Mark Durrant Posted September 19, 2007 Share Posted September 19, 2007 There is one extract that is appropriate to sprinting the details of which are as follows: The Motor Sports Council – the legislative body of UK motor sport – met last week (11 September) to ratify constitution and regulation changes that will be adopted for next season. A summary of some of the key changes is given below, but the full regulations will be notified in the MSA’s official magazine, Motorsports Now!, and in the 2008 Blue Book as appropriate. Regulation E12.16.7: Catalytic converters will be mandatory for all production based touring, saloon and sports cars, including specialist production and kit cars, from 1st January 2009 and for newly registered championships from 1 January 2008. They may be specified for certain other formulae. Do they really think this will help to adress climate change/global warming etc or is it a case of being seen to be green, if so we are all going to cough up £x00 of pounds just to compete and to no benefit to the environment. How they will enforce it,surely it is going to be a scruitineers nightmare 🤔 Very disappointing 😔 and I will need to read the full version in the Blue book before deciding what to do with the regs for our championship 🙆🏻 Mark D Comp Sec Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardO Posted September 19, 2007 Share Posted September 19, 2007 Mark; I sent a letter formally objecting to this on many grounds. I got one back basically saying "we don't care what you think, the top end of the sport have had them for years, if they can do it so can everyone else". The cost issue wasn't even mentioned in the reply. So the MSA wish to appear green, but apparently don't give a damn about appearing arrogant and elitist. As they haven't specified catalyst type or efficiency, I plan to argue that iron is a catalyst if challenged. R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlymoFraser Posted September 19, 2007 Share Posted September 19, 2007 Does this also apply to older vehicles that were not fitted with catalysts as standard? If so, while it will be a pain for us it will pretty well stuff historic and classic motorsport. R287 Mobile Jaffa Cake- It's black at both ends with a smashing orangey bit in the middle here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Durrant Posted September 19, 2007 Author Share Posted September 19, 2007 Neil IIRC the so called 'consultation document' stated vehicles registered from 1 January 2000 however, the press release does not state a year so we will have to wait for the blue book to be published. Mark D Comp Sec Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Locust Posted September 19, 2007 Share Posted September 19, 2007 Whether you agree or not; Provided that this is in line with construction and use regulations and mot testing requirements for roadgoing vehicles, I can't see how you can legitimately fight it. At least if you are competing in a roadgoing class that is. Ian Green and Silver Roadsport 😬 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry21p Posted September 19, 2007 Share Posted September 19, 2007 Did you read the new rulings on Caterham 21's being allowed in to L7C sprints under a new "invitation marque" rule? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bl0498 Posted September 19, 2007 Share Posted September 19, 2007 Guys, This is not new. If you look at E.12.16.7 for 2007 you will see ' .... Competitors are reminded of their obligation to maintain such equipment (Catalytic Converters) on a vehicle used on the highway where government legislation requires it.' which essentially means you must have one now if required under the construction and use etc regs for a roadgoing car. All they have done is reword to tighten it up and make it clearer!!! Best Regards, Brian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Plato Posted September 20, 2007 Share Posted September 20, 2007 I agree - the fact is that road going cars registered after 1998 should have cats anyway to be strictly legal in a road going class with an MOT. The MSA I imagine dont want to be caught by the carbon footprint crowd with their trousers down, which any sensible competitor would respect for the longterm good of the sport. Of course - just because you have to have a cat fitted - doesnt mean that the scrutineer will have an emissions test machine on site nor does it rule that the cat has to have any internals...... Taffia rear gunner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardO Posted September 20, 2007 Share Posted September 20, 2007 The MSA I imagine dont want to be caught by the carbon footprint crowd with their trousers down, which any sensible competitor would respect for the longterm good of the sport. The problem with that argument is that retrofitting a cat can significantly increasefuel consumption. The reply I got from the MSA said "we have no evidence of this" - which implies they haven't carried out even basic research. Five minutes on google would have brought up a load of US EPA reports from the 90's showing fuel consumption increases of up to 4.7% after fitting a cat to an engine that had previously been running without one. Of course retrofitting a cat does not always produce that magnitude of effect - it depends on the engine. But to come out neutral for fuel consumption generally requires some other tinkering at the same time - in particular with regard to burn ratios - but that hasn't been mentioned in the regs. (Retrofitting a cat does always result in a power reduction though!) R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil.cavanagh Posted September 20, 2007 Share Posted September 20, 2007 Richard, and that is without even consdiering the environmental cost of making the cat in the first place! Frankly this decision smacks of the worst possible type of token environmental gesture. They have done it to PRETEND we care about the environment. If they REALLY cared a scheme such as addign £10 to every license cost and spending it on CO2 off-set schemes, so making motorsport carbon neutral, or even carbon positive would be far more effective. Now, just have to wait to see the blue book and find the massive gaping holes in the regs!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mav Posted September 20, 2007 Share Posted September 20, 2007 As Brian says above, allt he post aug 98? cars that run in road legal class should have had a cat fitted anyway, as there is a requirement from MOT... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil.cavanagh Posted September 20, 2007 Share Posted September 20, 2007 Mav, is it? or do they just have to be able to meet the emissions regulations at the time of MOT? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardO Posted September 20, 2007 Share Posted September 20, 2007 As Neil says, the MOT requirement is that post 1992 cars have to meet a stricter emissions limit, not necessarily that they have a cat fitted. See here - there is no check for presence of a cat, only an emissions test. It should be noted that it's not easy to meet the standard without a working cat tho! Construction and use regs - which apply all year round, not just at MOT time - are the same. The requirement is to meet an emissions standard, not necessarily to have a cat fitted. R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil.cavanagh Posted September 20, 2007 Share Posted September 20, 2007 Richard, I assume you pointed that out in your letter! So I don't HAVE to run a cat when on the road or for MOT. Though being realistic meeting emissions at MOT time (or road side check) without might be tricky. Will be interesting to see quite how the MSA propose to enforce the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted September 20, 2007 Share Posted September 20, 2007 Great, so that means my vx classic is basically obselete (some would say it is already 😬). I can't see that anyone will go to the expense of adapting a catalytic converter for the car as it was never designed or supplied with one and it is not needed for MOT despite it being a post-2000 car. Also, it is not even subject to an emissions test at MOT time as the engine dates from '95 so its a visual smoke test only. Plus, I've only got 100bhp, I can't afford to lose any Edited by - Greg P on 20 Sep 2007 13:29:45 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bl0498 Posted September 20, 2007 Share Posted September 20, 2007 Greg, I think you will find that there is no need to have a CC for your car because of the regs that were in force when Caterham started shipping the Vx1600 in late 97 when they bought the job lot of engines. I had an early Vx1600, registered in 98 and like yours it was smoke test only. You must have one of the last Vx1600 cars. Brian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardO Posted September 20, 2007 Share Posted September 20, 2007 Brian - if he wants to compete with it he will! That's one of the reasons why this MSA ruling has stirred up so much s**t - cars that wouldn't need a cat on the road will now need one for MSA events Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted September 20, 2007 Share Posted September 20, 2007 Richard - precisely! I do compete and want to continue doing so. I presume the x-flow runners will be in the same position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gambo Posted September 20, 2007 Share Posted September 20, 2007 Of course - just because you have to have a cat fitted - doesnt mean that the scrutineer will have an emissions test machine on site nor does it rule that the cat has to have any internals...... Better get me welder out. I can see a market for dummy Cats springing up 😬 😬 RED 2.0 HPC 230BHP here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 A colleague who was racing an XJS at Silverstone today asked the scrutineers about this after I mentioned it to him. He was told that the rule will apply to vehicles manufactured after Jan 2000. My kit was November 1999 so fingers crossed he's right! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bl0498 Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 Guys, I have spoken to the author of the report on the MSA website that Mark quoted from and he indicates that it will apply to all vehicles manufactured after 31 Dec 1999. For our championship permit as its a renewal the regs will not apply until 1 Jan 2009. Brian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DSL Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 Would this apply to a class 6 busa car, thats never been road registered Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmar Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 or a car running in a non road legal class, but was once road legal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irrelevant Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 DSL: I think it's got nothing to do with road car rules . . .. For non-road registered cars, they'll probably use the MSA log book date of construction. Where do they draw the line with this then? Are we going to see F1 cars and Top Fuel dragsters with cats Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardO Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 manufactured after 31 Dec 1999 Wonder how they define manufactured for a kit car? (stir, stir, stir......) My problem is that as a clerk I'm going to have to interpret this c**p - and I don't believe the original reg was worded tightly enough to actually be enforceable R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now