Who would like to see a Group Nd class?

[Momus]

As far as the proposed Nd category goes there are a lot of issues with existing category overlap and the practical problems of tyres. If it were to go ahead with a cut off of say, December 31 1979, the XD Falcons and VB Commodores would be included which makes sense. The corruptly homologated RX7's could possibly have a retrospective cabin volume rule applied to remove them though the rotaries would still be represented by, among others, 13B RX4's which are possibly faster than 12A RX7's.
The Escorts would have to fight against the various Celicas, Alfas, BMW's Geminis, Dolomites and what have you.

I'm a bit more optomistic than Danny about the competitiveness of a decently pedalled and strong NA Duratec Escort in IP at this end of the country. With IP rules allowing their fitment to pre RX7 Mazdas it would be probably be an irony if something like a diminutive Mazda 1200 Coupe nee R100 did it.

Marcus

[Danny M]

Marcus thats part of the reason you would need to set the date at say end of 1977 to keep the the late flared Group C era type cars out and keep a bit of balance but I think you'll find a pinto'd Escort will have no dramas against Celica's, dolomites, Alfa's, Gemini's etc expecially if you build a proper one but as far as IP goes they're history as you should do a search of results and try and find the last time a N/A 2000cc Escort won a State Championship Imp/Prod race outright

[Paul T]

[Paul T]

[Momus]

Danny, I would not expect to see non-OE flared and body kitted anything in the Nd I envisage.
Variant options and special homologations for body work can stay in Group C. IP allows small flares and airdams as well of course.

My view of Nd is a progression of the Nc bodywork rules without allowing any more than say 25 mm a side pumps unless the car in question came with factory flares. This means that the Falcons and Commodores would look a lot more standard than their Group C cousins- more like Group A cars.

Mechanically pragmatism has to rule, so homologated race blocks from the same manufacturer would be permitted and gearboxes would be free but limited to 5 speeds. This would allow everyone to benefit, if they wished, from Holinger reliability and ratio choice or to use the bulletproof and cheap BWT10 based Nascar boxes available from about 8 manufacturers.

I haven't checked Natsoft for results but Scott Willing's black MK1 may have had outright IP success in Tassie a few years ago. Going back in time to the mid 80's in Victoria, a bloke named Jeff David had a quick turbo Pinto Mk1. Unfortunately for him, but fortunately for IP, or Road Registered as it was then, the bullet straight line speed of Beninca's 2 litre Alfa, (which later went on to become a potent, if unreliable Sports Sedan) in 1984/85 resulted in a turbo ban in the category.
Of course turbos are legal again in IP provided they run with a 36 mm restrictor. 36 mm is enough for 350 hp with massive torque and the consequent high average horsepower that gives blistering acceleration. Tony Wallis' lap record breaking B18 Mazda engined 808 (which might have been an Escort in another man's plans) is a good example of IP turbo weaponry and possibly an easier and cheaper alternative to Duratec.

John, certificate of description categories end up as monmental @#$% fights with speculators behaving like sharks. I think that there has to be flexibility in car specs, not attempts at rigid period enforcement. This is one reason I think the Muscle Car Masters category works a lot better than Group C.
As far as rotaries go in historic racing, they are here to stay. The RX2's were given a lease of life when the porting rules were relaxed to allow them the piston engined equivalent of high lift, long duration cams and bigger valves.
The problem with them is they operate in the wrong capacty classes. The FIA was hoodwinked about 40 years ago with respect to rotary capacity. The details are great but briefly the functioning of a 2 rotor engine is analogous to a 6 cylinder piston engine with each cylinder having the swept volume of one rotor; so for a 13B it is 6 times 654 cc giving 3924 cc: 12A's as found in RX2's are about 2600cc.

Marcus

[shaunb]

I have been having a fair old chuckle this post.

With the disparity of views here (and the level of conviction of same) I am utterly amazed that we have any category of competitive sedan motorsport in this country.

Momus appears to have an educated overview on the whole shooting match (and appears based on experience) but a lot of comments here appear based simply on getting Pinto RS2000 spec cars competitive in some (any) class?

You may as well try and fiddle the rules to make Zeta Lightburns competitive in Group C (who's with me!).

Cheers

Shaun B

PS: There is a class of racing that pinto powered Escorts are competitive, its called rallying. Trees are your friends.

[Blunny1]

I dont care if I am not at the pointy end I just want to race in a category that accurately represents the era.
I thought that was the mindset behind Nb & Nc as well.

In regards to opening the Nc rules out to 73 in Nc...why not?

[Stu]

Why cant we get the Pinto's as fast as those in Europe? They are fast and seem to be built to a $$$ ceiling.

[Neville Bertwistle]

[Neville Bertwistle]

[Blunny1]

Sorry Nev, I dont understand C of D.

Just because they are way faster than what they were in their day doesnt mean they dont represent the era well. To look at Nb & Nc, on an engineering level they are pretty similar to their original specs really. I am all for reliability modification freedoms but keep em on carbs, treaded tyres, no spherical suspensions components to original, no extra gears, and a few other things that would be sensible.

[Paul T]

That is not correct. Nb cars that raced in the day were showroom standard, with exception of some meetings. So take a mk1 Cortina for example there is nothing standard or unmodified in a current car, including body work.

Nc is different as improved production had started.

As far as the racing goes it's not the same as in the era due to freedoms given to the bigger cars, mainly Falcons and also Mazda's which should have never been allowed to go to the single dizzy engines or bridge ports.

The best thing that could ever happen to group N is a control tyre and a rule that the front and rear tyres must be interchangeable, I'd like to see the Falcon guys fit 275/60/15's on the front.

[Neville Bertwistle]

Blunny,

A Certificate of Description is an FIA document which ties an original historic car to a specified competition event from it's past. The idea is to present the car in both it's livery & mechanical spec as per that event. My RS is built to Bathurst 1979, meaning the livery and mechanical spec is as it was at Bathurst 1979 and as the CAMS homologation documents available at the time. A C of D is meant to stop people changing historically signiificant cars to later model specs.

While Group N is 5th category historic, none of the cars are genuine. C of D's for Group N cars are practically non-existent as why would you race a genuine historic car with a bunch of copies that can easily be reparied/replaced.

Group N rules allow much greater engine, drivetrain, suspension etc freedoms than were available in the day. As Paul says above they were basically standard road cars. So while they might look period, for the purist they are far from it. That's not to say they don't provide good racing and good crowd entertainment though.

And that's where Biante comes in. They took a highly successful AMATEUR category and turned it PROFESSIONAL by starting the Biante Masters. This is a business much like V8 Supercars, and dovetails nicely into their model car business. Got to hand it to them, it was a smart marketing move.

So back to the original topic, Im still yet to be convinced we need another racing category.

[Stu]

and in that vein, we plebs cant join in the fun! Too expensive to enter!