The Triumph Dolomite Club - Discussion Forum

I've found a list of ammendments tfor the Dolomite Sprint that's longer than the set in the FIA's papers on the Doly, and that includes the cam and carbs you have. The set in the papers goes to ammendment 29, but has gaps.

The question then is, why would the FIA have removed those ammendments from their copy of the papers?

Graham

I have all those and the Weber amendment with my FIA papers.

Get amendment 17 from here :

http://dollysprint.com/rac_homologation_form.htm

Page 34 of the 45 page document is here :

http://dollysprint.com/images/RAC%20Hom ... on0034.JPG

What I just read there is hard to believe, the factory homologated an AUTOMATIC transmission for group 1!!!!

Steve

Question still is, why would the FIA remove those ammendments from their copy of the papers and does that have anything to do with there having been nothing in the rules that allowed them to be approved? As in, covering their tracks?

Graham

No, they cannot do that. I would guess it is a clerical error.

Seems odd to have mised ones out of the sequence. Missing them off the end would be less so. They can and do remove approvals, however, like they did in 76, and it could mean that.

Graham

It does seem strange but it has to be an error. There are many other errors also within this pages. The larger vented front discs seem to show a disc with a bell figment but without the bell. In reality the disc was a one piece ventilated disc of the same diameter as the original. The rear disc conversion for the Group 2 car lists a 10.3” rear disc with AP racing calipers. When I rebuilt the original Broadspeed Group 2 car I tried to fit 10.3” discs on the rear with the correct calipers but the 13” wheels would not go on so ended up with around 9.5” disc so everything would fit.

Not sure what your picture is, looks like Group 2 front brakes.

Here are some fitted up.

Dolly racer 33 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 17, 2017 8:33 am It does seem strange but it has to be an error. There are many other errors also within this pages. The larger vented front discs seem to show a disc with a bell figment but without the bell. In reality the disc was a one piece ventilated disc of the same diameter as the original. The rear disc conversion for the Group 2 car lists a 10.3” rear disc with AP racing calipers. When I rebuilt the original Broadspeed Group 2 car I tried to fit 10.3” discs on the rear with the correct calipers but the 13” wheels would not go on so ended up with around 9.5” disc so everything would fit.

I don't see how these technical errors in the document, and presumably all copies of it, are on a par with the deletion of sections from it. And I'm not sure why "it has to be an error" or why you answer the question about why the FIA would remove amendments with "No, they cannot do that". Certainly, by 1978 the FIA, specifically the CIS which became FISA, was run by a bunch that made Bernie Ecclestone and Max Mosley look like the good guys - technically, turned them into the good guys. So I'm not quite clear why they couldn't do exactly as they wanted - unless someone with deep pockets and a good lawyer (if there is such a thing) objected enough and was bloody minded enough to bring them down. And, like I said, they did certainly change the rules and rescind approvals, as with the deletion of the 100-off rule in 1976 affecting (at least) Toyota, Lancia, Vauxhall, and Ford rally cars for the 78 season. I know some items are struck-out in black felt tip, which I assumed was them losing approval (that happens after production lapses as well as if rules change). If an entire amendment lost aproval, would they mark it as such, or just tear it out?

Graham

I have never known the FIA remove an homologated item from an historic set of papers. If they have issued the papers because they were satisfied with the criteria when the paperwork was issued they would have no reason to rescind that paperwork!!

When at scrutineering you hand your own stamped original complete set to the scrutineer that is what your car has to comply with. Not to some incomplete digitized version what the fia has on their site. How much interest in a dolomite would there be of the man who scanned weeks and weeks old forms.

Jeroen.

Dolly racer 33 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 17, 2017 8:46 pm I have never known the FIA remove an homologated item from an historic set of papers. If they have issued the papers because they were satisfied with the criteria when the paperwork was issued they would have no reason to rescind that paperwork!!

Ah, your talking about historic stuff, and I was asking about the British Salloon Car Chanmionship, etc. when the car was current. In those cases it wasn't like you got approval for a car, part, or modification and it lasted for ever, though the rules on how long aproval lasted afer production stopped varied.

And the FIA changed the rules all the time, and lots of items ceased to be approved for that. As I've mentioned, a couple of times, there was a great wadge of parts and modifications that were invalidated in 76 when the 100-off rule went, though there was a let in Appendix J for 1976 for those till 31/12/77. There's stuff in many of Robsons Rally Giants books about the effects of that change on the Celica, Stratos, and RS1800, etc.

Just look at what happened to the Vauxhall Chevette HS in scrutineering at Rally Portugal in 1978 (April I think) for an instance of when the FIA removed approval of parts, not just the Lotus head, but the gearbox and clutch too. IIRC they changed the rules on upgrading to rear disks, making them need homologation on productoin from 78 on - before that the rules explicitly stated they were alowed in Group 2 for the asking. I'd need to check, but I think that's a part the HSR got re-approval for.

There's also, as I said, lots of copies of recognition forms with parts crossed out, I assume by the FIA. Ain't that where their homologation had been removed or lapst or sumert?

But I admit I know nought about historic, and, I guess, I assumed you just have to have a consistent set of mods for a specific period (there's somthing about consistancy in evolutions in some versions of Appendix J at least, but I can't be botherd to go look now) - but if you can mix and match modifications at will in historic, it wouldn't suprise me.

Graham

FIA probably favouring French cars for a change

Tony