Special Stage Forums banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
R2- 50...WAIT! Make a left!
Joined
·
258 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
TTBOMK, the cut-off age for the "H" badge is '72 in 2002 (30 years).

Are there any plans to bump the cut-off model year to keep the 30 year cut-off -or- is the plan to keep '72 as the cut-off year?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
186 Posts
Unless the PRB has something new up their sleeve of which I'm not aware, H Class will stay pre-Jan 1 1972, consistent with Appendix K (specifically grouping G, I think). Why stay consistent with FIA when the rest of the H Class regs aren't fully in line with Appndx K? It's the evolutionary goal of the SCCA, same as Performance Rally in general, as far as I can see.
 

·
straight at T
Joined
·
2,472 Posts
I think that the reason that the cutoff will stay fixed (both in SCCA and FIA competition) is that you open a can of worms once you get into the mid-late 70's Gr4 cars. They can be extremely powerful and capable cars, some of which could challenge for a top-5 in SCCA competition. Lancia Stratos with Andrew Havas driving, anyone?

The current cutoff keeps out the Stratos, Mk I and Mk II Escorts etc, that were all in the 250-300hp range in Gr4 trim. This was the start of cars that were seriously engineered, rather than just modified, for stage rallying.

Adrian
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
186 Posts
Actually the Mk I Escort would qualify for H Class...I'd love to campaign an RS1600 in H Class - and the RS is enough of a car that I think it could be at least competitive in ProRally G2. And yes, I am looking into it. BDA replaced the Twin Cam in the Mk I in late '70.

Your basic argument is sound, though, I believe. My guess is that was the reason for using the Paragraph 3G restriction (12-31-71 cutoff) instead of one of the other App. K groupings.
 

·
Start Flat 30k Finish
Joined
·
366 Posts
RE: Aging gracefully!

>....can be extremely powerful and capable cars, some of which could
>challenge for a top-5 in SCCA competition. Lancia Stratos
>with Andrew Havas driving, anyone?


Where do I sign Adrian!?

Andrew
http://www.andrewhavas.com
 

·
R2- 50...WAIT! Make a left!
Joined
·
258 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
FIA reg link?: RE: Advancing years?

Would someone forward a link to these FIA regs? I've been been wading thru (i.e., spent 5 minutes surfing) the FIA site but haven't run across these regs. Probably right under my mouse.....<squeak>

Trying to make a case for allowing cars like my underpowered (i.e., <200HP :7 ) '73 99. Originally prepped for Open (in '73), it would fit 'bout mid-pack in today's G2 if it weren't for the driver. ;-)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
366 Posts
RE: FIA reg link?: RE: Advancing years?

>Would someone forward a link to these FIA regs? I've been
>been wading thru (i.e., spent 5 minutes surfing) the FIA
>site but haven't run across these regs. Probably right
>under my mouse.....<squeak>
>
>Trying to make a case for allowing cars like my underpowered
>(i.e., <200HP :7 ) '73 99. Originally prepped for Open (in
>'73), it would fit 'bout mid-pack in today's G2 if it
>weren't for the driver. ;-)

Wish I had 200hp in a 99.
The difference between the 72 & 73 model 99 is; 72-SAAB/Triumph 1.85 engine & smaller front suspension spring perches. 73 SAAB 2.0 litre engine much stronger and the first year of the "big front suspension". The 73 is the desired year to build from the stand point of the lightest tub weight with the bigger suspension. The problem is it needs the most reinforcing of chassis points.
Anyhow with rthe current cars running in G2 a well built 99 should not be at a disadvantage.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top