OK, Bart- Pablo, let me start by saying that I think you two pretty much walk on water in terms of attitude, spirit, guts and determination
I am a big fan of what you strive to do and I hope you both know that without me saying/typing it on here.
Now, please don't take offence, but..............
Bart wrote:
however i disogree with the second as you dont need a 50K car to
be competative, the wet is a sort the men from the boys and at oulton
park in our shed built car we were 11th in class with the least bhp car out there.
I think Time Attack, and all 'competitions' should be entered into on the understanding that you either do it because you want to have fun, or you do it because you want to be competitive which can in itself lead it to being fun. Whilst 11th in class with the least power is impressive, 11th in class is not competitive by definition. This, for me, is where a lot of series go wrong. It's not just TA, I see it in the Dunlop championship that Mr Birley, Mr Bly and Mr Kiddell run in. I see it in the Nippon series, I've seen it in Britcar too. A lack of numbers in some series means that widely disparate cars get lumped in together, and then people get the hump when a broader, more flexible set of rules means allow these gaps in spec to turn into gaps in lap times. Whilst I found the initial buzz of comparing a tuned XR4x4 with a tuned S14a compelling, it quickly became apparent that the variances between spec, money and driver standard killed any meaningful comparison. In club class some lads sponsorship was worth as much as a reasonable annual income, and that's before you factor in how much someone has invested into the car and driver development. Try meaningfully comparing that to Fred in the Shed with his homebrew 80's car............
I'm not knocking anyone that is in this for fun, not in any way. I wish I had the money or could make the sacrifices that you two do for the love of your passion. For the same reasons I'm not criticising anybody else that is in this for the experience or buzz of a high profile event at the top tracks, with no door to door risks. For that reason alone, it is a cracking option for some.
This is the conundrum though; it's not a race series, where you match the wits of the drivers and teams, and compare the performance and reliability of the cars. This is a sprint, so it's all about the driver pushing himself to his own limits, the car being stretched to its maximum in terms of performance and doing this all as consistently as possible. In the context of a sprint the competition comes from a strict and transparent class structure. There will always be the Chequebook Charlie's but more often than not, keen classes are filled with people trying to match like for like. Maybe they are allowed this level of genuine 'challenge' because there is no money involved, no media frenzy around the 'winners' and no regurgitated magazine articles for the podium dwellers.
If the event was allowed to grow slowly, sticking to a clear structure of rules so year on year, people knew how to build a car and knew what they were up against, I think the numbers of participants would be much higher. With more competitors the classes would be more clearly defined because you wouldn't need to run a 400bhp 4wd stripped car against a 250bhp lightweight Elise. Performance and results become easier to compare, spectators know what the hell is going on and if 'racers' want to compete at the cheap end, they can- equally if someone wants to rock up with their sponsored RV, a full team of support and a 100k car to win club class, let them fucking get on with it
Rant over.............I'll resume my position sitting on the sofa, day dreaming of having your level of commitment towards driving fast and doing so regularly. I have become numb towards the commerciality of these events; the money has killed the fun.
