James Martin/Mille Miglia

[wedge]

Watched this earlier, well worth watching on BBC IPlayer if you missed out on it. I shed a few tears - was I the only one? He's a petrolhead through and through which I never knew before - noticed he bought the Super Aguri to go along with the Jordan and so forth in his collection.

[wedge]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00g82ff/The_Real_Italian_Job_James_Martins_Mille_Miglia/

[Kneeslider]

Well perhaps I was the only one who thought he was a total berk?

I started to watch, because I like old cars, and Italy, and have driven some of the roads which feature in the Mille Miglia, also, I wasn't really aware of who he is, or what he does before. Never watched any of his progs on the tv.

So, to begin with, it seemed like he wasn't going to get an entry into the 'race' unless he had a very special car, everyone kept on refering to it as a race, when we all know that it is a reliability time trial, on public roads, but from looking at all the other cars there, a considerable number were a bit more 'everyman' than his Maserati, I saw a TR3, numerous Porsche 356 derivatives, as well as an Isetta, so to complain endlessly about how much it was costing was a bit silly. He could have completed the trial, in a simpler, less expensive car, and had a much better time.

Secondly, the car he bought may have cost him £600k, but it still needed a full rebuild??? I mean, how many cars, no matter how rare go for that much money as a project? I don't know that much about the actual history of the type of Maserati he bought, but I think that he was being a bit 'green' if he expected to buy the car, have it rebuilt, and then go straight to Italy with it, with the intention of running it in an endurance event, and expect no bother. I thought to myself that when he overtook the other brits in their Aston that the engine sounded a bit rough at higher revs, but he is clearly a 'making progress' type of driver, but surely it would have been better to get some gentle mileage onto the motor after it was rebuilt, to shake everything down?

Thirdly, the engines on 60 year old racing cars are always going to be a bit fragile, even when rebuilt immaculately, some advocate rebuilding things exactly as per the 60 year old spec, and if you do that, you have learned nothing from history, and have 60 year old problems, which is a bit tedious, but hey, at least you can claim your car is effectively as original (and worth the most, but is an expensive sculputure, which you can't practically drive anywhere). Or, you learn. You work out what breaks, and get it remade, the modern way, with better materials, better tolerances, thicker material at stress points, thinner where you can add lightness, you have a car which is better than the original, and will last longer, but hey, now it is probably worth less, because it's not original anymore! Catch22!

Finally, not once did I see him wield so much as a spanner. Now being a rich idiot is all very well, but if you are going to participate in something like this, you at least need to have some basic understanding of how your newly bought megabucks car works, what is likely to go wrong, and how to fix it, so don't expect any sympathy from me when it all goes wrong, and you don't even know how to remove the spark plugs! Oh, and his running mechanic wasn't up to much either, I would have thought that a borescope would have been a handy tool to have with you, and that would immediately have diagnosed a dropped valve or a broken valve spring, instead of starting the thing up again, and causing more carnage withing the motor!

Perhaps I am just being jealous and cummudgeonly, as I would simply adore the chance to do somthing like that, but fools and their money, etc etc.

[Kneeslider]

Secondly, the car he bought may have cost him £600k, but it still needed a full rebuild??? I mean, how many cars, no matter how rare go for that much money as a project?

Yes, I know, reading my post back, and having a think about it, there are lots of exotic projects to be had for the £600k+ bracket, but even so.

If it had been me, I would have bought a C type Jag, for less money, and that would have been more reliable, numerous other possibilities spring to mind also, all of which are in my mind at least, more attractive than James's Maserati, and better developed too.

I did enjoy seeing his bluff, Yorkshire persona take a dent though. Did you notice how he made sure that when he bought his co driver that book, she knew exactly how much money it cost him. Tosser!

[MrJan]

I loved it when he was on the phone to his Mum and said "X is loading the car now", it would be nice to have someone to do that.

It was actually a better programme than I thought it was going to be but was still fairly poor. As you say it didn't seem to have much running in post rebuild where it should have done at least 1000 gentle miles, overtaking the Aston was a childish thing to do and showed him up as someone who may love cars but doesn't appreciate that you need to treat them with respect.

I was also irritated how they kept calling it a £1m car, the bloke paid 600k for it and competing in the Mille Miglia these days doesn't have the same prestige. To go out and buy such an expensive car was also a bit green, it seemed like he really hadn't done his research properly to see what was elligible and would be reliable enough to go the distance.

I can see that he really loves cars but there were times that he seemed like a spoilt kid, like when he was shouting at the camera crew or having a go at his co-driver for writing on the dash (incidentally I'd have thought that marker would be preferable to sticky labels which are more likely to leave a residue). Having had experience with classic cars I have to say that I felt no emotion during the programme, I couldn't relate to his rich boy spending and the attitude of throwing money about, from what I've witnessed classic cars are more about cameraderie and helping each other out but if I'd have been there I wouldn't have given him the time of day (in fact my parents were there and didn't :D )

[BDunnell]

I thought it was a ghastly idea for a programme and accordingly didn't watch.

[Dave B]

Well perhaps I was the only one who thought he was a total berk?
I'm glad it wasn't just me. I was barely paying attention as I we had a housefull but he didn't exactly come across as likeable.

Everytime I read about these events the one word that crops up over and over again is camaraderie. The berk, as you call him, seemed determined to go it alone then had a sulk when his car broke down and he couldn't get the parts from the UK in time. Maybe if he'd been a bit more sociable he might have reveived some help instead of ending the event too bitter to watch his "rivals" succeeding.

[Daniel]

Thirdly, the engines on 60 year old racing cars are always going to be a bit fragile, even when rebuilt immaculately, some advocate rebuilding things exactly as per the 60 year old spec, and if you do that, you have learned nothing from history, and have 60 year old problems, which is a bit tedious, but hey, at least you can claim your car is effectively as original (and worth the most, but is an expensive sculputure, which you can't practically drive anywhere). Or, you learn. You work out what breaks, and get it remade, the modern way, with better materials, better tolerances, thicker material at stress points, thinner where you can add lightness, you have a car which is better than the original, and will last longer, but hey, now it is probably worth less, because it's not original anymore! Catch22!

I think sometimes the keep it original bunch miss the point. Sure when it comes to modern classics like a Golf GTi, a Quattro or something similar the companies usually got it just about right so you can realistically keep it original and have a pretty reliable car. But old cars might be expensive but it doesn't mean they were built well enough to run these sort of events especially when they're 60 years old.

My dad has restored a Fiat 500 over the years (well over 25 years in fact :crazy: ) and he's kept it as original as possible but where bits were a bit tatty he didn't spend megabucks on getting them refurbished or repaired, instead he found an excellent company in Germany who remanufactures the parts to original specifications and where there were inherent weaknesses the parts are better than original. It might not be a completely original car in the true sense but it looks very much the part and would probably run happily as a daily driver which is something that can't be said for a lot of completely original classics.

Personally I'm a believer in keeping things original or improving on things as long as the car can go back to being original if the next owner wishes and as long as it doesn't wreck the character of the car.

[BDunnell]

I think sometimes the keep it original bunch miss the point. Sure when it comes to modern classics like a Golf GTi, a Quattro or something similar the companies usually got it just about right so you can realistically keep it original and have a pretty reliable car. But old cars might be expensive but it doesn't mean they were built well enough to run these sort of events especially when they're 60 years old.

My dad has restored a Fiat 500 over the years (well over 25 years in fact :crazy: ) and he's kept it as original as possible but where bits were a bit tatty he didn't spend megabucks on getting them refurbished or repaired, instead he found an excellent company in Germany who remanufactures the parts to original specifications and where there were inherent weaknesses the parts are better than original. It might not be a completely original car in the true sense but it looks very much the part and would probably run happily as a daily driver which is something that can't be said for a lot of completely original classics.

Personally I'm a believer in keeping things original or improving on things as long as the car can go back to being original if the next owner wishes and as long as it doesn't wreck the character of the car.

My goodness — this is a whole other debate! A very interesting one, though, in relation to all sorts of historical items. My view is that contemporary alterations are fine so long as this is absolutely clear in all documentation, and, more seriously, there is no attempt at 'passing off' as original.

[MrJan]

My old man has a 1938 MG but has put a newer A-series engine and a Sierra gearbox in as he likes to go touring to Italy in it. We still have the original parts in the corner of the garage for if he ever sells it on but without the newer stuff he wouldn't use it half as much as it would only ever get short run outs.

Old cars in their original state are perfectly capable of completing events like the Mille Miglia but the most important thing is to be well prepared and treat the car right. I think that it's important that some cars are kept in their original state but not at the cost of using the car for it's true purpose, it's far better to have an old car with a modern engine that is driven than an original car which people can look at.

[Drew]

I watched the first few minutes and then bits of it and the voice over man did my head in. "James' model girlfriend.." "James paid over £600,000 for this car" and the one that made me turn it off "James was horrified to learn his co-driver was a woman and that she drove a german car" He's a chef for crying out loud, what a patronising prick. It seemed more like a programme to boost his ego, but then I didn't see it all.

[Daniel]

I watched the first few minutes and then bits of it and the voice over man did my head in. "James' model girlfriend.." "James paid over £600,000 for this car" and the one that made me turn it off "James was horrified to learn his co-driver was a woman and that she drove a german car" He's a chef for crying out loud, what a patronising prick. It seemed more like a programme to boost his ego, but then I didn't see it all.

yeah I sky+'ed it. His girlfriend seemed a bit of a airhead also. The remarks about his co-driver when she was racing that Porsche were totally unacceptable IMHO..... sexist w@nker.....

[wedge]

Interesting opinions - you lot make me feel like a bit of an idiot for sympathising with James!

He's obviously a naive rookie playing the Classics game. Spoilt and rich he may be but I couldn't help falling for his enthusiasm of yesteryear - it all felt genuine.

I'll get my coat......

[Kneeslider]

My goodness — this is a whole other debate! A very interesting one, though, in relation to all sorts of historical items. My view is that contemporary alterations are fine so long as this is absolutely clear in all documentation, and, more seriously, there is no attempt at 'passing off' as original.

I guess it all depends upon wether or not you want a museum piece, or a useable car. I am not really into seeing cars or particularly aeroplanes in museums, because if the object doesn't work, then it's not a vehicle, just a sculputure, nothing more. In the end, cars are just lumps of metal which man has made, and given the will, anything can be made again.

I think that it's a bit silly when a D type Jaguar sold for $2M recently, but you can make a fake to such a good standard, that all the parts are interchangable, coupled with the fact that any 50+ year old racing car will be like the proverbial philosopher's axe, seven new heads, and ten new handles, but still the same axe.

The best plan is not to play that game, save yourself the cash, and only buy something where you see some value, instead of buying someting with a view to punting it on in X years to make Y profit.

After having owned and restored a few classics, and yes, even a crude kit car fake of something else, my view is that all the body and interior should be as close to original as possible, uprate the engine by tuining, but stop short of dropping in a whole different engine or gearbox because changing those can alter the whole ethos of the car. Suspension can be changed as much as you like, but try to keep the 'stance' of the car looking right, and period mods like alloy or wire wheels are ok too.

Changing stuff like dynamos for alternators is OK, but there's nothing much wrong with a well set up dynamo, but 6 to 12 volt conversions are well worth having, so too are solid state electronics for flasher relays and voltage regulators and uprated brakes, and you would have to be mad to use '50s specification tyres rather than modern ones.

The question, as with many things in life, is 'Where do you stop?'

[Daniel]

Interesting opinions - you lot make me feel like a bit of an idiot for sympathising with James!

He's obviously a naive rookie playing the Classics game. Spoilt and rich he may be but I couldn't help falling for his enthusiasm of yesteryear - it all felt genuine.

I'll get my coat......

Hey :) No need to feel like an idiot. I suspect you were just looking more at the cars than listening to James ;)

[thompp]

I wasnt aware of this programme originally, but a friend of mine at work told me anout it becasue he knows I'm into motorsports.

James Martin spend a large part of a million quid getting the car into the race, then it conked out in the early parts of the race!

The other amusing part is that he didnt want his wife as his co-driver because of her lack of knowledge on motoring so he hires Sarah Bennett-Baggs (so I'm led to believe) as his co-driver! That must have gone down well with the missus!

I then realised I'd taken some photos of the co-driver in her Porsche supporting A1GP at Brands Hatch in May....
http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=17229472@N00&q=Sarah+Bennett-Baggs&m=text

Perhaps I am just being jealous and cummudgeonly, as I would simply adore the chance to do somthing like that, but fools and their money, etc etc.

Yes, you are being jealous and cummumdgeonly.

It's pretty obvious that the bloke had a genuine passion.

As for him not once holding a spanner.....neither did Lord Hesketh, but he is recognised as being a motorsport nut. Getting your hands greasy is not a quailification for entering an event. Being passionate about it certainly is.

Yes, sure, some of his spending was a bit flash.....but then isn't that very flashness the thing that actually funds all racing?

And who the feck wants to drive the Mille Miglia in a TR3 when they could drive it in a 1948 Maserati? Somebody with no soul, probably.

[wedge]

Hey :) No need to feel like an idiot. I suspect you were just looking more at the cars than listening to James ;)

I did genuinely felt sorry for him. He's young and precocious. If it was me I think I would've made the same mistakes. And I think the criticisms of James was a tad harsh considering a lot of people who buy classics have a big wallet.

I wonder if we followed someone like Nick Mason's first ever classics event would he have had the same criticisms for being rich and spoilt....

[Daniel]

Yes, you are being jealous and cummumdgeonly.

It's pretty obvious that the bloke had a genuine passion.

As for him not once holding a spanner.....neither did Lord Hesketh, but he is recognised as being a motorsport nut. Getting your hands greasy is not a quailification for entering an event. Being passionate about it certainly is.

Yes, sure, some of his spending was a bit flash.....but then isn't that very flashness the thing that actually funds all racing?

And who the feck wants to drive the Mille Miglia in a TR3 when they could drive it in a 1948 Maserati? Somebody with no soul, probably.

I call BS on that.

How is it obvious that he had a passion for cars/motorsport? I really wish Michele Mouton was within earshot of him when he was making his idiotic comments about his co-driver to be she'd have ripped his nuts off and shoved them so far down his throat she could have ripped them off again.

Any tosser with lots of money can go out and buy a car of that vintage and compete in the Mille Miglia. That doesn't take passion. It doesn't take passion at all! The fact that he had to go asking Nick Mason what sort of car he should choose says a lot. If it were me and I were genuinely interested in doing the Mille Miglia I would have a list as long as my arm. But as with most rich people who are supposed to have a passion for this sort of thing he had no real idea.

Lets face it, he's just some guy who got rich being a TV chef and as with all rich people he can afford expensive cars so the uneducated and ignorant who these shows are aimed at will probably believe he has a passion for cars/motorsport.

The jealousy argument is one that annoys me. You only hate useless drive x because you're jealous of the fact that he gets to do things you want to do.

[BDunnell]

The fact that he had to go asking Nick Mason what sort of car he should choose says a lot.

To be fair, it could very well be that this bit (which I didn't see, of course) might have been put in because knowing already which car to use may have been deemed to credit the non-enthusiast TV audience at which I hope this was aimed with too much intelligence. Such devices are often used to pointless effect.

By the way, I look forward to next Christmas' motoring TV highlight, Ainsley Harriott doing the Rally GB. ;)

[AndyRAC]

To be fair, it could very well be that this bit (which I didn't see, of course) might have been put in because knowing already which car to use may have been deemed to credit the non-enthusiast TV audience at which I hope this was aimed with too much intelligence. Such devices are often used to pointless effect.

By the way, I look forward to next Christmas' motoring TV highlight, Ainsley Harriott doing the Rally GB. ;)

There is a precedent - Chris Searle co drove Roger Clark in 1980 ( I think) as part of a TV series. Also Judi Spiers co drove somebody for part of the Pebble Mill programme. But that was when it was a National event.

[wedge]

I call BS on that.

How is it obvious that he had a passion for cars/motorsport? I really wish Michele Mouton was within earshot of him when he was making his idiotic comments about his co-driver to be she'd have ripped his nuts off and shoved them so far down his throat she could have ripped them off again.

Any tosser with lots of money can go out and buy a car of that vintage and compete in the Mille Miglia. That doesn't take passion. It doesn't take passion at all! The fact that he had to go asking Nick Mason what sort of car he should choose says a lot. If it were me and I were genuinely interested in doing the Mille Miglia I would have a list as long as my arm. But as with most rich people who are supposed to have a passion for this sort of thing he had no real idea.

Lets face it, he's just some guy who got rich being a TV chef and as with all rich people he can afford expensive cars so the uneducated and ignorant who these shows are aimed at will probably believe he has a passion for cars/motorsport.

The jealousy argument is one that annoys me. You only hate useless drive x because you're jealous of the fact that he gets to do things you want to do.

I agree with Tamburello on this one

Seems like its the if-it-was-me-with-that-kind-of-money-I-would've-done-a-better-job syndrome.

Alright he said a stupid off the cuff remark which was probably meant in jest but who hasn't at a 'mature' age?

James talked about the Mille Migllia with genuine passion, he read books on it, looked it up on youtube, went to Classic car events, had a Jordan and Super Aguri in his garage, checked out half a dozen bookshops for motorsport books in Italy. What more do you want?

I have few motorsport books, some F1 DVDs from recent years, watch old random races on youtube, if it goes round a race track I'd pretty much watch it on telly if its on, spend a few Sundays at track some where in England but I may well drive a crappy Pug 206 with bore exhaust so would that make me any worthy as a motorsport fan or am I a Chav?

[MrJan]

I don't doubt that he's a car nut but that doesn't stop him from being a naive cock. The way that he was so protective of the car was ridiculous, kicking off at the camera crew (who he'd probably invited along to help fund it) and his co-driver. If you are going to spend 1000 miles in a car with someone then you should get on with them, something that I wasn't so sure about between James and Sarah.

I'm certainly not jealous of him, I don't find the prospect of entering the Mille Miglia particularly enticing and I didn't like the Mazza anyway. There are other people out there with collections that are far more impressive who seem nice. Someone in my Dad's car club has a Bugatti who I'm fairly jealous of but when I met him he seemed a nice enough bloke. James Martin came across as a knob with a Maserati and too much money, and he would still come across as a knob if he only had a fiver and a set of roller blades.

Classic cars need to be treated with care and from the looks of it James Martin was all too busy showing what a big boy he was in his expensive car going fast.

[Daniel]

but I may well drive a crappy Pug 206 with bore exhaust so would that make me any worthy as a motorsport fan or am I a Chav?

You do realise that was the point I was trying to make :) Driving whatever car you drive doesn't make you anything :)

[wedge]

I don't doubt that he's a car nut but that doesn't stop him from being a naive cock. The way that he was so protective of the car was ridiculous, kicking off at the camera crew (who he'd probably invited along to help fund it) and his co-driver. If you are going to spend 1000 miles in a car with someone then you should get on with them, something that I wasn't so sure about between James and Sarah.

It's only TV. Moments of tension makes better TV than moments of compassion and chivalry. Oh and he did try to make it up to her by buying that expensive book as a present.

Nope, wait a minute, he was just being spoilt showing off the size of his wallet.

If it was me I'd probably throw some toys out the pram first time round and be caught in the moment and be tempted to run higher revs.

But that's life - rarely do things go perfectly as you imagined and you only learn from mistakes. I'm sure if James did it next year he would do things differently.

Any tosser with lots of money can go out and buy a car of that vintage and compete in the Mille Miglia. That doesn't take passion. It doesn't take passion at all!

The jealousy argument is one that annoys me. You only hate useless drive x because you're jealous of the fact that he gets to do things you want to do.

The jealousy argument pretty much fits your point of view, since there doesn't seem to be any other logic behind it.

By your definition, every competitor in historic racing is a tosser, since it certainly isn't anything other than a pastime for the rich.

Please save your pathetic rich=tosser argument for the next meeting of the local Trotskyist student group. It may wash with your comrades, but in reality it is sadly inadequate.

[Kneeslider]

Oh come on! I don't think that 'analysis' is altogether fair!

[BDunnell]

The jealousy argument pretty much fits your point of view, since there doesn't seem to be any other logic behind it.

By your definition, every competitor in historic racing is a tosser, since it certainly isn't anything other than a pastime for the rich.

Please save your pathetic rich=tosser argument for the next meeting of the local Trotskyist student group. It may wash with your comrades, but in reality it is sadly inadequate.

So, by your definition, anyone who thinks a rich person is a tosser is automatically jealous of their wealth, are they? I ask because I can see no other logic behind your point of view. If the answer is 'yes', then you are completely and utterly wrong in your generalisation. I think rich people can just be tossers in the same way as poor people. Certainly, we shouldn't automatically admire or even respect people based on their wealth. It should work both ways.

If you are to accuse others of putting forward inadequate arguments, you really ought to make sure yours are up to scratch too.

So, by your definition, anyone who thinks a rich person is a tosser is automatically jealous of their wealth, are they? I ask because I can see no other logic behind your point of view. If the answer is 'yes', then you are completely and utterly wrong in your generalisation.

Quite right.

I've met many tossers, both rich & poor. Sadly there is no guarantee in either end of the wealth spectrum.

Which is why I'd never socialise with anybody from a motorsport forum, for example.

[Daniel]

The jealousy argument pretty much fits your point of view, since there doesn't seem to be any other logic behind it.

By your definition, every competitor in historic racing is a tosser, since it certainly isn't anything other than a pastime for the rich.

Please save your pathetic rich=tosser argument for the next meeting of the local Trotskyist student group. It may wash with your comrades, but in reality it is sadly inadequate.

WTF? :laugh:

I've met many people who compete in motorsport who are rich and perhaps not the most talented. That doesn't mean I instantly brand them all as tossers. Some are really nice people and then there are some like Mr Martin who are tossers.

The old jealous argument is one of the most ****ing weak arguments that is peddled about on this forum when people criticise people who have money for how they conduct themselves when they compete in high level motorsport. You know what? I love spectating and I have no crushed dreams of being an F1 driver, WRC driver or competing in the Mille Miglia. I'm just happy sitting on the sidelines spectating. I guess if you asked me if I want to do all those things I'd say yes but that doesn't mean I'm green with envy at those who get to do those things :crazy: Heck I wanted to go to Helsinki for Christmas but you don't see me on here branding all the people who got to go as tossers. If you want to go and use your weak infantile arguments on the forum then go and use them on someone who doesn't have the desire to show you up for your lack of understanding, perception and comprehension skills.

I've socialised with lots of people on this forum and 9 times out of 10 I've met some really great people and had lots of fun. Sure I've met some people who are a bit loopy but no more than I'd have met anywhere else. Yes again another silly argument from yourself....

[Daniel]

Oh come on! I don't think that 'analysis' is altogether fair!

Fair enough :) Just as long as you don't go around insinuating that the people who feel like that feel that way because they're jealous that's fine with me :D

I'm just happy sitting on the sidelines spectating.

Ah, I see, so you just sit on your arse and criticise people who actually do something for being tossers.

No chance of you getting your hands dirty or showing any passion from spectatorsville.

We've met your sort everywhere....the ''do nothing" crowd is, funnily enough, the epicentre of the worlds tosser population.

[BDunnell]

Ah, I see, so you just sit on your arse and criticise people who actually do something for being tossers.

No chance of you getting your hands dirty or showing any passion from spectatorsville.

We've met your sort everywhere....the ''do nothing" crowd is, funnily enough, the epicentre of the worlds tosser population.

So motorsport spectators have no chance of showing any passion, do they? What utter rot of the first order.

[Daniel]

Ah, I see, so you just sit on your arse and criticise people who actually do something for being tossers.

No chance of you getting your hands dirty or showing any passion from spectatorsville.

We've met your sort everywhere....the ''do nothing" crowd is, funnily enough, the epicentre of the worlds tosser population.

Seriously dude :) GET A LIFE.

You're just trying to put a negative spin on everything I say. If I ran into a burning house and saved a newborn baby you'd probably say "You fool! He was going to be the next Hitler!!!!!"

You're incredibly ignorant. I've twice had a media pass and been a photographer for a rally website at Rally Australia AND I was also on a service crew for two different rally teams and I definitely got my hands dirty doing that.

But please, do continue using your kindergarten level arguments and I'll continue to make you look like a tool.

P.S Here's a picture of me taking some photos for the same site at Rally Day at Castle Combe in 2005
http://members.iinet.net.au/~fenix1983/Files/Dangerous2.JPG

PPS Now kindly go and make love to yourself before you dig yourself an even deeper hole :rotflmao:

So motorsport spectators have no chance of showing any passion, do they? What utter rot of the first order.

Do they put their money where their mouths are?

No.

Seriously dude :) GET A LIFE.

You're just trying to put a negative spin on everything I say. If I ran into a burning house and saved a newborn baby you'd probably say "You fool! He was going to be the next Hitler!!!!!"

You're incredibly ignorant. I've twice had a media pass and been a photographer for a rally website at Rally Australia AND I was also on a service crew for two different rally teams and I definitely got my hands dirty doing that.

But please, do continue using your kindergarten level arguments and I'll continue to make you look like a tool.

P.S Here's a picture of me taking some photos for the same site at Rally Day at Castle Combe in 2005
http://members.iinet.net.au/~fenix1983/Files/Dangerous2.JPG

PPS Now kindly go and make love to yourself before you dig yourself an even deeper hole :rotflmao:

Look, there's a tosser trying to get on the track!

[BDunnell]

This is really starting to get silly now. The thread was actually quite an interesting and civil discussion of differing viewpoints up to a point...

[wedge]

This is really starting to get silly now. The thread was actually quite an interesting and civil discussion of differing viewpoints up to a point...

Dear oh dear

It started off accusing James Martin of being a cock and now members are attacking each for being a cock.

Surprised this thread is still open for discussion....