Vx220 Racing?

I've read all this thread.. and am slightly at a loss. I kind off get the idea.. but don't understand why it has esculated to this so early on.

but the fact is that other than opinion there has been no official position taken therefore overt criticism is a bit hard to level.

Thats not quite right. Simon Scuffham, who is organising the cage / roll bar aspect, has stated on LOT that he is not looking at a full cage solution and it will only be adopted if they are obliged by TPTB.

More mis-interpretation. The cage being worked on by Simon is to the Lotus approved A-Frame and front brace design, correct. However it doesn't preclude the use of a full cage if someone wants to go down that route, and I expect quite a few people will. What Simon is doing is working with a manufacturer to obtain a cost effective solution that meets and exceeds the required regulations of Motorsport in the UK. A 'Group Buy' in essence. Most of the people taking part don't have an unlimited budget therefore the A-Frame is a safe cost effective solution, very few people can afford to build a 2nd car incase they crash one, like you seemed to be planning

There is no ignoring comments on safety aspects, we have people involved who have been involved in motorsport for a number of years as well as people who are experienced qualified Automotive Engineers. Therefore we do actually know what we are doing and already have a wealth of experience to draw on.

I'd like to point out that some of your comments are overblown and exagerated. Please tell me which track in the UK any Lotus or VX can reach 170mph (Rockingham Oval doesn't count, and even there I think there is little chance). You also seem convinced that people can't drive or use mirrors and will get in you way because their car may have less power than yours. Who knows, there may be novices out there who are better drivers than you so their lower powered car may lap faster. It is impossible to predict if there will be any accidents, you have to agree, all those who have shown an interest have been taking part in our trackdays for years where they fully understand any speed differential between the cars. Therefore we expect there to be little problem. To say anything else not knowing any of the people involved is IMHO disrespectful to those people.

I do struggle to understand what you are trying to achieve with your recent comments, especially as very few of them are based on fact. You seem to have made your mind up about the series being fixed, unsafe and disorgainised while not knowing who is taking part, what the regulations or technical specifications are or who the organisers are. I for one will be helping organise the series and have a LOT of automotive engineering and motorsport experience, and I am not taking part, neither will a number of the other organisers.

Any conflict has nothing to do with you raising questions about safety, no-one has ever said that, and others should not see it that way, safety is an important issue and it will always be taken seriously, however where the conflict arises is your attitude to the initial responses that you got and the fact you seem intent on making unfounded comments about the organisers and possible competitors.

Mark Thank you for your interesting response. It is unfortunate that many of your more excitable allegations are not founded in fact. As I have barely made any remarks outside this forum concerning the series I cannot know to what you refer when you suggest I have been contentious. I have made 2 postings in the LOT A-frame conference in which, supported by CocoPops, we reported the damage occasioned to a Vx that had rolled at low speed. That has to be dealt with or racing will not be safe. As to compromising safety, three of your organisers have said, two to me and another to a man with whom I do business and trust, that if anything more than A-frame were required the series would not happen as the "track day converts" couldn't face fitting a full roll-cage as it means they can't drive it to the office. Another has said, "I regret it (the lack of roll-cages) but money talks". I understand the difficulties of organising a series but I do not think safety should be compromised unnecessarily. It is perfectly possible to implement a roll-cage in two parts: one part permanent (a braced roll-hoop which I understood was intended by the description of the A-frame) and a detachable cage secured by pip-pins to the roll hoop and to more permanent mounting plates in the cockpit. These can be removed within minutes but deal efficiently with the issues of track protection and road use. I am now re-assured to hear that forward braces, which should be positioned to protect the driver's head in the event of rolled sliding, will be included. Nothing is worse than to find the tub intact but the driver stirred up by bits that got in through the other side. Although I have been confused about your reports of my "contentious behaviour" I may in fact have a handle on it. Yesterday another man with whom I do business has reported to me that an organiser (with whom I have never spoken) is suggesting that I have an unstable and damaging reputation as a consequence of a transaction I had with AmD concerning an engine upgrade. AmD were unable to achieve the contracted performance. I remonstrated with them, as you would expect, trenchantly. They offered no defence of their incompetence or any explanation as to why they couldn't deliver on their promise: I did get such foolish remarks as "your engine doesn't like it". I could not make them understand that failure to perform under contract was serious and was left with the option of suing for breach or swallowing the situation. In fact I paid their bill but then made a full report on here pro bono. I was consequently accused by an interested party of all sorts of very strange behaviour (apparently verging on the violent) in my dealings with AmD. As the chap had not been present I regarded the remarks as careless: anyone who knows me will know them to be untrue for I am pretty gentle in most contacts with my fellows. Gentle: proper, polite, decent, fair although not a pushover. Anyway, that was all of two years or more ago and the matter is long dead. Now we have a series coming up, in which some who are both runners and organisers have a potential commercial interest, I find that this tale begins to circulate again. I hesitate to suggest that any of these chaps are frit at the prospect of being beaten by someone not using their products / services but it does cause one to wonder. Its pity we won't have chance to find out. Anyway, I do regard re-circulation of this largely fabricated report as damaging to my broader interests. I have pretty well retired from business so any financial damage is modest. If it were not so I would now have a couple of retired coppers interviewing all involved to trace the remarks to source. I am not sure that I can be arsed right now. But if I find that these rumours persist and that they do affect an interest of value to me I will take the necessary action to constrain them. The awarded damages might be small: the costs will break them. You question where 170mph will be achieved. I already terminal at Goodwood at an indicated 145 before Woodcote. I am building a spare engine which will deliver 360bhp and with a couple of innovative tweaks I am hopeful of 400bhp. You can do the calculations yourself. A respected tuner has already reported to me an Audi engined S1 returning 387bhp on the brake (and swearing he wouldn't race if it rained). Another respected driver / developer of my vintage has recently completed an S1 development above 360hp and swears that during testing he was touching 190 on the Grand prix circuit at Silverstone. Personally I've always thought he was a God awful liar, but I like him a lot, and he's never taken more than 10% leeway with the truth in my experience. The numbers (drag & weight / power & straight length) make the issue clear. If you have approaching 400bhp in a light slippery car you'll hit those sort of speeds. If you don't you aren't trying. One other matter, all my comments are based upon remarks made to me by those I understand to be runners or organisers. I understand where the organisers are coming from and I think the intent laudable. But I fear the way in which they have discussed the proposals with me made it seem as if they had not considered all the implications: Its good to get people ftrom trackday to racing - but not at the expense of safety. If, as I now understand, you have edopted forward braces adequate to protect the driver in the event of a roll, I am re-assured. Not entirely happy but adequate to stop fretting about it. It was put to me that poor engineered safety could be managed by selecting only appropriately behaved drivers. I just think this is wrong. It doesn't deal with mechanical failure and it doesn't deal with the change of attitude which arises when the flag drops. However, if we have adopted forward braces I'm not so worried about that. BTW, I'm not worried for me, but I am worried for your beginners - it is in their interests I have expressed myself. I also drew the inference from one set of remarks that a chap could get banned for non-driving issues (e.g having a spare car). I would not have an issue with such banning if a. the rules were clear and enforceable b. all runners were not organisers c. any banning decision was open to public review and challenge. Or, if the matter were restricted to driving issues and all series drivers were involved in the process - I well recall having to sign before every BOC round to allow Damien "MadDog" Magee to race with us. Rules need to be clear and accepted, enforcement needs to be efficient and fair, and above all it must be seen be to fair.

Edited by cyberman, 27 June 2006 - 11:53 AM.

Ian,

You seem to be trying to make this personal, sorry I won't rise to that. Anything I post anywhere is always factual.

Onto your favourite subject.
Correct, a number of people don't want to run full cages, it has nothing to do with us telling them what they have to use. In every series there is always a minimum requirement and as a few people already have their cars prepped to run in other series we decided to make that the Lotus Motorsport one, see the picture below. The Lotus A-Frame is something used successfully for a number of years, and if you attend a round of the Mid-engined sportscar championship (which has similar speed differentials BTW) and look at most of the Lotus entrants they have this fitted. As you can see below, this certainly isn't a Q60 cage as you claimed, had you ever seen one before you posted?



There is no push to make people use any particular item, so please stop saying so. You keep making the comment 'poor engineered safety', sorry but that is totally false. The A-frame was designed by Lotus and approved by the MSA, it's not as if we are talking about a Q1 cage here. The MSA would actually allow me to run my Exige using just the standard roll hoop, stupidity in my opinion.



This has never changed, as you saw in the thread you commented on in LoT. You made 3 posts, one saying you were interested in taking part, one saying you would prefer a full cage yourself with a couple of comments about why, fair comment, the other with some pictures of a rolled VX, incidentally the VX and Elise roll hoops are different, I assume you know this? The VX one isn't eligable to be classed as Q1, the Elise is, so read into that what you will. As such the VX could never run with a A-Frame mounted on the standard hoop like the Elise can, therefore commercially the only option is a full cage.

Personally I really don't care if you are re-assured. The current regs have been put together by people with a lot of experience and knowledge, not by people who are "well-intentioned but naive" as you stated. I'm not sure why you feel your comments are more valid than any others, especially as you don't know the others.

To be honest I am really not interested but you obviously felt that there was some history between yourself and AmD which you felt was important enough for you to post, as this is the 1st I have heard of it I'm not sure how it is relevant??

I've gone through this twice now and won't again. Hopefully this now answers the real questions, and anyone who is interested now has some real facts.


As for the 190mph at Silverstone, funniest story yet, it takes a F1 car over 800bhp, less weight and huge cornering speeds through Becketts to get to that, a Lotus or VX has no chance.

the other with some pictures of a rolled VX, incidentally the VX and Elise roll hoops are different, I assume you know this? The VX one isn't eligable to be classed as Q1, the Elise is, so read into that what you will. As such the VX could never run with a A-Frame mounted on the standard hoop like the Elise can, therefore commercially the only option is a full cage.

Just as a interested bystander, why is this? Is an S2 Elise eligable for MSA A-frame? TMS mention £1000 while Plans £3000 for a full cage...?

wow. what an interesting read.

The daft head rest protectors and cut-outs in the roll bar hoop specified by Vauxhall. It weakens the roll-over protection. MSA rules on roll bar design and material are strict (for very good reason). The Elise hoop is MSA compliant (ie. UK club and national events) but not FIA compliant (international events) due to the grade of steel used. The S2 Exige has the option of spec'ing the roll hoop in T45 (I think?) steel which complies with FIA regs. Keith's Exige roll cage is FIA compliant.

The daft head rest protectors and cut-outs in the roll bar hoop specified by Vauxhall. It weakens the roll-over protection. MSA rules on roll bar design and material are strict (for very good reason).

The Elise hoop is MSA compliant (ie. UK club and national events) but not FIA compliant (international events) due to the grade of steel used. The S2 Exige has the option of spec'ing the roll hoop in T45 (I think?) steel which complies with FIA regs. Keith's Exige roll cage is FIA compliant.

Yeah, annoying isn't it. The VX hoop is completely different to the Elise ranging from lack of harness bar mounts (the Elise has them as standard) to completely different head restraint arrangement.

The costs for the cage are still a bit TBA. One reason why the costs should be lower is that we're having 10 made (for VX's) and not just one, that means the development costs can be spread therefore dropping the overall cost.

The costs for the cage are still a bit TBA. One reason why the costs should be lower is that we're having 10 made (for VX's) and not just one, that means the development costs can be spread therefore dropping the overall cost.

Can you keep me posted on your cage development? I've considered sending my car away to get one fitted, but no point re-inventing the wheel if you are already developing one.

We'll be developing a new harness bar (never really been happy with the existing ones due to fit), an A frame race/track day cage and a full 6 point cage.

see

http://www.plansmoto.../showroom/cars/

(third car down)


PS we have all the parts including MSA roll cages for the VX 220 and can prepare a car in 14 days to comply with MSA requirements for racing. See you on the grid!

Anyine who is getting bored with trackdays should give it a try... you'll never look back!

do you have an idea on the price for roll cage for VXT

Having read this all through I am a little confused, but heres what it seems to me and it is just my opinion. Ian who has no commercial interest in all of this seems concerned about the potential safety elements, and as an ex/current racing driver ( sorry Ian don't know if you currently race) he seems just about the sort of person I would listen too if he is trying to make a point about safety. Other people who may or may not have a commercial interest seem to disagree with Ian and don't like the fact he is raising these concerns on an open forum, better that he should say them in a closed room where we can't hear??? The joy of the current PBMW series is the relatively flat playing field everyone enjoys, but as Ian pointed out the mix of driver level married to the huge difference in potential power outputs seems to the outsider ( That will be me) like a nice recipe for problems. Ian I for one have valued your input in this discussion and if this forum is not to degenerate into the sh*t of other forums then we need to respect the voice of anyone with a valid opinion.

Edited by Bletch, 02 July 2006 - 05:06 PM.

Here here!!!

Any further news on all of this... I am really looking forward to see this happening My best of luck wishes to everyone involved

Any further news on all of this...

According to the lotrdc website clicky they have full grids guaranteed for next year. Don't know what happened about roll cages etc. Can't see anything in the draft regs.

All progressing nicely. I pick up the first VX220 fully caged up on Friday.

Any further news on all of this...

According to the lotrdc website clicky they have full grids guaranteed for next year. Don't know what happened about roll cages etc. Can't see anything in the draft regs.

Nice I didn't know that this site existed.. very useful, thanks

I did notice that there were no VX220:s yet under the Drivers & Cars section

All progressing nicely. I pick up the first VX220 fully caged up on Friday.

Great news photos would be nice if you have the chanse to take some

Is Thorney motorsports not a sponsor of the series?

No.

I did notice that there were no VX220:s yet under the Drivers & Cars section

I think if this is the same series I saw some paperwork left at the LoT day, then the class the VX are in is the same as the anything goes category, hardly fair.