Home > Triumph Motorsport > Car Preparation > Vitesse suspension and engine block

A MessageBoard dedicated all aspects Triumph Motorsport, including TRR/TSSC Racing, Trials, Hillclimb and Rallying

Section : Car Preparation

Vitesse suspension and engine block

Posted By : Julian Belcher, 19-Sep-2004, 07:59pm

John,

It has taken a while but I had a bit of spare time yesterday so carried ot the suspension mod. (See picture)

The arm picks up on the roll cage cross member and as it is about 500mm long should not change relative length enough to cause the suspension to lock up especially as I have kept the original spring eye for mounting the top arm. Hopefully the compliance in the rubber bushing will prevent the thing jamming on the limits of travel.

My next task is a week or so of bodywork prepping prior to throwing some paint at it.

The block on my engine has a small crack adjacent to the timing cover, so I am going to get another one. I have been informed by Darryl at Racetorations (Very helpful guy) that the later six cylinder blocks were strengthened by the addition of a cast in rail running the length of the block on the rhs just above the sump. If anyone has a spare block of this type (The bore condition is not important) please let me know.

Vitesse suspension and engine block

Followups :

Vitesse suspension and engine block

Posted By : Jon Wolfe, 19-Sep-2004, 10:34pm

As you guys may know I'm always interested in unusual mods and am interested in chassis dynamics and innovative thinking. What I'd be most fascinated to know about is pre and post mod performance as that's the only way to tell if what you have done actually makes any difference.

I made quite a few suspension mods to my full race spit in 98 and 99 but ended up ditching them after test days showed they were at best no better than the standard set up. As yet I think the jury is out as to whether sliding joint (or rotoflex) is better than swing axle as we have pragmatic, inconclusive evidence out on the track. Lucas = swing axle, Thomason = sliders, Vowell = swing axle, etc.

The only real way to tell is to spend day at the track trying various mods. For example, Baby Blue is the winningest Class A car out there at the moment but it has swing axles and rubber bushes...nothing trick at all.

I really do wish JD had made it onto the track at Donington as we'd all like to see innovative thinking doing well. Keep it up guys, we need weird stuff too!
- Vitesse suspension and engine block
  
  Posted By : Nigel Gibbins, 20-Sep-2004, 08:11am
  
  I'm not entirely sure about whether using the rollcage for a suspension mount is allowed by the MSA. I don't have the 'Blue Book' here with me but when I re-read this post tonight at home I will check and edit this comment.
  
  In the meantime someone else may have the book to hand.
  - Vitesse suspension and engine block
    
    Posted By : Julian Belcher, 20-Sep-2004, 08:02pm
    
    Nigel,
    
    No problem that I can see in using the roll cage for picking up suspension points. Most full cages pick up on the suspension. But let me know if you find out anything to the contrary
    - Vitesse suspension and engine block
      
      Posted By : Nigel Gibbins, 20-Sep-2004, 09:55pm
      
      Q1.1.1 (para 4) It is not permitted for safety cages to extend beyond the front upper or rear suspension mounting points. Any modification to a homologated safety cage is prohibited.
      
      That's all I can find, so if your cage is homologated you can't use that modification, but I don't think it is and a trailing arm is a suspension mounting point so use you best judgement there...
      - Vitesse suspension and engine block
        
        Posted By : John Davies, 23-Sep-2004, 06:58pm
        
        Julian,
        Sorry to be so slow to reply - I am presently PC-less and have to use a work machine after, er, work. And I couldn't even read the postings here, until I remembered to bring my TSSC Membership No. to work. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.
        
        I like the new mod. I presume that there is some sort of flexible bearing/bush in the upright? Or you will need a sliding bearing at the other end!
        All TSSC racers will know that after the Donington debacle (ignition failure - still don't know why), the Race Secs gently pointed out to me that my car offends both the Club regs and the MSA regs. The sesond was by having naked, moving suspension parts in the passenger compartment, and I have dealt with that by alloy covers. YOu might want to do the same, if only for safety.
        The first was because I had missed a revision of the Club regs that now excluded the getout clause I was using. Nevertheless, they kindly said that I might race, but not score points - I'm very happy with that. My sincere thanks to the Race Secs. However, rules are only rules and are there to be broken - you haven't heard the last of this!
        
        Jon,
        I agree - any amount of calculation and widget making cannot compete with performance on the track. And since Donington I've tested the Vitesse at a track day, and been very pleased with it. I will hope (Please God) to demonstrate some improvement at Brands, but that must be speculation.
        
        Developing the Championship.
        Like you, I am interested in new ideas and developments. It would be a pity if Triumph racing became a fossil, with no innovations allowed. The track is the only place where they can be shown to be of any use, but our current regulations are very restrictive for cars that do not fit into any of the classes. The 'Invitation' class, in which my car might properly be entered, is limited to only two races a year.
        
        How about an Invitation Class for any car built on a TR or Herald-type base, to be admitted at the discretion of the Race Secretaries? Cars that cannot race in another class, but meet the 'Silhouette' regs, would be eligable for all races in the season, but not for any Championship points and would have to give way to cars in other classes if a race is oversubscribed.
        I'll hope to raise this at th Drivers Meeting, but will be gald to discuss it here beforehand. Please bear in mind that I can only get occasional access to a PC at present.
        
        John
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Julian Belcher, 24-Sep-2004, 00:10am
        
        John,
        
        Yes the upright does have a flexible bush, and the arms will be boxed in but thanks for pointing it out..much appreciated.
        
        As an outsider I cannot have an informed opinion about the pro's and con's of allowing a permanent invitation class, although I can see that someone with a big cheque book could hi-jack race wins. My view is that an open class could detract from the enviable spirit within your series. This is something that should be protected. The problem would occur when an invitation class car takes out a slower (or faster) car who is battling for points.
        
        I understand your point about restrictive regulations, but they do allow everyone to compete without breaking the bank. Motor racing is expensive, and freeing up the regs too much could be a poison chalice, and difficult to police.
        
        In the interest of safety cars with slick and treaded tyres should not be mixed. You would probably have to use the original engine block and head, and I would think that the shell modifications are pretty well thought out as they stand.
        
        Your suggestion of allowing cars in at the race secretaries discretion, is fraught with problems, as it relies on the person being wise enough to know what to allow in. I believe that the committee would need to set a criteria for a season with a caveat that it could be amended for the following year
        
        I do not know what I am going to do with my car when it is finished. It's natural home at present is probably in the Classic Thunder Championship, because I have committed myself to the Westfield Championship again for next year, the chances are that it will only see action on a couple of occasions
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : David Styles, 24-Sep-2004, 10:26am
        
        as a brand new comer to this triumph racing stuff..
        
        I'd just like to add a point of view from a newbie...
        
        Its incredibly expensive to build even a semi competitive car and race with the tssc at the moment.
        
        A friend of mine is just beginning to build a race spit. The donor car is steel, and he doesn't have the money to rebody it in fibreglass.
        
        He got our regs... looked at our class A cars.. and said
        
        "Whats the point ? I can't even be competitive in the "road going" class, with my budget and these regs"
        
        He's looking at running with the HSCC where they have a true "steel bodied, roadgoing car" class.
        
        When the other class C cars out drag me on the straights I realise I do need that extra 3 bhp from an EWP. (which I haven't got yet !)
        
        The problem is we have a bunch of people who have been doing it for quite a while... and the problem is therefore their cars are very well developed. Newcomers can't jump straight in at that level, and now even our class A means "Modified" and Class C means "Super Modified"
        
        I was lucky, I was able to buy an already reasonably developed car as a base, and now I need to try to work out how to make it go faster.
        
        I doubt I'd have been able to put in the herculean effort that Mik did to build his car.
        When my friend saw Miks' car, he thought it must be Class C.
        
        I must point out that I'm happy, as I managed to jump in part way up the ladder, but I just think others might not be so lucky.
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Chris Wilson, 24-Sep-2004, 12:26pm
        
        David,
        
        I understand your views although I'm building from scratch and at Class A level. As a "wannabe-newbie", I have endeavoured to ask the important questions prior to embarking on my race-car project before committing myself. Inevitably there are questions that I perhaps should have asked but still not thought of them as yet, even though I'm now committed!!
        
        Different people will have different views/concerns/priorities/budgets etc etc. I am plodding on with my project and deliberately trying to keep the costs as low as possible. Where safety is paramount though, I will not be scimping on the costs!! Like others before me, I have limitations on what/when and where I can achieve my aims but eventually I will get there!!
        
        A point of view from an inexperienced person - I think the Class A cars need/require a bit of leeway with what can be done to them if for no other reason than to ensure that they don't get lapped a thousand times in one race by those V8 monsters!! (sorry Jon!). I understand that restricting what can be done to a Class A car should help to keep the costs down - I reckon I'll be able to prove that once I've completed mine and added up the final costs!!
        
        I too admire Miks car and credit where it's rightly due and I reckon next season will see Mik going even faster!!
        
        Oh well thats my tuppeny worth - not sure it made any sense but I'm "bitten" by the bug and gonna stay "bitten""!!!
        
        Regards
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Michael Davis, 24-Sep-2004, 04:53pm
        
        Another thought - being competitive with the experienced drivers/cars is not necessarily the point. I've had plenty of out of this season even if I did get lapped by the entire field in every race
        
        I'm not saying I don't want to go any faster (I do!) but I'm here to enjoy myself and that's the main object of the exercise for me at the moment.
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Jonathan Binnington, 24-Sep-2004, 05:42pm
        
        as another lurker, I would like to raise again the question of the eligibility of basically road-going specials, eg CGT6's and 2.5 PI conversions.
        
        I am disappointed but not surprised that triumph based specials such as 2.5PI spitfires are deemed out of bounds, disappointed as i have one, not surprised as I appreciate that there isn't any difficulty filling grids with the classes as they are...
        
        I can see the sense of not having an 'anything goes' class, but how about a 'period' class in which triumph components up to a cut-off date were allowed?
        
        I understand that moves have been made to allow 2.5 GT6's into classic rallying, how about letting Macau replicas and the like have an airing???
        
        jonathan binnington
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : John Davies, 24-Sep-2004, 10:12pm
        
        All,
        Thanks for your comments - this is just the debate that is needed, and I'll reply below to some of the points made.
        
        On Class A - not really what we talking about, but I feel that too much modification has been allowed. 'A' was originally seen as a low-budget, introductory class for the newbie, who could use a road car with essential safety race mods, drive it to work and to the track even. If GRP and an electric water pump are now seen as essential, perhaps we need to re-think Class A as well.
        
        But back to Class G. Yes, it could be a money-pit, where people seek race wins by throwing cash at the car. But will they, if no Championship points are available?
        It would be unfortunate if a G-car took a Championship contender off and ruined their day, but hey! That can and has happened, between leaders and back markers. It's racing , Dammit.
        
        Julian raises some good objections, and I would be glad to have the Invitation cars comply with other existing regs, such as for tyres and certainly the bodyshell safety related ones. Though what if someone wanted to enter a GT6 with one of the new GRP bodyshells?
        He also suggests that G-class admission should be for a single year only. I see the point, but would hope that the Secretaries' discretion would cover that. An owner might wish to develop his modification slowly over several seasons, but will have to justify staying in G to the Secs.
        
        Jonathan suggest a period class, but is that not the exiting Class A, if the modifications allowed were more limited than they are. Andy will know better than I, but would this not replicate the Historics series? So why bother?
        
        On engines, why not a 2 litre Spifire? I think that would be within the existing regs. A 2.5 might not, (and would be easily done, if the transmission stood up) but it wouldn't lap the slower cars any more than do the V8s already in the series, so no loss there.
        
        The Championship already allows many non-original, non-contemporary modifications that have no relation to safety, for instance spherical jointed suspension and electric water pumps. So development is in the Spirit of the Championship.
        
        Can I emphasise? I don't want an 'anything goes' class, but one that can accomodate the one off, the car that is different, that offers another way of Triumph racing. Perhaps one that will be the 'spherical jointing' of the Championship's future.
        
        The provision for Secretarial approval was in the knowledge that they represent the membership and will not allow a slicks-and-wings, Cosworth powered, carbon-fibred, wacky racer. On the other hand, given a suitable G-class they may allow developments of existing Triumph engineering, that are cheap and simple to produce.
        
        Please keep the comments going. I'll look forward to the debate in the Paddock at Brands and at the Driver's Meeting.
        
        John
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Adrian Lee, 26-Sep-2004, 12:19pm
        
        "On Class A - not really what we talking about, but I feel that too much modification has been allowed. 'A' was originally seen as a low-budget, introductory class for the newbie, who could use a road car with essential safety race mods, drive it to work and to the track even. If GRP and an electric water pump are now seen as essential, perhaps we need to re-think Class A as well."....................
        
        Could not agree with you more John.If class A was as above then i would race and so would many others i feel.
        
        "The problem is we have a bunch of people who have been doing it for quite a while... and the problem is therefore their cars are very well developed. Newcomers can't jump straight in at that level, and now even our class A means "Modified" and Class C means "Super Modified"".................
        
        Sorry David ,but i think that is unfair to the experienced racers.They all started somewhere,Andy and Jons success is not an overnight miracle,I wonder how many cold winter hours have been spent on developing these cars and how many track hours developing the driving skills necessary to compete in them?
        
        On a personnel level ,i would not spend the money to compete in Class C( but after a year or two in Class A, i bet its pretty tempting..........),but would certainly compete in Class A if it was actually a road going class i.e. no wild cams,no webbers,no eleccy pumps etc etc................Good debate all round though,keep it going.
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Nigel Gibbins, 26-Sep-2004, 08:30pm
        
        I'm not going to enter into this thread... but I am reading it with interest.
        
        However, from time to time I will butt in and make poitns such as these....
        
        Class A cannot use electric water pumps or webers. Carburation is strictly limited to twin 1.5" SU/Strombergs and electric water pumps are specifically prohibited.
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Andy Vowell, 26-Sep-2004, 09:54pm
        
        I disagree with GRP bodywork being seen as essential for class A. The facts are that the 2004 class A winning and second placed cars are both predominantly metal with GRP bonnets.
        
        Andy
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : James Carruthers, 27-Sep-2004, 09:54am
        
        Not forgetting TSSC Overall 2003 TSSC Champion was ALL steel? with HS2 carbs...
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : David Styles, 27-Sep-2004, 10:47am
        
        Hi all..
        
        Hadn't read the updates, but I was told that they were interesting at the track on Sunday.
        
        Must say I totally agree with Andy's posts.. !!!
        
        I wasn't criticising anything or anyone, I was just raising how it can be perceived by an uneducated newbie.
        
        i.e. me a bit, and my mate.
        
        I think the way my points have been answered was infact really constructive, and I'm hoping that the explanations to the points raised may even lead to yet another TSSC racer next year ! (a Class A Spitfire).
        
        One of the points that I've been saying to people most since I started, is that the reason I haven't changed ANYTHING on my car yet is that I can't drive as fast as the car will go yet.
        It wouldn't matter if I was driving Andy's car, as I can't drive that fast. For me at the minute my speed is due to 60% car, 40% driver. I'm hoping to get it a bit the other way next year !!
        
        I think Johns' post about the "spirit of the series" is a good point too, and why not have cars that could be given special dispensation.
        
        The interesting thing is that I wonder how many non-championship cars would run anyway ?
        Surely the point of racing is to be in a championship and be competing.. I for instance have only run as class G because I only had time to do a couple of meetings at the end of the year. I'll definitely be class C next year though.
        
        anyway, the balanced answers above to my post were good... so thanks.. I'm gonna print this thread off and give it to my mate.
        
        cheers
        
        Dave
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Barry Blakeley, 27-Sep-2004, 02:07pm
        
        I think the views expressed by the experienced racers regarding the class A or class C for novices are all valid.
        I can only express my opinion on the HSCC roadsports (1960's cars) and the TSSC class A.
        In 2002 I raced with the HSCC and my car complied to those regulations, problem was I was competing against 500 Kg Ginettas with twin webbers, Turners with 1200cc coventry climax engines etc etc, truth is I was lucky to get within 5 seconds of their lap times and found that I was in effect sprinting against the clock.
        Boredom soon interveined and I moved to the TSSC series for 2003.
        Ok I was not inexperienced but my car was still all steel and limited by 11/4 SU's.
        The TSSC class A was in complete contrast to the HSCC as from race one it was side by side, bumper to bumper stuff.
        The point of this is that I had a little more track experience than my fellow competitors but I had a heavier and slightly less powerful engine.
        Any newcomer intending to race should choose the race series and class on the basis of where they would expect to be in the second year.
        In 2004 I had 11/2's, fibreglass front, 50Kg less weight etc etc yet my lap times were only marginally faster than last year.
        Barry
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Andy Winterton, 29-Sep-2004, 07:50am
        
        Phew, what a long thread.
        
        Seems everyone is agreed that the regs need to make our series as attractive as possible - the more spitfires on the grid the better.
        
        So far haven't seen anything compelling enough to break our three-years-of-no-changes resolution from last year. Stability of regs in itself must have some benefit in attracting newbies, and makes life easier for everyone else too.
        
        PS. Congrats to Andy, about time!
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Jon Wolfe, 29-Sep-2004, 08:55am
        
        It's funny how the people with the most to say about racing and rules are the ones who don't actually put their money where their mouth is and get out on the track.
        
        There's only one place to be judged and that's out on the black stuff. If you want to change the rules, get racing and people will be interested ... over the past 17 years (yes it's really that long) I have seen loads of rule changes and 'clarifications' which have been taken into the rule book, instigated by people who are considering racing then they never turn up. Same old story.
        
        Racing is expensive, winning is bloody expensive.
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : John Yarnell, 29-Sep-2004, 09:10am
        
        ....snarled the Wolfe.....
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Frederique Slezak, 29-Sep-2004, 11:39am
        
        Gentlemen&8230; as a friend of Dave Styles considering entering the HSCC 60&8217;s Road Sport series next year in my MKIII Spitfire &8211; I think I might just have been referred to earlier and have read the responses with interest&8230; but thought I ought to put my own case forward&8230;
        
        I shortly will be a novice driver, I want to race a Spitfire because I love the cars&8230; and most importantly I want to have some fun&8230;
        
        But the point about the GRP body vs. steel body was not quite right&8230; &194;&163;600 for some body panels is not the issue - anyone worried about that sort of cost probably shouldn&8217;t be racing. My main concern is that with no minimum weight in TSSC Class A where does it stop? Titanium bolts? Carbon fibre props shafts&8230;? These are just extreme examples&8230; But you understand my point
        
        By having a minimum weight it means it is one less element for the novice to contend with &8211; the most important one being learning how to race&8230; no!?
        
        Whether I race with the HSCC or TSSC/TR Register I am well aware I&8217;ll be at the back &194;&8211; I have no delusions of winning any championship &8211; but might give the ladies cup a go I just want to enjoy driving my car and learning how to race.
        
        Surely with a minimum weight (which is much easier to monitor than inside the engine) the perceived accessibility of Class A would (in my humble opinion) encourage more entries, which in turn would also see more Class C entries once people are &8216;bitten&194;&8217; by the racing and development bug.
        
        For the record I am a big fan of the Class C cars &8211; it&8217;s a real inspiration to see Spitfires going so phenomenally well &8211; and quite rightly that&194;&8217;s the pinnacle of seven plus years development and experience, and perhaps something for a novice to aim at long term.
        
        So in summary &8211; well, I&194;&8217;m genuinely confused&8230; I have every intention of racing but don&8217;t want to spend the weekends drilling more and more bits out of my car&8230;
        
        Incidentally the other appeal of racing a car that complies with HSCC regs means that my boyfriend, who has the unenviable task of preparing the car&8230; can also enter it for a race or two in a different series &8211; for development purposes he tells me&194;&8230; we don&8217;t care about the gloried Fiats
        
        Fred
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Nigel Gibbins, 29-Sep-2004, 12:43pm
        
        The point we are trying to make about weight limits is they make no difference (although all logic says they should ). There is absolutely no imperitive to significantly lighten your car in order to race it. The introduction of weight limits will not in anyway cut the costs of our series as the reduction of the unspring weight is the most important factor for the cars handling and these alloy hub and uprights would still be bought by anyone who wants to spend cash on that sort of thing.
        
        Let me make a HYPOTHETICAL example... say we had a weight limit (including driver) this would still result in the heavier driver cutting up their car or buying expensive alloy items to lighten it more than the 'jockey' driver. Also, the drivers with more budget would still have cars that essentailly weighed in at 600kg but use the opportunity to ballast the car and control the weight distribution for better handling. This is what actually happens, it doesn't just mean development stops because you have reached the weight limit.
        
        There has never been a regulation that says you have to lighten your car. So why everyone seems to think It's mandatory is beyond me most weight reduction on Class C cars is a result of a bored afternoon rather than a deliberate plan... ask Andy about his handbrake
        
        As for entering different races or even sharing the car - the MGCC (who we did approx 8 races this year) nearly always have an allcomers race at the end of the day. You will have heard me refer to them sometimes as 'Pit Stop' races - this is the perfect opportunity to get and extra race in and/or let the boyfreind have a go. Our drivers can often be seen sharing each others cars in these and you get to see how someone else's car performs.
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Andy Vowell, 29-Sep-2004, 11:27pm
        
        Love this thread.
        
        Taking a few of Nig's point.
        
        I like the Hypothetical example and have even tried on a couple of occasions to get weight limits introduced but these were turned down for several reasons.
        1. Weight saving is THE cheapest way to improve your cars power to weight ratio so go faster. Cutting things off costs nothing.
        2. TSSC racers want Spittys to be as light as possible so one day we can stuff all the V8s.
        3. There are more featherweight drivers than the more heavily ballasted variety so I got out-voted
        
        Yes I drilled my handbrake lever, it was a long winter evening and I was bored Weight saving is not an addiction and I can give it up anytime I like. Now just let me finish filing off the heavy chrome plating from the speedo surround.
        
        I can recommend sharing a car for pit-stop races but Barry is not my boyfriend
        
        Andy
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Nigel Gibbins, 30-Sep-2004, 07:58am
        
        Did I say that... Oeerrr misus!
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Barry Blakeley, 29-Sep-2004, 02:53pm
        
        Fred,
        It appears that the problem you have is deciding which club best suits your requirements because this will ultimately dictate the build spec of your car.
        I raced with the HSCC for 4 races in 2001 then all of 2002 in the HRS class E.
        In the paddock I found the HSCC to be VERY elietist and on the track I found that my car was no where near being competative even when I was more experienced.
        Because of this, at the end of the 2002 season I did 2 races with the TSSC, to test the water, and found everything about the TSSC was in contrast to the HSCC.
        In 2003 I raced with the TSSC in my HSCC spec car and won everything possible, in theory this should not have happened but I suspect this occured because I was more experienced and my car was 100% reliable.
        I started racing because I wanted to race against other drivers and cars, close racing was not possible with the HSCC in my car, very close racing was the reality of the TSSC.
        The debate on weight etc for a novice is important only in terms of which spec to prepare the car.
        Ultimately if you want close racing I suggest you compare lap times for the HSCC/HRS class E cars and the fastest TSSC class A cars.
        If you are still in any doubt then prepare your car for HSCC regs and you can decide which club to race with when you have more infomation.
        I have tried not to be biast in this I merely wanted to make you aware that my experience demonstrated that it is possible to be competative with the TSSC even in a HSCC spec car but the reverse is not.
        One last thing to consider, try talking to the competition secretary at the HSCC to discuss, clarify spec, reg's etc or try the discussion board on the HSCC web site.........
        Barry
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Frederique Slezak, 29-Sep-2004, 11:46pm
        
        Barry,
        
        Thank you for your comments &8211; I appreciate your input from both the HSCC and TSSC perceptive.
        
        I was leaning to the HSCC because the regs were tighter which meant that any mods concentrate on suspension and engine. Therefore there is less to concentrate on in order to build a race car.
        
        Looking at the HSCC minimum weights, we knew our best hope with the Spitfire power-to-weight ratio was not to be lapped too many times! But the perception, rightly or wrongly, which I think may have been shared in other comments on this board, is that preparing a car becomes more accessible with the tighter regs, leading to less modifications for a first timer&8230; of which a steel body is an example.
        
        I must admit that having restored several Spitfires I also feel a little reticent in chopping up a basically sound car to race and I was greatly encouraged by the fact that you were competitive in the TSSC with your HSCC car.
        
        I will be racing next year &8211; plastic or steel&8230; TSSC or even HSCC - and I really appreciate your insight,
        
        Many thanks,
        
        Fred
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Nigel Gibbins, 30-Sep-2004, 01:53pm
        
        Fred,
        
        It seems you have a tough descision to make but I would like to make sure that you know whichever championship you finally decide to compete in TSSC, HSCC, 750 motorclub (Roadsports) there is always the offer of up to two invitational drives with the rest of us Triumphs. All you have to do is look at the dates on our calendar (when published) and ask me for an invitation. Championship registration is &163;35 (in 2004) and if you actually register you can do as many as you want (of course)
        
        I sincerely hope you (and your boyfriend) have a great time with your racing exploits - I know you will - and if you can supply me with reports on your progress then I will get them published in the Race news section of the Courier. (the only reason that it only contains the TSSC racing at the moment is because no-one else tells me about their competitions )
        
        You are welcome to attend our annual drivers meeting if you would like, it will be held at Jigsaw Racing on the 14th November - please just drop me a line and I'll make sure everything is set.
        
        Also, don't be too shy about asking advice on the technicalities of racing spitfires and preparing them, there's a wealth of experience on this board from current and past spitfire racers and whichever championship you go for we will do all we can to make sure you're as fast as possible
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Frederique Slezak, 01-Oct-2004, 12:36pm
        
        Nigel,
        
        We do certainly intend to join you for a couple of races next year - if not the entire season... and will email separatly about the 14th.
        
        It's alway useful to know there's plenty of advice on hand and I'm sure I'll be putting it to good use...
        
        Many thanks,
        
        Fred
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Adrian Lee, 29-Sep-2004, 10:44am
        
        This is a messageboard Jon,where members can air thoughts,views and opinions.I do not know enough about racing to argue the finer points with any of you,nor would I.The opinions aired by members are simply that,opinions, about motorsport on the motorsport messageboard,if the non racing members are not allowed to do that then maybe there should be a seperate login page for racers only to access the motorsport messageboard.
        
        Conjuring up interest on here and in the courier must surely be beneficial, if it only gets two or three more people racing.Your thread makes it sound a bit elitist,i'm sure it is not,or have I misunderstood your post.............
        
        Racing is expensive,yes i agree,but is there anyway to lower the initial costs,is this not where this thread started?
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : David Thompson, 27-Sep-2004, 06:44pm
        
        An interesting debate chaps...........
        
        On a personnel level ,i would not spend the money to compete in Class C( but after a year or two in Class A, i bet its pretty tempting..........),but would certainly compete in Class A if it was actually a road going class i.e. no wild cams,no webbers,no eleccy pumps etc etc................Good debate all round though,keep it going.
        
        Previous respondents are correct in saying that Class A was originally a road going class introduced to entice new blood into the sport at a low level entry cost. It started me racing and I'm still at it, however over the years that it has existed it has always been the least well supported TSSC class and it is only in the last couple of years that we have seen a regular (though small) turnout and some great close racing. It's fine to say that keeping it as roadgoing style cars would have encouraged a greater entry - historically this has been proved not to be the case.
        
        As Andy says, racing is just plain expensive, whatever the class. Just because the rules say you can do something, it doesn't mean that you have to (and vice versa for some of the less rule abiding!). It's better to build a good reliable car and get onto the track to learn race craft. Over the seasons you will develop the car and your skills - you don't have to do it all at once (unless you win the lottery). In the meantime you will have a lot of fun, meet some great people, party through the summer and have something to talk about at work on Monday morning.
        
        Class A has certainly become a relatively highly developed class and this is because it has evolved over time. Last year's driver's meeting was a lively debate which ended up with a lot of mods being approved for class A on the basis that people were already capable of carrying out the mods without being challenged as for example, there was no easy (cheap and acceptable) way to scrutineer the inside of an engine. The rules were therefore changed to reflect what was realistically possible to police and hence give clarity and transparancy to the regulations. Yes, this means that the cars are more developed but believe me if you went out with a bog standard car before the rules were changed you'd be way off the pace.
        
        Ultimately if you spend money wisely you can develop a competitive class A car without spending huge sums. After that it's just continuous development. NiG works to a very strict budget but still runs a class C car and has a lot of fun.
        
        If you want to race, then you'll do it, Class A or Class C, you pays your money and takes your choice - it's gonna cost you either way but hey you can't take it with you.
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Chris Wilson, 27-Sep-2004, 07:57pm
        
        Ok, my personal aim is to build a Class A 1500 spitfire from scratch and then race it! I'm not going to worry too much about the "tweaking" of it until I've actually raced it and got some experience on the track. I'm hoping to replace the outer panels, except the doors, with GRP mainly because I think (wrongly or rightly!) they will be easier to maintain/repair etc than the steel ones (never beat a panel in my life!). The rest of the car is going to be built/put together as it should be with just a few alterations/mods that will be within the regs. i.e. electric fan, oil cooler, sump baffles, unleaded head, sports exhaust and uprated front suspension. Oh and of course the required safety equipment etc will be also fitted!! There will most probably be loads of other ideas that I will have and no doubt I will want to incorporate them as soon as I can. However I'm trying to maintain a realistic "hold" on my enthusiasm and not "leap before looking" or "run before walking"!!
        
        Whatever the rules/regs stipulate, now or in the future, I'm just looking forward to when the day arrives (and NO - don't even go there NiG!! ) when I can join the great "Camaraderie" and spirit of the TSSC/TR racing fraternity and enjoy myself both on and off the track! What I'm also discovering is that I'm getting a great satisfaction and sense of achievement out of this project already and to me that's half the fun!!
        
        Now where's me spanner and manual???!!
        
        Regards
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : John Davies, 27-Sep-2004, 08:17pm
        
        Just to augment the above argument:
        Who needs the new GT6 GRP body?
        Go to the Specials Forum and the eBay sale of an Ashley Special. Claimed to be one of 3 in existence and in lovely looking condition, it has a rollover bar and the current owner describes it as 'ideal for hill-climb/sprint'.
        Why not racing? Because there is no class that it would fit into, unless a Vitesse chassied and engined car with a Spitfire-like, all-GRP body could be admitted to Class G.
        
        Tell you what, I'll save you the time - here's the sale address:
        http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd...
        It looks a gem!
        
        John
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Nigel Gibbins, 28-Sep-2004, 08:26am
        
        A 'strange' looking car, but it is a Triumph ... not sure the rollcage would pass muster as it is, but I've seen worse get through.
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John? Yes I think you have!
        
        Posted By : Julian Belcher, 28-Sep-2004, 09:56pm
        
        I have been having a look at the technical regs, (Why aren't they available from this site?)
        
        Anyway I thought I would throw a few more sticks on the fire.
        
        According to the regs issued 31/12/03 I can see nothing preventing any of the TSSC cars overboring their GT6's etc to 2.8 Litre and running in class E. Is this correct?
        
        I am surprised by the level of modification allowed on the group A cars, and although I can understand the problems in enforcing restrictions in engine mods, other championships simple seal and strip an engine from time to time. Also there is no minimum weight for class A or C. Is it worth looking at introducing a minimum all up weight as per the other classes? We all know that saving that last 20 kilos can cost a fortune. If you are looking to reduce costs especially in class A this must be worth considering.
        
        The level of modification allowed to the suspension is also surprising again especially in class A, where it would seem anything goes. Ie shock absorbers free as are springs. That sounds to me like open season on coil overs!
        
        It seems that the main difference between class A and C is carburation, rim width, gear ratios, lsd, and minor restrictions to the valve gear. Other minor variations include ground clearance, banning of electric water pumps, and electronic ignition (why?) in class A
        
        I can see what a number of contributors mean, the class A cars can be a standard road car but only if you don't mind being hammered in every race.
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John? Yes I think you have!
        
        Posted By : Nigel Gibbins, 28-Sep-2004, 11:06pm
        
        Those points one at a time...
        
        ----> "According to the regs issued 31/12/03 I can see nothing preventing any of the TSSC cars overboring their GT6's etc to 2.8 Litre and running in class E. Is this correct?"
        
        What about regulation 5.7.1 where it very clearly states that the maximum overbore is .060"
        
        ----> "other championships simple seal and strip an engine from time to time"
        
        To inlcude a 'sealed engine' regulation costs a fortune as each engine has to be inspected before assembly, the assembly has to be supervised by the elligibility scrutineer and any stripping of engines needs the elligibility scrutineer in attendance. This will equate to approximately 60-70 engines needing to be inspected at the beginning of each season. These of course are dotted all over the country.
        
        ----> Is it worth looking at introducing a minimum all up weight as per the other classes? We all know that saving that last 20 kilos can cost a fortune.
        
        Weight reduction is the ONLY performance modification you can get that costs nothing but time and effort. Anyone who thinks reduction of weight is a cost issue is mistaken. Also, the 1300cc cars only significant advantage is it's weight (or lack of it) introducing weight limits will remove this unless thay are so low as to be pointless.
        
        Also, as a point to note, one of the heaviest spitfires out there is Paul Lucas's and he isn't slowed down by it!
        
        ----> I.e. shock absorbers free as are springs. That sounds to me like open season on coil overs!
        
        The regulations quite clearly state that original spring types must be retained and for 'double wishbone' rear suspension (rotoflex) only the the original GT6 Mk2 suspension mounting points can be used.
        
        ----> It seems that the main difference between class A and C is carburation, rim width, gear ratios, lsd, and minor restrictions to the valve gear. Other minor variations include ground clearance, banning of electric water pumps, and electronic ignition (why?) in class A
        
        With just these items you mention here (gear ratios are free BTW) a GT6 will be &163;2000 cheaper to build and a spitfire will be &194;&163;1750 cheaper. Is that a good enough reason?
        
        And the reason the regulations are not posted on this site is that I want potential racers to contact me and I will send them a set of regs. In this way I have an idea of the poetential new competitors out there. This way we have contact and I can answer any technical questions a new racer may have while they are rebuilding their cars.
        
        It's amazing how much people miss when they are reading the regs. The commonest one is "...if the following text does not clearly specify that you can do it, you should work on the principal that you cannot." And with that, there is no mention of 'coil overs' on the rear or extra trailing arms.
        
        As a final note the current technical regulations as agreed in our last drivers meeting cannot be amended, except on safety issues, until 2006. So all this will have to wait until then. And with class A regs as they are we currently have the best support in that class that we've ever had.
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John? Yes I think you have!
        
        Posted By : Julian Belcher, 29-Sep-2004, 00:54am
        
        I thought that might get you going Nigel....
        Methinks I have touched a nerve.
        
        By the way you have got completely the wrong take on sealing engines. I shall explain. Holes are drilled in bolts normally on the head and sump. These holes can then have wire passed through them by the series scrutineer who then seals the engine so at a later date he can strip and check its legality. This is common practice in many race series...and very cheap.
        
        Far from costing nothing weight saving can cost a fortune depending on how far you go. eg alloy components, (diff casing etc) titanium nuts and bolts. As I said the last 20kilos is the expensive bit. An all up minimum weight can take out fat bloke disadvantage.
        
        Ref an overbored GT6 you are incorrect. The regulations state maximum 3 litres plus .060" This is not quite the same as designed capacity plus .060"
        
        I cannot find the bit that says original spring type must be retained (except for class B and D) . 5.8.1 states shock absorbers free, spherical suspension joints permitted, springs free, camber compensators allowed. Perhaps there is a page missing from my set ? Please let me know.
        
        You seem to missing the point about cost. A number of posts have stated that they would like class A to be more standard. I am not arguing that a class a and c car would cost the same, only that a competitive class A car is still a pretty developed racer, and the cost could put off some people.
        
        You seem a bit sensitive about regs, I downloaded my set from the TR register site, and virtually every other championship publishes their regs on their web site. Have a look at barc, brscc, amoc, etc etc. If you do not want to publish them on the site it's no big deal. so in the words of Micheal Winner "Calm down dear."
        
        I think you are again missing the point of this thread. , I actually believe that you have got things about right as they are (see my earlier post to that effect) but if it allows drivers and potential drivers to discuss how the series could develop surely that is a good thing for all concerned.Yes you have excellent grids but does that mean you cannot make them better? Perhaps a race totally dedicated to TSSC cars. Listening to the concerns of existing and potential competitors is a healthy exercise.
        
        It is a good idea have stability within the regulations, but I am surprised that no amendments other than safety can be made until 2006. I have pointed out a couple of ambiguities within the tech regs, they were not serious suggestions (well not yet) but where there is ambiguity there will be someone exploiting it, and sometimes regulations need to be amended in the sake of clarity.
        
        By the way are any of you doing the Birkett this year?
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John? Yes I think you have!
        
        Posted By : Nigel Gibbins, 29-Sep-2004, 08:47am
        
        Sealed engines...
        this still requires the eligibility scrutineer to be in attendance when the engine is sealed and when any head gasket needs replacing. We have to pay for Ron (our eligibility scrutineer) to turn out and with triumphs you can bet that there'll be a headgasket going pop somewhere during a weekend. This point was duscussed at great length a couple of years ago and the consensus was we didn't want it.
        
        Lightening...
        You could buy all the 'trick' alloy gear if you want... but alloy gearbox cases, diff cases are illegal in our series... "originality on all major components including block, head, gearbox casing and differential.." (paraphrased). I think the current cars (spitfires) range from around 610Kg to 710Kg and one of each was/is champion this year and last. Mine, for the record, is 658Kg. BTW - Andy Vowell is not a small fella... (Sorry Andy)
        
        Overbores...
        I'm afriad you'll just have to take it as read that you cannot have a 3 litre GT6 in our series. There are very pressing reasons for this which I will not go into on a public messageboard or in Email either. If you really want to know then you will have to find me and talk to me
        
        Springs...
        Yes, you seem to be missing an errata sheet that was sent out with every set of regulations. This contains regs that were voted for and passed but somehow was not amended into the current document.
        
        Standard Class A?...
        When class A was standard we struggled to get more than a single car regularly turning out to race. Since 2002, this changed butu as the cars were going faster and faster we had to decide what we should do. So we asked the racers (as is ususal) they decided what they wanted and that is what we now have. Afterall, we (as a group) will develop to regulations in line with what the current drivers want.
        
        A fully TSSC grid...
        We need to average a certain number of cars per grid in order to maintain our MSA championship status and the TR Register need us as much as we need them. Although numbers this year have swung in favour of the TSSC. I wouldn't mind a fully combined championship but the TR Register do not want this and in any case there would have to be sweeping changes to the regulations to facilitate this IMHO.
        
        Clarity and no changes...
        Every year, the TSSC drivers have had a 4-6 hour drivers meeting in which we discuss the regs. Ususally this is in the form of proposed amendments which are discussed and voted on. The last one was an open free-for-all in which we went through every regulation and ratified them. After this we agreed there were probably still a few 'grey' areas, but we'd live with them as we all knew what the 'spirit' of the rules is. This is when we decided that they would do us for the next three years. Of course safety is always paramount and so this was excluded.
        
        I would love to re-write the regulations to be completely clear and precise, but this is not as simple as you may think. Afterall, my own interpretation may not be the correct one - which is why we have 4 regualtions officers.
        
        Birkett...
        I'd like to take a team to the Birkett but getting enough drivers to 'sign up' is not that easy... maybe next year...
        
        Nerves...
        No Julian, not really a nerve... I sort of expect and encourage this kind of discussion at the end of each season... it's good for series. But, you must understand that we have 18 registered drivers who these regulations have a major effect on. Each year I get approached by many members wishing to race and asking for advice, but unfortunately the 'hit' rate of turning them into racers is only about 1 in 10 (for various reasons) so you can (I hope) understand that we 'listen' more to the registered competitors (who actually turn out) than anyone else.
        
        Phew... too many words here... should be writing the report from this weekend ... or actually working...
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John? Yes I think you have!
        
        Posted By : Ralph Jane, 29-Sep-2004, 09:58am
        
        He He, what a great thread this is. There is of course another alternative to the reg's and that is to disregard them as Mr Gibbins did for the whole of his class A career.
        
        As for eating your tailpipes Jon, I would if I could get close enough to the blue blur.
        
        Sorry Pete, I lost your e-mail address but to answer your question. The Mikuni's cost &163;60.00 from a bike breakers and I made the manifold myself for about &163;20.00, a full set of jets (2 per carb) costs &194;&163;9.00 for all 8 and the air filter was &163;25.00 from Jigsaw. Hmmmmm anyone for webers, not me pal take a look at my lap times at Mallory.
        
        Captain Scarlet
        No. 54
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Andy Vowell, 24-Sep-2004, 05:42pm
        
        A nice post Dave, as a oldbie I'd like to address your points:-
        
        "Its incredibly expensive to build even a semi competitive car and race with the tssc"
        
        It's incredibly expensive to race cars - full stop. There are cheaper series out there than the TSSC, i.e. Metros, but to be competative, the time, money, and hard work still has to be put in.
        
        "The donor car is steel, and he doesn't have the money to rebody it in fibreglass"
        
        My car started out as all steel (besides the bonnet) and has slowly morphed over the last 7 years into fully GRP. The problem with steel panels is that they cost a lot more in material, time and effort to replace after damage than GRP. (Mark H's car is steel as was Barry's)
        
        "Whats the point ? I can't even be competitive in the "road going" class, with my budget and these regs"
        
        Very few people are competitive when the first come out. Both drivers and cars need to develop. Better to be out there on the track developing a car over a few years than sitting at home saving for the fastest car out there, only to find it take years to learn how to drive it.
        
        "the HSCC where they have a true steel bodied, roadgoing car class"
        
        Barry's car was an HSCC car. I do not think he changed anything to race with us only that it gained a GRP bonnet and HS2s this year. The HSCC regs are tighter than ours but the best cars are no slower than our class A. And you in HSCC you could get beaten by a glorified Fiat.
        
        "I do need that extra 3 bhp from an EWP"
        
        Then your opponents will shave off a couple more Kg and get they're advantage back, that's development. Plus they could be exiting the corners quicker so have the jump on you that way (driver development)
        
        "The problem is we have a bunch of people who have been doing it for quite a while"
        
        I don't see myself as a problem!!! It took me 7 years to get to here. I remember asking Jon Wolfe how I could go as quickly as him when I started, his answer - drive faster
        (They is also the newcomers trophy to play for when you start)
        
        "and now I need to try to work out how to make it go faster"
        
        Stop braking
        
        "When my friend saw Miks' car, he thought it must be Class C"
        
        Give Mik a couple of years and it may well be, the lure of class C power is a strong one
        
        "I must point out that I'm happy, as I managed to jump in part way up the ladder, but I just think others might not be so lucky".
        
        Luck - balderdash. To go motor racing takes huge amounts of hard work, determination, an understanding family, and the ability to throw bank statements in the bin without opening them! But it is all worth it for the feeling of 30 Triumphs at full chat trying to fit into the first corner
        
        Andy
        
        Have you opened a can of worms John?
        
        Posted By : Chris Wilson, 24-Sep-2004, 05:54pm
        
        >>>>and the ability to throw bank statements in the bin without opening them!<<<<<<
        
        Wot's a bank statement??? I've told my bank manager to stop sending me any - they were making dents in the floor when shoved through the letter box!!
        
        P.S. I'm of the same frame of mind as Mik (see his post) and support Andys comments - I think this could be a good debate!!??
        
        P.P.S I've edited my last post slightly at the beginning cos I've realised I didn't type what I meant to say!! Grrrrr!!!
        
        Regards
        
        Vitesse suspension and engine block
        
        Posted By : Andy Vowell, 24-Sep-2004, 05:53pm
        
        John
        
        If you want to change the regs may I suggest that you make a proposal for the driver's meeting. Without a formal proposal that is sent out to all regiistered competitors to vote on then all that can be done at the driver's meeting is a discussion not a decision. At least thanks how I think it works.
        
        May be worth canvasing for views on forums and/or by email/phone to competitiors and race secs to develop a proposal.
        
        Am looking forward to seeing the Silverback in action at Brands.
        
        Cheers
        Andy
- Vitesse suspension and engine block.
  
  Posted By : Julian Belcher, 20-Sep-2004, 08:16pm
  
  Jonathon,
  
  Thanks very much for the offer, where abouts are you, or are you going to Brands this weekend and have room in the glove box?
  
  Jon,
  
  I have spent years modifying suspension and then un-modifying it. I just like playing, and I suspect that whatever I do the car will still handle like a mini skip.
  
  This beastie is months away from testing and as for racing I would like to do something with it next season. but I am not sure I could stand the humiliation of being pee'd over by most of the field!!
(no subject)

Posted By : Jonathan Binnington, 20-Sep-2004, 07:20am

I'm sure i have a block like that, come and take it away, please

Jonathan