Latest amendments to Appendix K (Jan 2012)

[terence bower]

Sorry to be pedantic Simon,I thought they were 'Incidents' ?
BTW,Chris GAVE me the Ferrari,sorry.

[Mike Bell]

Originally Posted by MGDavid

he did, post 3, para 5

But not post 1.......

[pomracer]

Originally Posted by Simon Hadfield

In my dreams I have just won Euro millions so I knock on Chris Evans's door and make him an offer for his 250 GTO, unload the brown envelope (with forklift) and drive home. Then i then take the car to Spa and Monsieur le scrute has one look and says NON, you need a full 6 point cage with padding everywhere

So the vast cost/value means you can have different accidents? The point is that accidents can be just that, accidents - they can be independent of driver skill, car capability, and certainly car value - as I said earlier the relationship of elegance to safety is one that only the owner can make, if you want absolute purity don't race it![/QUOTE]


It is difficult to argue against any measure that are intended to save lives, but when one looks at the context of historic motorsport, are we not all involved because o a passion for the older machinery? Otherwisee we would all be door to door in modern saloons each containg more scaffolding and snug as bugs in our safet cocoons.

My rather jokey example was not used to make a point about value - of course you are right in that you can die equally easily in a Morris Minor or a ferrari GTO. Where I was trying to get to with it was that in my humble opinion, it would be a travesty to fit such a car with full 6 point cage + padding because it is beautiful, work of art on wheels, sublime.......so why wreck the aesthetics if, and I say IF , the owner CHOOSES to race the car with a single rear roll hoop , lets say made by Safety Devices, maybe a modern seat and wears a Hans Device. In the boot is a fuel cell + all the other usual safety things.....
Safety is such a difficult subject because to be against any measures suggested makes one come across as what the yanks might call an "unreconstructed neo-con", especially if you get on your soap box and shout "nanny state" .........but somehwere, somehow there must be a line drawn perhaps? Are we not allowed to make intelligent and considered decisions ourselves
Otherwise all the lovely cars we see being brought out to race will surely dissappear?
Maybe they will be consigned to 'parade' laps?
Will historic racing just become grids full of replica cars with HTPs?

[Simon Hadfield]

A modern seat doesn't wreck the aesthetics? All of this is about personal choice.....but with choice must come responsibility surely? As your work of art slowly submerges under fuel cells, seats, non period driver apparel etc where does the string snap - again I suggest the period/competitive/safety relationship is down to the owner - if you have a paddock of 200 drivers there will be 200 versions of where they think the relationship is balanced and I would guarantee that all 200 would think that their way is the only and best....

[pomracer]

I am not sure whether you are agreeing with me or not!
Anyway, let's draw a line under the safety argument, - I am very much driven in this by my own car which can run with or without a hardtop, and I guess that Morgans,Cobras and maybe some Etypes (for example) fall into that category and so form a tiny proprtion of all Period F cars over 2 litres ( most of which, especially TC's ,will have 6 point cages anyway).

Simon I gather that you may be on a committee which produces / reviews these changes? If so I plead ignorance to how the changes come about and what form of consultation process , if any, there is? Is it down to Clubs , or the MSA(UK)?

As of this morning I am informed of 4 historically very significant AC Cobras which will no longer be seen racing if the new regulations are 'set in stone' as their owners will not be prepared to butcher the cars. Perhaps this proves both my, and your point, that many cars will just sit in museums......and my bet is that one day there will be 4 more Kirkhams pounding around Goodwood with Joe Public thinking they are the real thing.

[428FRUA]

About 10 years ago I ran our Orange Cobra in the AMOC Intermarque Championship, where it was a front runner. The MSA brought in the 6 point cage rule then, and I obliged by fitting an approved cage. I can't find a photo of it, as it looked so awful I never bought any! It made a beautiful classic car look like a Modsport special. No offense to Modsports intended, as they were designed as such. Since then the cage has been removed and the car raced in FIA GTS, where the cage was not required and it ran a single head hoop and diagonal. If all the historic Cobras are expected to convert to the ugly 6 point cages, there will either be a shortage of Cobras out racing, or the richer owners will build clones, so their original can stay at home, unmolested. Where does that take our sport?

[MGDavid]

Originally Posted by 428FRUA

........ Where does that take our sport?

perhaps it takes it back nearer club racing where you run what you brung, rather than a high-speed parade of 'investment vehicles' (pun intended)

[midgetman]

This isn't some kind of beauty parade, this is serious racing! In the 60s brutes such as Cobras and the like hurt a lot of competent Gentlemen Drivers. With the performance developments these cars have now undergone, plus increases in tyre and tarmac technology, they're hardly going to be going slower are they? An accident still hurts, whether you have it in a modern racer or a beautiful 1960s work of automotive art.

Any spectator with a modicum of common sense understands the safety side of motor sport and understands the compromised aesthetics.

Playing Devil's Advocate, it could be argued that if the cars mentioned above are too historically significant to have a roll cage fitted, then they're too historically significant to put at risk in a race and should be confined to parade laps.

[MGDavid]

Originally Posted by midgetman

........ With the performance developments these cars have now undergone, ........

Good point, if they were that historically significant they would be run as they *were*. No qualms about changing anything under the skin but a safety cage which spoils the photograph, heaven forbid we ruin 'the show' - does this sound hypocritical or what?

[pomracer]

I would like to think that we are all agreed on one thing : Motor sport is dangerous. Very dangerous. One could argue that historic motor sport is definitely at the more dangerous end of things for obvious reasons - the age of the cars we drive.

I do not think that it will ever be possible to reach a stage similar to F1 for example .Unfortunately accidents do happen and will happen, as we all know.

The Appendix K document - the subject of this thread - begins with the paragraph from which I quote:

"..Historic Competition is not simply another formula in which to acquire trophies, it is a discipline apart, in which one of the essential ingredients is a devotion to the cars and to their history. Historic Motor Sport enables the active celebration of the History of the Motor Car."

I consider the pursuit of safety admirable. If my wife wanted me to be a safe as possible I would not race a historic car - I would pick a modern tin top. With any racing there is risk, with historics I would argue, more risk. I make the personal choice to race historics because I have a passion for a certain era of cars.

Anyway, I did not really want this thread to become a safety debate, but perhaps because the subject is the latest rule changes (specifically the introduction of 6 point cages for Period F onwards) it was inevtiable.

It does seem however as though new regulations are introduced which have unintended consequences, but perhaps it is difficult to draft a regulation that will 'fit all sizes'. Consequently, common sense dictates that certain cars should be allowed dispensations - as is that case at the moment on all sorts of things ( see the 'back pages' of App K).

[pomracer]

Originally Posted by midgetman

This isn't some kind of beauty parade, this is serious racing! In the 60s brutes such as Cobras and the like hurt a lot of competent Gentlemen Drivers. With the performance developments these cars have now undergone, plus increases in tyre and tarmac technology, they're hardly going to be going slower are they? An accident still hurts, whether you have it in a modern racer or a beautiful 1960s work of automotive art.

Any spectator with a modicum of common sense understands the safety side of motor sport and understands the compromised aesthetics.

Playing Devil's Advocate, it could be argued that if the cars mentioned above are too historically significant to have a roll cage fitted, then they're too historically significant to put at risk in a race and should be confined to parade laps.

Look , there are only a very few cars affected by this rule change - almost every Period F car I can think of (over 3 litres) has a roof, and/or a 6 point cage already, and with a roof from a spectators viewpoint a 6 point cage can hardly be seen.


IMO many spectators travel far and wide to watch historic racing, especially the big meetings, precisely BECAUSE someone is wheeling out a particularly lovely , maybe very rare, ( does not necessarilly mean very valuable, just maybe not seen out very often) car to race. Hence big crowds at maybe 3 meetings a year, virtually empty stands the rest of the time.

So , if I follow some of the posts corrctly, maybe we are following in the footsteps of the USA and maybe historic racing will divide into balls out racers in mobile scaffold platforms on wheels, and 'parade' races of cars with no overtaking on corners .....god forbid!

[terence bower]

Unfortunately,not many owners/drivers seem to have read those words,the reason why Historic Racing will never get 'back to how it should be!' Its regarded as just a business now with rather a lot of competitors taking it/themselves far too seriously,it is supposed to be FUN.

[pomracer]

Agreed!

The latest copy of Historic Motor Racing News has just landed on my desk. I am not sure about Copyright etiquette and forums, however as usual Carol Spagg hits the nail firmly on the head in her editorial of the issue in front of me.
Maybe I can just squeeze in a quote:

"...I don't necessarilly advocated the old Brooklands dictum of 'the Right Crowd and no Crowding' ,as after all. it is nice to make expenses, but the point of the whole thing is for the owners of these fine old cars to give them an airing,not necessarilly to do the ego bit in front of a racing crowd. After all ,you can get semi-serious racing in less precious cars at your local SCCA regional event and get tossed out of corners too, but the Historic Car events aren't supposed to be like that."

[pomracer]

Just trying to get this thread back on track and back to roll cages, and the new Appendix K regulations which have come in to effect as from january 1st.
It may be very dull for some, but I recommend a read of the relevant sections if you can be bothered. It may affect you.

It has been brought to my attention that the FIA might actually differentiate between a car which cannot be fitted with a full roll cage as per the new regulations just published......and a car to which the owner does not want to fit the required roll cage.

The two are very different and perhaps some of the posts on the thread have gone 'off piste' ,so to speak.

I have been told that in fact there are a number of cars which it would be impossible to fit a roll cage, within the confines of the bodywork and comply with the new regs as written.


And just so as not to make the whole argument appear elitist and only applying to expensive cars, owners of any car which has some history behind it are equally affected of course.


Out of all the feedback and chat about this, it seems very clear that many are taking the view that the FIA have an agenda here : they want to see historic racing go in the direction of replicas, and 'real' cars confined to museums.

It is your sport, and to use a cliche, I believe that we are all sleepwalking in to this.

[Simon Hadfield]

But then if you make an exact replica of a car which cannot have a roll cage fitted then surely by definition the replica cannot have one either? There are regulations about cars that supposedly cannot have the FIA specified roll cage fitted - one simply has to go through the necessary procedures. This whole topic has become terribly emotional and I really do agree with MGDavid - when one knows some of those who are creating such a fuss and the way the cars have been developed MGD hits the nail right on the head!