed-shift systems, titanium components, modified suspension front & rear, special cooling systems, fuel, distributors, starters, dynamo, camshafts etc etc - revving to 9000 RPM and pushing out 120bhp+. A competitive car can be built for about £30.000+.

In 1965, they were cars from the showroom stripped of unneccessary interior, a modified head, carbs and exhaust. That's about it.

Any current competitive App K Cooper S 1275 would run about 10secs faster laptimes than the best car on the track in 1965.

Besides - In Scandinavia, there is only historic racing and a couple of other formulae, so we can't just take our cars and race them somewhere else...

[limjamrace]

Apart from being reshelled the Imp in question uses the actual same running gear as it did in 1970-72...The straight edge block and the transaxle which is now deemed illegal due to no syncro!
I don't know who is/was responsible for homologation at the time (Chrysler were at no time involved with the brilliant Bevan team i believe) but it seems a case of non-foresight..
In another case in the different direction the chap with the Cooper S has the direct point...His car was never like the one in 1965!
It seems to me that only Fiat had the foresight to get it right with the likes of www.ScuderiaTopolino.com building such a legal homogated racer..Even down to having an opened rear engine lid to cover the exotic exhaust system!
Canny or what!
I wish Doc Knutson all the best in overcoming this problem. Perhaps a consultation with his engine supplier/worker Reggie Pattern may overcome this as he delves in transaxles as well as engines..
As for the 930 B1 block !
I would be concerned as to the use of this as it was introduced some time later and isn't really an original item..
Cannot understand the meaning of hard to come by straight edge blocks as in UK they are plentyful awaiting wet liner conversion..Cheap as well!
Yours David L .Llewellyn Imp Motorsport

[John D]

Ok,I've been doing some reading,thanks to Martyn Morgan Jones great book on George Bevan,I've found that the 1972 championship was run to FIA APP J rules.However,I'm unable to find out exactly what APP J actually is?
I've done a couple of searches,but no luck so far.Does anyone know where I could find the relevant information and how APP J and APP K relate to each other?
Thanks

John

[zefarelly]

and its exactly why lots of Imps prosper well (under gp5 regs) in HRSR and are never seen racing in U2TC.

Are they homologate with drum brakes pre 66 ? (discs later)

Tony Lanfranchi drove a fraser imp in period I think, not that it'll help!

[Peter Mallett]

If it's built to Group 2 it would fit nicely into Masters Proto and Touring 70s.

http://www.themastersseries.com/reso..._Regs_2010.pdf

[MGDavid]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

If it's built to Group 2 it would fit nicely into Masters Proto and Touring 70s.

http://www.themastersseries.com/reso..._Regs_2010.pdf

this might be logistically challenging if the cars are based in Norway !

[Doc Knutsen]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

If it's built to Group 2 it would fit nicely into Masters Proto and Touring 70s.

http://www.themastersseries.com/reso..._Regs_2010.pdf

Much as I love visiting the UK, carrying our pair of Historic racers across the North Sea for a week-end race six or seven times a year would be a bit of a stretch

[John D]

Ok,I found the app K regs and the list of homologated cars.
Given that most of the Sunbeam Imp ones seem to be missing and that it's known and documented that George Bevan and others used the JK boxes,in period,in FIA sanctioned events,then surely it would be allowed?

Anone been down this road before?

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by Doc Knutsen

Much as I love visiting the UK, carrying our pair of Historic racers across the North Sea for a week-end race six or seven times a year would be a bit of a stretch

hmm,

Well there's definitely Brands and Snetterton, but you don't have to cross the North sea for Spa, or indeed Spain and Portugal.

[DaveGT6]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

hmm,

Well there's definitely Brands and Snetterton, but you don't have to cross the North sea for Spa, or indeed Spain and Portugal.

Spain or Portugal from Norway - cripes that makes me whinging about going to Anglesey seem rather petty!

[John D]

Thanks for all the comments,lads.
It seems to me that there are an awful lot more rules than are really required.
Having done a load of reading on the subject of App K,I have the impression that the rules are more run by beaurocrats than enthusiasts.
However,that's a subject for another day.

Can I ask again,to help get Doc back out on track,has anyone been down the road of trying to get an HTP for a car for which the homologation papers have gone missing?

John

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by DaveGT6

Spain or Portugal from Norway - cripes that makes me whinging about going to Anglesey seem rather petty!

It's pretty normal for "mainlanders" to drive long distances.

[Doc Knutsen]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

hmm,

Well there's definitely Brands and Snetterton, but you don't have to cross the North sea for Spa, or indeed Spain and Portugal.

True enough...but from where we are based, Paris is about 30 hrs by road.
And Spain, not to mention Portugal...are a wee bit further down the road.
Plus I have to be back in my surgery by Monday morning

[limjamrace]

It could also enter the proposed 2011 HTS series!!!

Only trouble is Mr Knutson lives in Norway!!

[Lancsbreaker]

Shipping the car to and from Norway for each race could be pricy, though?

[Al Weyman]

Also be lapped within 5 minutes by Broadspeed V12 Jag Coupes, BDA Escorts, 4 cam Capris etc etc etc! Get it outin the CTCRC championships, emminently more sensible, cheaper and without that sort of opposition!

[Richy_Rich]

Well, I suppose there's a bridge between Denmark and Sweeden. But even getting to Spa from Norway is going to be a hell of a round trip - like 2x the length of the UK.

[Al Weyman]

Well i used to work on Imps at Nathans and IMHO the gearbox was a load of crud and even knocked out on the road cars with standard power. I really cannot see the Bevan, Nathan Imps etc. using a standard gear set!