K37

[MrJan]

I know it's all been said before but the article in MN this week reminded me about it and it's important that as many people object as possible.

For those that don't know the MSA are planning rule changes that will outlaw a lot of things. From what I can gather some of it is worthy due to safety concerns and damage to forest stages. However it also includes a lot of things that will see the end of some of the great cars in rallying that I believe to include 6R4s, Darrians and one off specials such as those run by Andy Burton and David Kynaston.

Surely any safety concerns with one of a kind vehicles can be addressed during scruteneering and not just by a blanket ban on anything but the norm? I know that I for one travel to events BECAUSE of these interesting cars, not just the sound and look of them but the engeneering prowess of the people who build them. I would not be so bothered about rallying if all we had was a bunch of WRC cars and Gp N Evos, to me these cars lack the soul of many of the well prepared cars that would become useless if K37 goes through.

Basically this post is just a plea to anyone that hasn't already to contact the MSA and register constructed complaints about the proposed rule changes. PLease, try to keep all these fantastic cars in rallying.

[FAL]

Have you actually seen the latest full proposals? MN will not help there, with its all too typical modern, brief, "limited attention span" coverage (compared to the great days when "Verglas" was the rally oracle).
Just how many cars are actually affected now under the latest revisions? Very few now, you might discover. Scrutineers are amateurs and the whole point is that their role is to check additional mandated safety equipment rather than the sort of structural matters that only a manufacturer type-approval crash tests etc can. Rally cars use the public road and that is the basis of the problem.
The FIA are now hiding away in Switzerland from EU legislation. The MSC/MSA are not. I have been one of the fiercest critics of the MSC/A and still am. These original proposals were ill-considered and issued without proper consultation - a typical example of their inate cronyism and lack of democracy. Their handling of the whole matter has been grossly incompetent from the start and caused unimagineable concerns that could have been avoided. Heads should roll at the very top. The origin of the problem lies with them - when the FIA banned unlimited capacity GpB rally cars at the end of 1986 (it didn't immediately ban lower capacity), the MSC/A under pressure from vested interests (Austin Rover in particular) promptly allowed them to continue!

None of that alters the fact that they are right this time. There is no long term history of home-built specialist cars in rallying (Gp B were manufacturer type approved). There are some deatails that need to be corrected (the latest proposals still show an incomplete grasp of the previous Appendix J).

I would ban all 4wd too! (The only reason for the faster home-built 4wd cars is the expense of having WRCs etc.).

[MrJan]

Even if in comparison to the number of cars competing very few are effected the fact of the matter is that those are the cars that people like to see. The heavily modified Escorts, Grp B cars and other exciting machinery. If the proposals saw an end to all the dangerous cars and also lead to more rear wheel drive stuff that is great fun to watch then I'm all for it.

However I am deeply concerned that it will just give way to smaller front wheel and 4 wheel drive cars. I was at the Sunseeker at the weekend and most of the field was made up of Evo challenge cars. Of these maybe 5 or 6 were actually impressive, the rest merged together in a sort of dull drone. What was good to see was Andy Burton, Stuart Larbey and 'Mad' Mick Jones. I'm certainly not alone in being glad to see these cars break up the Evo monotony. The forest came alive with people excitedly expecting the arrival of each car, rejoicing in the sound and spectacle of it.

As for safety then the Wyedean rally a few weeks ago provides a sad but relevant point. Andy Burton crashed into a tree, knocking out his co-driver (and son). He claims that safety improvements he was able to make after a previous accident saved his son's life and he vows to make further improvments. In the same rally David Williamson crashed his 205 and died from injuries he sustained.

I agree that some things in rallying need to change to improve safety anmd protect forest roads from being dug up too much, however i don't think that banning well built and well engineered cars (either one off or otherwise) is the way to do it.

Finally I have to admit that all of this is from a spectator's point of view (and one that doesn't have a vast knowledge of the regs at that) but what I do know is that I certainly won't put in the effort to support rallying if it becomes a dull Group N fest.

[FAL]

We won the battle against manufacturer pressure towards "homologated" national rallying in around 1989/90 - fighting the 2000cc then 1600cc ceiling on non-homologated cars in the National Championship. That events like then Sunseeker epitomise the "rich business men go rallying in hired 4wd Turbo cars" syndrome is not a problem of K37 but of the wider malaise affecting the sport. The Sunseeker has a lot to answer for, its upagraded status having taken up the only south central forest allocation and, arguably, putting an end to the viability of club level forest rallying across the south of the UK (where any event in the SW and the one in Kent now need to be in a major championship because there are no longer enough forest cars in the south to run local events).
The "Golden Era" of rallying for those around at the time was not the couple of years of the "GpB era" but the much earlier time when all cars were 2wd and far closer to standard.
Things have moved on regarding K37, very few current cars are now affected by the revised proposals and those that are would be highly unlikely to be still rallying by 2010 anyway. The whole K37 saga illustrates exactly what is wrong with the unelected MSC and its paid help the MSA and may yet prove to be the thing that provokes fundamental reform.

[MrJan]

Well this seems to still be rumbling on in the background of rallying (not followed it at all so not sure if they've changed the name).

Can anyone give me a quick overview of where we're at? What sort of cars are under the microscope (e.g Millington engined stuff, Darrians etc.)? And who has heard if they should be okay to run their cars in 2012?

[Allyc85]

Could tell you the exact state of play but Andy Burton said in an interview after Wyedean that there is rumours that the Pug might still be allowed to carry on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIZzLucJxGw

[Allyc85]

Did I over hear right at the weekend that the 6R4 is banned from next year?!

[MrJan]

I think that it's at risk, but that could all be rumours that have had the chinese whisper effect. Everyone seems to be very confused on the whole matter, it seems like everyone you speak to has a different interpretation about what it means.

[leecarter]

Did I over hear right at the weekend that the 6R4 is banned from next year?!

complete rubbish will continue to compete under 2.5 litre or 2.8 single plemium

[leecarter]

Have you actually seen the latest full proposals? MN will not help there, with its all too typical modern, brief, "limited attention span" coverage (compared to the great days when "Verglas" was the rally oracle).
Just how many cars are actually affected now under the latest revisions? Very few now, you might discover. Scrutineers are amateurs and the whole point is that their role is to check additional mandated safety equipment rather than the sort of structural matters that only a manufacturer type-approval crash tests etc can. Rally cars use the public road and that is the basis of the problem.
The FIA are now hiding away in Switzerland from EU legislation. The MSC/MSA are not. I have been one of the fiercest critics of the MSC/A and still am. These original proposals were ill-considered and issued without proper consultation - a typical example of their inate cronyism and lack of democracy. Their handling of the whole matter has been grossly incompetent from the start and caused unimagineable concerns that could have been avoided. Heads should roll at the very top. The origin of the problem lies with them - when the FIA banned unlimited capacity GpB rally cars at the end of 1986 (it didn't immediately ban lower capacity), the MSC/A under pressure from vested interests (Austin Rover in particular) promptly allowed them to continue!

None of that alters the fact that they are right this time. There is no long term history of home-built specialist cars in rallying (Gp B were manufacturer type approved). There are some deatails that need to be corrected (the latest proposals still show an incomplete grasp of the previous Appendix J).

I would ban all 4wd too! (The only reason for the faster home-built 4wd cars is the expense of having WRCs etc.).

The only thing i would ban is you FAL for being You..................never mind nexy year you have your wish in the BRC 2wd only big yawn........
But hey you will be waiting for the historics behind them, so you can pick the ****e out of those as well

[Allyc85]

complete rubbish will continue to compete under 2.5 litre or 2.8 single plemium

Glad to hear it :D

there does seem to be alot of rumours and bull**** about what will be legal and what wont, I still havnt heard one positive thing said about the MSA and any of their recent decisions in rallying!