Touring Cars- Gp1, Gp1b, Gp1 1/2. The differences?

[Mike Bell]

If this has been covered before please point me in the right direction!

I'm trying to increase my understanding of the 1970s to early 80s Gp1 category, and in particular the difference between the AppJ regulations I have for that, Gp1b (Europe?) and the Gp1 1/2 cars that ran in UK. And were the 'Francorchamps' cars that I've seen pictures of competing at Spa 24hrs different again?

[Frank de Jong]

All the categories are basically for Group 1 cars (production of minimum 5000 cars per year). Group 1 was a FIA class, basically unchanged from the early 60's to 1981. Not much freedom in preparation but difficult to check if things were legal; unspectacular since wheels and exhaust had to remain standard.
Belgium started Group 1 1/2 (unofficial name, but let's use this one) in 1974 as an alternative for the expensive group 2 cars; inlet and exhaust were free, body modifications as Group 2, wider wheels allowed.
It was used for an unofficial championship in 1974-75 (Trophée de l'Avenir) and the Spa 24 hours and was then replaced by the new 1976 Group 2 rules which tried to do more or less the same.
In the mean time, in Britain they tried to make Group 1 a little more spectacular but more limited than Belgium; let's call this Group 1B. There was more freedom on wheels, exhaust was free after the manifold, there was more freedom to lower the suspension and engines could be blueprinted.
After 1975, this "Group 1B" was introduced in Belgium, Netherlands, France, Germany, Scandinavia and probably elsewhere. Unfortunately, since it was not a FIA class, countries had their own ideas to what was allowed and what not which made the most famous Group 1B race, the 1977-1981 Spa 24 hours a bit special; some cars turned up with front spoilers which were allowed in France, for instance.

[Mike Bell]

Frank, thanks very much for such a comprehensive reply!

With all those National variations in period between 'pure' Gp1 and further modified cars it suggests that any race series now for (supposedly) Gp1 cars will have to be aware.....

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by Frank de Jong

In the mean time, in Britain they tried to make Group 1 a little more spectacular but more limited than Belgium; let's call this Group 1B. There was more freedom on wheels, exhaust was free after the manifold, there was more freedom to lower the suspension and engines could be blueprinted.

Very interesting reply, thanks Frank. So the Group 1 cars in the UK in the late 1970s only had blueprinted engines ? How did they manage to get such huge increases in horsepower IIRC the Essex motor in the 3.0 Capris was delivering around 240bhp-270bhp when a road going version would produce less than 140bhp.

[Frank de Jong]

It was not only preparation of the engine (and exhaust tuning); Ford managed to homologate a few extra goodies like a bigger carburettor, higher valve lift etcetera. The homologation papers for the Capri 3000 is 71 pages thick, far more than average.

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by Frank de Jong

It was not only preparation of the engine (and exhaust tuning); Ford managed to homologate a few extra goodies like a bigger carburettor, higher valve lift etcetera. The homologation papers for the Capri 3000 is 71 pages thick, far more than average.

Wow ! That's incredible... I had no idea at all. I had always imagined that Group 1 regs permitted a degree of engine tuning, I never realized that they were only allowed to blueprint, albeit off such a cheeky set of homologation papers that it led to a phenomenal increase in power over the standard. Amazing, thanks for the insight Frank.

[Al Weyman]

Good luck to the scruts at Goodwood lol!

[Mike Bell]

I don't think Goodwood will be worried if a car is Gp1 or one of the other, as long as it is running as it did in period. More of a concern for the series that some cars will (hopefully) migrate to!

I would love to know what the relevant BSCC rules were precisely. When the championship went to Gp1 in 1974 it was (according to Graham Robson's text am reading) to FIA rules, but then this is contradicted by the fact that it was apparently nicknamed Gp1 1/2 by some journalists right from the start.....

As said and to be expected from them, Ford homologated new parts for the Capri (and RS2000) as required all the way though to late 70s, but Robson suggests that in 1977 the "RAC MSA's rather special and relaxed attitude to it's own Gp1 1/2 regulations allowed the Dolomite Sprints to use twin dual-choke Weber carburettors , a close ratio gearbox and bigger ventilated disc brakes, while the Capris could use a new front spoiler, quick rack and anti-dive front suspension kit".

Now, I would have thought that some of those mods were homologated by the manufacturers, but am happy to be corrected as have not got papers for either. For 1980 the MSA raised their minimum class weight limits (not FIA's) and allowed cars up to 3500cc. Suddenly the 3528cc SD1 became catalogued as 3492cc- The reverse of Ford with RS1600 when it's 1598cc engine was listed as 1601cc years before!

[Frank de Jong]

For the Dolomite, at least the carburettors and gearbox were homologated in Group 1 from 1/1/77, not sure about the brakes though - like the ignition which was free in Group 1B it could be that the rules were liberal in that respect too.
I remember the Firenza had some big carburettors homologated as well.

[Mike Bell]

Thanks Frank. With regard to the Dolomite, we have a racer on here with a period car, but he is occupied racing it at Goodwood this weekend! Hopefully he can help with some knowledge of what was what. I'm not wanting to focus on any particular car, just what the MSA regs actually were, and did the goalposts move through the years? For instance, I read that near the end of the Gp1 era Capris were not allowed to use certain parts that they had been using- rear anti roll bar for one. Also that the later '255bhp' engines were so tuned that they needed expensive rebuilds very regularly. So much for a more production based formula! Apparently the Spa 24hr race was over the Essex mileage limit for rebuild......

Having suggested am not focussing on any particular car, looking at the European RS2000 Mk2s (a car I know a little about) on your site, the BHP appears to peak at 175. I wonder if this was with homologated 44idfs, Gp1 cam and cast exhaust manifold, or were alternatives allowed in Belgium etc?

[chunterer]

Originally Posted by Mike Bell

Thanks Frank. With regard to the Dolomite, we have a racer on here with a period car, but he is occupied racing it at Goodwood this weekend! Hopefully he can help with some knowledge of what was what. I'm not wanting to focus on any particular car, just what the MSA regs actually were, and did the goalposts move through the years? For instance, I read that near the end of the Gp1 era Capris were not allowed to use certain parts that they had been using- rear anti roll bar for one. Also that the later '255bhp' engines were so tuned that they needed expensive rebuilds very regularly. So much for a more production based formula! Apparently the Spa 24hr race was over the Essex mileage limit for rebuild......

Having suggested am not focussing on any particular car, looking at the European RS2000 Mk2s (a car I know a little about) on your site, the BHP appears to peak at 175. I wonder if this was with homologated 44idfs, Gp1 cam and cast exhaust manifold, or were alternatives allowed in Belgium etc?

The Capri output sounds about right Mike. Neil Brown with much 'shoving' from CC Racing Developments managed, I believe, 265 from the last British spec G1 Essex lumps. These engines were limited in supply and were very much considered timebombs!

Vince Woodman apparently had a special qualifying engine but I'm not totally sure on what differences that engine had over the regular units?

ORP one of our resident G1 Capri experts can probably tell us a bit more.

The final push for power may also have been aided by a late homologation 'break' from the MSA, not totally sure about details, in what the Capri was permitted to run in an effort to give the ever improving Rover some competition!

The RS2000 is an interesting car as it was never very competitive here, yet seemed to be elsewhere in Europe. Was that due to regs freedom it enjoyed in France and Belgium?

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by chunterer

The Capri output sounds about right Mike. Neil Brown with much 'shoving' from CC Racing Developments managed, I believe, 265 from the last British spec G1 Essex lumps. These engines were limited in supply and were very much considered timebombs!

Vince Woodman apparently had a special qualifying engine but I'm not totally sure on what differences that engine had over the regular units?

ORP one of our resident G1 Capri experts can probably tell us a bit more.

The final push for power may also have been aided by a late homologation 'break' from the MSA, not totally sure about details, in what the Capri was permitted to run in an effort to give the ever improving Rover some competition!

I guess you can understand how one would be incredulous to the idea of these engines just being blueprinted !

[Frank de Jong]

Originally Posted by Mike Bell

Thanks Frank. With regard to the Dolomite, we have a racer on here with a period car, but he is occupied racing it at Goodwood this weekend! Hopefully he can help with some knowledge of what was what. I'm not wanting to focus on any particular car, just what the MSA regs actually were, and did the goalposts move through the years? For instance, I read that near the end of the Gp1 era Capris were not allowed to use certain parts that they had been using- rear anti roll bar for one. Also that the later '255bhp' engines were so tuned that they needed expensive rebuilds very regularly. So much for a more production based formula! Apparently the Spa 24hr race was over the Essex mileage limit for rebuild......

Having suggested am not focussing on any particular car, looking at the European RS2000 Mk2s (a car I know a little about) on your site, the BHP appears to peak at 175. I wonder if this was with homologated 44idfs, Gp1 cam and cast exhaust manifold, or were alternatives allowed in Belgium etc?

Most cars were prepared in Germany anyway (Eichberg, HWRT, Berkenkamp) and for sure they only used homologated parts; the RS 2000 quite a few different carburetors homologates as well as exhaust manifolds. 175 HP is the last quoted HP figure I am aware of (that's from 1978) but the cars raced on under the same regulations up to 1983 (!) so a few HPs must have been found in the mean time.
Cars were very competitive in Europe (Belgium, France, Germany and the Netherlands) and were seldom challenged; there was a good and well-driven Firenza in Holland, which was about the same level; some Kadetts were competitive as well and I suppose Vernaeve's Dolomite was well-prepared too. It would have been interesting to see what a well-driven and -prepared Escort could have achieved in the UK.

[Mike Bell]

Originally Posted by chunterer

The RS2000 is an interesting car as it was never very competitive here, yet seemed to be elsewhere in Europe. Was that due to regs freedom it enjoyed in France and Belgium?

I guess with works Dolomites in same class here it just wasn't worth trying to compete with them. Escorts seen to have had the class very much to themselves in rest of Europe, and as a German produced Ford perhaps a bit of backing from them.

Final carb setup was the twin 44idf homologation, but if better exhaust manifold was allowed maybe the engine could get above 175bhp. I have heard of a 'special' Gp1 cast manifold that is different internally to the homologated one, but not seen any evidence with my own eyes!

My car will be presented in the HWRT Jagermeister livery, just to make sure it stands out! Will be interesting to see how competitive it can be using correct parts against Dolomites.

[Mike Bell]

Thanks for sticking this thread, James or.....

The mention of homologation breaks for certain cars opens up a can of worms. Anyone got or can point me in direction of the period RACMSA regs for the British Championship for the various seasons? I can see any current series for Gp1 cars struggling to sort out what is period legal and what is not. It appears that the race meeting last weekend was hot on livery and outward appearance, but perhaps not mechanical spec. I received comments from the paddock before and now after the meeting about brakes, suspension, carbs and body panels on various cars suggesting that eligibility scrutineering was 'relaxed' to say the least! However, it is possible that some cars were running parts covered by said 'homologation breaks' or to European rules, but how the heck do we clarify what was or wasn't used?

[Peter Mallett]

Something that hasn't been mentioned as far as the BSCC is concerned is the Blue Book. I believe the 1980-82 books allowed Group 1 cars to run non-homologated exhaust manifolds (would explain some of the power increases) and as long as the principle of the suspension was retained in the original position, struts and springs were free. Hence on the Rover they ran coil overs at the rear.

[Mike Bell]

Thanks for that Peter. I'm now on fleabay looking for period 'Blue Books'!

[andy97]

Originally Posted by chunterer

The RS2000 is an interesting car as it was never very competitive here, yet seemed to be elsewhere in Europe. Was that due to regs freedom it enjoyed in France and Belgium?

My guess is simply that in the UK Ford's marketing objectives were met by the Capri fighting for outright wins, whilst the Escort was developed for rallying.

Not much point in spending money racing/ developing Escorts in the UK when it wouldn't be perceived as a winner.

[Mike Bell]

Originally Posted by andy97

My guess is simply that in the UK Ford's marketing objectives were met by the Capri fighting for outright wins, whilst the Escort was developed for rallying.

Not much point in spending money racing/ developing Escorts in the UK when it wouldn't be perceived as a winner.

Agree, but with the caveat that IMO if Ford had had a sure fire class winner in the RS2 (championship being class based) it could have been different. With the Triumphs about, not likely! Am sure the fight at the front of the pack got many times more publicity than what was going on in middle of the grid....

[andy97]

With these recent snippets about Dolomites across this and another thread it is becoming even clearer what an opportunity BL missed with that car. Imagine what properly developed Group 2 and 4 versions could have achieved on track and gravel respectively?

[Mike Bell]

The Dolomite did have weaknesses but certainly didn't lack development in Gp1! Staying off topic for a minute, in the 70s I owned a new Mexico and then used RS2000 amongst others, but my job at a major BL dealer gave me regular access to Dolomites- normally an 1850HL o/d, sometimes a Sprint. One particular early 8 valve car, in typical Triumph brown, was a cracker, and as an enthusiast was a joy to drive. I also had the opportunity to punt early 5 speed Rover SD1s about. Now they were flying machines.......... The later ones, along with later Triumphs, were rubbish. During all this time our local plod used Capri 3 litres as unmarked cars, but fortunately my employers also owned the local Ford dealership that supplied tham, so always got the heads up when new ones came on the scene!

Back to topic. Realised where I can get to read all the relevant Blue Books and probably more relevant literature as well. It's in Pall Mall and luckily I know a couple of members!

[AntA35]

Goodwood now over, a fabulous weekend, despite the car breaking it's throttle linkage (it was a new one, should have left the old one on!) Ho hum...

What a great thread!

In answer to some of your questions Mike, my Dolomite is the car to which Frank refers as the Vernaeve car, basically it's an original Group 1 Leyland Cars Dolomite (Belgium) that was developed alongside the Group 1 Leyland Cars Dolomites of Britain. The chassis was manufactured in Canley in 1973, it was then built into a race car and first raced in early 1974, alongside the Broadspeed Dolomite of Rouse/Dron and returned to the UK at the end of 1975 to be rebuilt and receive the latest Don Moore engine, works upgrades and new red, white and blue works livery. The car was retired by Vernaeve at the end of 1978/79, sat in the window of his Leyland dealership until the mid 80's. It was then left pretty much unmolested for 25 years spending quite a few of those in a museum, until I purchased it.

The car remains incredibly faithful to how I found it, which is pretty much as per the homologation papers of the period, some additional holes had been cut in the front panel in 1974/5 to aide cooling that were not homologated, which I have now closed off, but these are easy to recreate if necessary. However there were quite a number of improvements made and amendments and insertions to the homologation forms over the years of the Dolomite. Most notable of the improvements were the twin Weber 48's from 1/1/77 enabling an additional 40bhp over the twin SU's. I've spoken with some of the chaps who used to work in the Triumph dealerships and the road going Dolomite Sprints were offered with Webers, but they would come supplied in the boot of the car as a dealer fit (sounds like the Group A Alfa spoiler story doesn't it).

You also mention the brakes on this car, which were notoriously poor along with the rear axle. The standard disc, calliper and pad area was retained all the way through the Group 1 period of the car with only one notable modification enabling a vented front disc. Essentially, to accommodate the wider disc a spacer had to be made to widen the calliper, but that was all, the disc diameter remained as before. Oil coolers and the like were homologated for African markets, along with different gear ratios, differentials, springs and front roll bars etc.

The homologation forms for the Dolomite provide quite a variety of possibility for modifications. However, one thing I have noted... some of the homologated parts on the forms were either never manufactured or the sizes of items allowable (e.g. brake pads) bear no relation to the accepted item that was/is used. In this example, the allowable pad size for Group 1 front brakes according to the homologation form is almost 20% bigger than the one that will fit in the calliper?

It is possible I suppose that the manufacturers designed in some extra allowance into their figures for wiggle room or just to save them applying for an amendment later on, but then how were the physical examples measured by the RAC/MSA to convey them as accurate? Either the RAC were incompetent or Triumph had them measure larger pads that didn't fit the calliper! Unless the figures were just passed as read. However this happened, I think it is likely there are irregularities in many sets of homologation forms and the truth behind these points will only be known to very few, if any, people around today. What this does create however is the certainty that homologation was as difficult to control then as it is today.

In my example, I know that the brakes are what they used in period (as they were on the car), but the pads that fit are in fact smaller than what was homologated and I've yet to find a pad to the homologated allowance that will fit the calliper! So, the question of homologation and period correctness are already at odds, let alone a steady set of parts that you can find that will work.

On the question of the Escort RS2... Vernaeve in his Dolomite used to fend them off successfully on occasion and yet succumb to them on others. There is some editorial somewhere of Vernaeve getting in quite a nasty bit of door banging and rough driving with Eddy Joosen (BMW 530) and Alain Semoulin (Escort RS2) at Nivelles in July 1977, so they must have all been close on lap time. However, to see how competitive they were against the Dolly, see the Belgian Touring Car Championship 1977 on Franks site, I think you'll be pleasantly surprised or pleased, or maybe I am telling you what you already know:

http://touringcarracing.net/Pages/19...gian%20TC.html

Will we see your car this year? We really need a small Ford in Gp1, so we can have class battles as well.

[Mike Bell]

Thanks for joining in, Anthony, I knew you would be able to give us the Dolomite detail! As the thread title suggests, it suddenly dawned on me that I had no real idea of the different approaches to Gp1 adopted in period, nor could I find much written. From gratefully received responses on here, it is already a bit clearer! The magnificent motorsport library at the RAC Club could be the place for some period info on the BSCC at least, so am working on the feasibility of a visit to do some research.....

Your split and spaced out caliper to accommodate a vented disc is exactly what Ford homologated for the Escort and I assume Capri, although the later II & III models may have had vented discs as standard?

Yes, the small Ford was poorly represented at Goodwood, hopefully they will have one more to accept next year at least! This season? Definitely, I'm just in the process of getting a couple of engines put together, one by my own hands and one by Scholar, who have plenty of Pinto history! Only issue is that may have to request permission from organisers to use a tubular manifold, as the homologated cast version is getting very rare. The one I have has two broken mounting lugs, which is fairly normal.....

[Peter Mallett]

Mike, in the BSCC manifolds were free for Group 1. See the Blue book.

[Mike Bell]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Mike, in the BSCC manifolds were free for Group 1. See the Blue book.

Thanks. Hopefully when I can get hold of a copy, I will! Is that one of the 'Gp1 1/2' modifications?

When it comes to HTP, however, it will be the homologated manifold the FIA want to see. I am also trying to determine the level of interior trim required for said document- so far have had confirmation that rear seat(s) can be removed (App K, in order to accommodate cage) but all other trim should be present. So what trim did they have in BSCC- Carpets? Passenger seat.......?