So Peter, Who built the Engines?
No one has come up with an answer as far as I can tell. Since you are so familiar with the driver(s) and car owners, perhaps you could enlighten all of us as to who is the engine builder. With an engine from that builder, I feel sure I could demolish the DB1's on the West Coast who run in SVRA West, not to mention being able to kick Cowdrey's butt. As far as the car and "no expense was spared", perhaps you could also enlighten us all to what that could entail, given the ultra strict limits on the engines (where .5 to 1 hp is considered a big deal, shocks (steel bodied), etc. The bottom line is that anyone who can make a 40 year old LEGAL 1972 Titan competitive with a new Piper with a Honda Engine is a real magician.
Modernization of the Vintage Car
I have tuned into this thread late having been reminded of it at my lunch with Bob Bruce today about the comments from "Tigaman" (our friend Peter Krause). I think Peter continues to identify why one driver in a Formula Ford is quicker than another - he is better! It is very much a driver's car. The car is much faster than any of us will ever be. A great driver in a Formula Ford, and I think the older ones on Dunlops prove the point, is going to get performance out of that car that few will do.
That brings me to the point of reply to the reference to Modernization. When the Vintage Racer Group was founded in 2004, we were approached by some owners of Club Fords to run with us if they could use Dunlops as the Historic Formula Fords do under Monoposto Racing Rules. They had run in SVRA F70 groups and found it not to their liking. At that time we were talking with Jack Woerhle at SVRA about his putting the Club Fords in Group 2 with the Historic FF - on the same (Dunlop) tires - as safety issue. If a Club Ford has a cast iron head and the canisters removed from it's shocks, and on the same tires, we did not think there would be a distinct advantage of the newer Formula Ford (1973-81) over the older one (1968-72). We saw an opportunity to grow the FF/CF class within VRG with the acceptance of the newer car. What we learned in racing with SVRA is that the evolutionary changes to the uprated Kent engine were accepted even though Monoposto Racing Rules did not evolve with them. At VRG we have come to accept that the engine builders build the uprated Kent engine one way - there is no distinction of its being used in vintage or in SCCA (we are not talking about a "runoffs" engine vs one built for a season). We think there is a parity in the Formula Ford class, that there is no edge to the driver in the CF over the HFF. The better drivers are pretty well split between the CF and HFF and it is always the driver who dominates. Our purpose is to have the Formula Fords, defined by Monoposto Racing Rules be the same. Where there are differences, such as aluminum bodied shock absorbers, an in-cockpit brake bias adjuster, an engine built to SCCA FF specifications that have evolved over time from what Monoposto Rules define - SVRA does not police those differences, VRG does not police those differences; and we would like to see those rules reflect the general acceptance so that we can police the cheating - i.e. an overbore engine, a cam, higher compression. If the sanctioning bodies do not police the engine that has the lighter fly wheel or aluminum bodied shocks on the HFF, their leverage on policing, on what we call "real cheating" (CUBIC INCHES, COMPRESSION, CAM) remain difficult to enforce.
In answer to the Modernization of the Vintage Car: At VRG and at SVRA we do not think we have fostered a modernization of Formula Ford. There is always going to be an evolution. SCCA has done that in its engine rules to make the engine more reliable, especially where parts were no longer available. The Dunlops tires, used on Formula Fords - still - world wide, except in the USA because of the no SCCA tire rule, have been a standard. The engines are still the stock, built to specifications of an uprated Kent 1600 cc engine, aluminum bodied shocks were supplied by Ray Caldwell on his 1972 Formula Fords. We do not see "up grades" in the class. We do see more very well prepared Formula Fords (CF & HFF) that are historically correct. NOTHING in vintage racing today is exactly as it "was raced in its day." We think that FF, FJr, FB, because of Monoposto Racing's Rules have kept costs in check and the cars, in most important instances, historically in check and correct. In the west you may have seen modernization that we do not allow here. VRG has nearly 60 CF/FF in the club. It is hosting next May at the Jefferson 500 at Summit Point in West Virginia the 45th Anniversary of Formula Ford in the USA for all Monoposto Legal Formula Fords. "Upgraded" Formula Fords not allowed.
Monoposto Concept Doesn't Work For Post 72 FFs
What is amazing to me, is that the Monoposto concept, in all respects, does not work for a variety of Formula Fords built after 1972. There are many great cars built after 1972 that are more than 25 years old, but are caught outside of what the hardcore Monoposto devotees want in the way of rules. What bothers me about SVRA and other organizations, is that they are running a wide variety of cars in different classes that are fairly new-some seem to be only around 5 years old, but they can't seem to get a handle on any Formula Ford produced after 1972....it's just too perplexing for them, and mainly, they don't understand the FF class or its history.
My dad bought a new Merlyn Mk20A from Race America in Dallas, TX in 1972. That car did come equipped with steel wheels, but it also was delivered with Firestone Slicks, not Dunlop treaded tires. The new Merlyn MK025 that he bought in 1974 had gas charged Bilsteins and Minilites, along with Goodyear slicks. As Formula Ford continued to develop as a class, every manufacturer was attempting to reduce unsprung weight It seems that cars produced after 1972 should be able to run slicks, as they never competed in the US with treaded tires except during races run in rain.
Furthermore, in CVAR, we run all Formula Fords, Atlantics, and Formula Bs in one group--cars that have both treaded tires and slicks, and I can tell you that there never has been an incident that I have seen, that was caused by the mix in tires. For someone to say that, is, in my opinion, ludicrous.
What needs to happen, is that cars built after 1972 should not have to compete under Monoposto rules, but with a set of rules that takes into account the evolution of Formula Ford that makes sense and is reasonable. The SCCA GCR and Formula Ford specific rules did not stay as a static document after 1972, and any vintage organization is being very near-sighted not to recognize this.
The way to control costs in vintage racing is not with a spec tire, but to continue to enforce no contact rules as per the "spirit of vintage racing." Tire costs are but a drop in the bucket compared to travel costs, entry fees, and maintenance costs of the cars. If someone is bent on putting a new set of Dunlops on for every race, then how are you going to control that?
To SVRA and other vintage organizations----Please don't leave some really great generations of Formula Fords, that are more than 25 years old, on the sidelines because you think you have to force Monoposto rules on every Formula Ford.
just my thoughts on historic ff competition
WOW!!!!!! I got hooked on road racing after watching a black and white broadcast of Wide World of Sports coverage of a F1 race in Europe when I was probably 12 or 13. Add to that the fact that I grew up in Alabama, in the heart of NASCAR....I wanted it bad. So now as I am close to 56, and I am restoring both my grandfather's 1955 Chevy Belair and a newly acquired Hawke dl2 FF. I will never be a national champion, but I have prepared SCCA showroom stock, and crewed on an IMSA team for a 5 time SCCA national champion, and put him on the grid multiple times when no one else was there. I have prepped and raced FC, FA, and FSV. I usually run mid pack or to the rear, I give signals to passing cars as best I can and run the standard racing line.
With that said....many of you run faster than me....and there is little doubt in my mind that you could go faster than I can in my car.
With my mechanical knowledge of "the race car" in the absence of the ability to check C.C. I would have asked for the following.....
Weight of the flywheel?
Inspect the head for port work?
Surely just these two inspections would have been possible?!
Sorry to interject so late, and obviously this is a closed matter..........there is always next year, and a focus on tighter rule enforcement could happen...........but I was hoping for a more relaxed self policing environment in the SVRA where we run what we brung,,,,,,,and we bring legal cars to compete for the fun of it, knowing that we are all here to enjoy ourselves, and go home at the end of the weekend with ourselves and our equipment as we brought it...........with the addition of some great experiences!!