The continuing saga of a Vintage Rallist... So now that the 2009 season is over, here are a few of the lessons learned: In 2007, Joe and I learned that rallying an old car is fun. Our definition of old was 1969. Ha! All of the veteran racers were helpful, courteous, and nice, but I couldn't help but feel somewhat out of place since their definition of "old" was something prior to 1948. So for 2008, we rallied a 1932 Ford Speedster. We did okay - not great, not horrible; just okay. Well, I reasoned that if a '32 age factor was good then a '16 age factor had to be GREAT! So away went the Ford Speedster and we welcomed the 1916 Buick Speedster. Fast-forward to 2009's lessons learned: 1) There is a reason old cars have an age factor. A 1932 Ford is not as easy to drive as a 1969 Porsche. . . and a 1916 Buick is not as easy to drive as the Ford. In fact it's not easy to drive, at all! It's fun in a kinda "will-we-make-it-to-live-another-day" sorta way. I like driving the car but you really have to keep one step ahead of it. The best description I can give you is this: It's like flying a WWI Sopwith Camel. The wind blow, the chassis shakes, the engine howls, bugs die with a SPLAT on your goggles, and the whole time you're thinking, "Man this is fun! Hope I don't die!" 2) Testing the car in Texas (flat) and then racing it in Missouri (hilly) was a bad idea. The Buick is rear-only drum brakes. The car stops poorly at intersections at the bottom of a hill when you're approaching at 45 mph. The car doesn't stop at ALL if the road is wet or has gravel on it. 3) There is a balance among age, performance, and topography. Taking it all into consideration, I think the next time we'll race the Buick will be next June at the Sugar Valley Rally. Nebraska is flat. And they have a category that limits top speed to something less scary than 50 mph.
Monday, December 14, 2009
The continuing saga of a Vintage Rallist... So now that the 2009 season is over, here are a few of the lessons learned: In 2007, Joe and I learned that rallying an old car is fun. Our definition of old was 1969. Ha! All of the veteran racers were helpful, courteous, and nice, but I couldn't help but feel somewhat out of place since their definition of "old" was something prior to 1948. So for 2008, we rallied a 1932 Ford Speedster. We did okay - not great, not horrible; just okay. Well, I reasoned that if a '32 age factor was good then a '16 age factor had to be GREAT! So away went the Ford Speedster and we welcomed the 1916 Buick Speedster. Fast-forward to 2009's lessons learned: 1) There is a reason old cars have an age factor. A 1932 Ford is not as easy to drive as a 1969 Porsche. . . and a 1916 Buick is not as easy to drive as the Ford. In fact it's not easy to drive, at all! It's fun in a kinda "will-we-make-it-to-live-another-day" sorta way. I like driving the car but you really have to keep one step ahead of it. The best description I can give you is this: It's like flying a WWI Sopwith Camel. The wind blow, the chassis shakes, the engine howls, bugs die with a SPLAT on your goggles, and the whole time you're thinking, "Man this is fun! Hope I don't die!" 2) Testing the car in Texas (flat) and then racing it in Missouri (hilly) was a bad idea. The Buick is rear-only drum brakes. The car stops poorly at intersections at the bottom of a hill when you're approaching at 45 mph. The car doesn't stop at ALL if the road is wet or has gravel on it. 3) There is a balance among age, performance, and topography. Taking it all into consideration, I think the next time we'll race the Buick will be next June at the Sugar Valley Rally. Nebraska is flat. And they have a category that limits top speed to something less scary than 50 mph.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment