Comments on: New Speed Classes for 2010

By: Shiftspark

Shiftspark — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:28:42 +0000

Hi
I cant see the point of allowing spherical bearings in top mounts only on struts that come with them as people will try and buy struts with these on, either they should be allowed if they are fixed and non adjustable or not allowed at all.
My car has fixed solid top mounts with a bearing in them instead of rubber so I assume these will have to come off again?
I guess I am not the only one fed up with the regs.

By: DaneGross

DaneGross — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 12:42:17 +0000

I’d say the Caterham and Westfield were both specialised production cars, as there is a MSA category for that and we can assume less that a thousand were made of the ’specific’ model for any given year. Plus there is no such category as “kitcar” !

(Plus I’d been peeved if I had a £30k+ Caterham R500 and somebody called it a kitcar. Its made in a factory on a production line by a specialised company in limited numbers = specialised production car.)

The vanilla VX220 2.2 and vanilla 1.8 Elise ARE both Road going production cars (more than 1000 a year made)

The special versions such as Exige, 135, 160, 190, 111S, 340R, VX220 Turbo and VX220 VXR are Specialised Production cars because of the low numbers made.

I really can’t see why there is an issue with
the MSA categories. Within each category you can have as many classes as you like.

A Porsche 911, MG TF, Honda S2000 are all production cars and should be in the road going production class.

Anything produced in low numbers ( < 1000) should be in specialised. That is the specific make + model + variant.

As that meerkat says… "Simpleys"

By: carmad

carmad — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 20:57:15 +0000

Porsche 911 would be a sports car
Caterham R500 superlight a kitcar, same for the Westfield.
Basically any Lotus 7 /Caterham / Westfield type car is a kit car.

By: racingFive

racingFive — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 20:12:26 +0000

Thanks – that is really helpful to me to let me understand how some of this might work. I will be competing at some of the events covered by these regs next year although I’m not a regular.
Porsche 911 would be a 4 seater sportscar, I guess.
Is a Caterham R500 a kitcar or a specialist production car?
Is a factory built Westfield a kitcar or a specialist production car?

By: carmad

carmad — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 08:18:20 +0000

The classes mimic the majority of major National B championships.
The clarifications were requested by competitors because the blue book did not go far enough, hopefully this will be remedied in the 2011 blue book and they would therefore be reduced.
Lotus 2/11 and any low volume production car.
VX 220 would be in sportscars same as the Elise’s.
Any 2+2 sportscar

By: racingFive

racingFive — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 21:52:15 +0000

Personally, I think it’s too complicated and unclear. For me, there are too many classes in the ‘northern’ regs and all these ‘clarifications’ just make it less clear. Here are some questions:

Why are kit cars replicas and spaceframed cars separate from specialist production cars – I don’t recall a category for those in the blue book other than road-going specialist production cars.

In light of the above, what constitutes a specialist production car in class 2D?

Which class would my standard VX220 compete in?

Give me an example of a 4-seater sportscar?

By: Steve Mitchell

Steve Mitchell — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:50:53 +0000

Dont worry about what i think Russell I have had enough of it all, i will either hang up my helmet , and go back to sailing, or maybe go rallying , at least that has sensible regs.
We wonder why new people are put off!!!

By: Russell Thorpe

Russell Thorpe — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 12:06:39 +0000

Oops Mitchell not Miles sorry Steve.

By: Russell Thorpe

Russell Thorpe — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 12:05:14 +0000

Thanks for coming back on this Ron its clear that both Steve Miles and Gordon Riley are of the opinion that spherical joints at the top of McPhearson struts are allowed.

Its clear that the only time that you can use a spherical joint at the top of a McPhearson strut is when an uprated damper comes with one already attached and is an integral, which in my opinion means non removable from, part of that damper. Even then it has to be used with the original top mount which is in its original position. So no ability to adjust castor and camber angles as a result of using such a bearing.

By: carmad

carmad — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 09:37:29 +0000

This is my understanding of this regulation as it has been explained to me and given the go ahead by MSA technical;

The only time a spherical joint will be allowed is as the top mount of a new upgraded replacement strut that can only be obtained with a spherical joint as the top mount and it is a integral part of that assembly, it must also fit the original mounting point/s and not necessitate the moving of that mounting point. This only applies to cars with a strut type suspension configuration. Please also note that this reg is not written in stone yet, it is what we have been advised to use, it might be superseded for 2011 when the the blue book is published.
Keep checking “Motorsports Now” for the official version. It might stay the same of course, who knows!!!