Jim Richards - Bathurst '09

I know the "Biante" historic sedan series is not greatly respected on this esteemed forum,but one has to admire the talent of the team who put Jim Richards Falcon Sprint together,and Jum who broke the category record putting the oldest car in the race around Mt Panorama in 2:24.2.Faster than every car at this year's Festival of Sporting Cars,and every car in this year's Bathurst 12 Hour.
And nice to see Lex Davison's grandson Will share the win in that "other event" with Garth Tander.

And Jum is 62 - or is it 63 now? Bloody quick still.

I know the "Biante" historic sedan series is not greatly respected on this esteemed forum,but one has to admire the talent of the team who put Jim Richards Falcon Sprint together,and Jum who broke the category record putting the oldest car in the race around Mt Panorama in 2:24.2.Faster than every car at this year's Festival of Sporting Cars,and every car in this year's Bathurst 12 Hour.
And nice to see Lex Davison's grandson Will share the win in that "other event" with Garth Tander.

Reportedly 600hp helps though how you get 600 out of a 289 I do not know. It does push a lot of air though.
The Biante cars though are purely hotrods, not really historic though you have to drive them well to be fast.

Reportedly 600hp helps though how you get 600 out of a 289 I do not know. It does push a lot of air though.
The Biante cars though are purely hotrods, not really historic though you have to drive them well to be fast.

I think it has reputedly 380kw, a shade over 500bhp.....509 isnt too shabby for a 289 anyway.

It pulled away from the 350ci Camaro up the mountain so most of the horses appeared to be working well even tho the Sprint was probably a 500lb lighter car.

Edited by Ellis French, 12 October 2009 - 00:44.

I think it has reputedly 380kw, a shade over 500bhp.....509 isnt too shabby for a 289 anyway.

It pulled away from the 350ci Camaro up the mountain so most of the horses appeared to be working well even tho the Sprint was probably a 500lb lighter car.

I would be surprised if the Camaro is any heavier than the Falcon. The Falcon should be around 1250-1300kg as the Chev is too.And the Chev has far less frontal area though possibly the Falcon could handle a little better.Mustangs are accepted as a better handler.Though they are a bit lower in the underpinnings and roofline.
509 sounds more realistic for the standard configaration [though not Ford] Windsor heads. It must be turned fairly hard with shorter gears to get the performance.

I would be surprised if the Camaro is any heavier than the Falcon. The Falcon should be around 1250-1300kg as the Chev is too.And the Chev has far less frontal area though possibly the Falcon could handle a little better.Mustangs are accepted as a better handler.Though they are a bit lower in the underpinnings and roofline.
509 sounds more realistic for the standard configaration [though not Ford] Windsor heads. It must be turned fairly hard with shorter gears to get the performance.

The Sprint is permitted to run fibreglass boot ,bonnet, front guards and bumpers etc. as thats how they were raced in period.
The Camaro should be all steel.
The Sprint is required to weigh in at 1360kg fueled with driver . It gives away about 70-80 hp to most of the 350 Chevs.
It has around 200kg weight advantage over most of its competitors.
It runs modern non Ford eg..Dart or similar heads....(also permitted in Nb)
I also believe it may be based on a Nascar block (V8 Supercar) sleeved back to 289 with lots of billet stuff.

Edited by Ellis French, 15 October 2009 - 01:43.

The Sprint is permitted to run fibreglass boot ,bonnet, front guards and bumpers etc. as thats how they were raced in period.
The Camaro should be all steel.
The Sprint is required to weigh in at 1360kg fueled with driver . It gives away about 70-80 hp to most of the 350 Chevs.
It has around 200kg weight advantage over most of its competitors.
It runs modern non Ford eg..Dart or similar alloy heads....(also permitted in Nb)
I also believe it may be based on a Nascar block (V8 Supercar) sleeved back to 289 with lots of billet stuff.

As far as i know Nb still has to use modified production stuff, the 2 Sprints here in SA are defenitly Ford heads and blocks and steel panels. Even then they are using 70s blocks on 60s cars as are the Mustangs which has long been a bone of contention.As the 63 64 blocks are not as strong which would limit the horsepower.
The Biante cars are hotrods with Dart iron? heads, T10s and 9" diffs.On both Chevs and Fords, and Irving headed Toranas. Not bad to watch but not historic cars more Improved production

As far as i know Nb still has to use modified production stuff, the 2 Sprints here in SA are defenitly Ford heads and blocks and steel panels. Even then they are using 70s blocks on 60s cars as are the Mustangs which has long been a bone of contention.As the 63 64 blocks are not as strong which would limit the horsepower.
The Biante cars are hotrods with Dart iron? heads, T10s and 9" diffs.On both Chevs and Fords, and Irving headed Toranas. Not bad to watch but not historic cars more Improved production

Nb (Mustangs at least as at 2007, not sure on other makes) could run dart heads but are not allowed to alter them at all from the over the counter as supplied conditipn if they do...ie no porting. They can be inspected on assembly and sealed. They still have to run normal old blocks . Nb Sprints can/do run f/g panels .

Agreed , Biante is definetly similar to the old Improved Production where almost anything goes....as do stacks of $'s

The Transam series that is up and running in Qld is also attracting some attention and will probably spread down the East Coast.

A Tassie Nb Sprint with f/g panels

As far as i know Nb still has to use modified production stuff, the 2 Sprints here in SA are defenitly Ford heads and blocks and steel panels. Even then they are using 70s blocks on 60s cars as are the Mustangs which has long been a bone of contention.As the 63 64 blocks are not as strong which would limit the horsepower.
The Biante cars are hotrods with Dart iron? heads, T10s and 9" diffs.On both Chevs and Fords, and Irving headed Toranas. Not bad to watch but not historic cars more Improved production

Would surprise me if the Sprint weighed MORE than it weighed ex-Canada manufacture in 1964 ,which was under 1200kg.Nb/Nc rules are more stringent than the Biante "show business"rules-eg XU1 Toranas run 15 inch wheels,BUT they are by no means sports sedans.They are obviously old school in the main--Richards car has leaf springs --carburettors,stock steel bodies,blunt aerodynamics etc.But even the brutal Taylor MGB V8 of 5.8+litres,a radically upgraded weapon at the fosc 2009 Bathurst,was 4 seconds behind JR's time.If Jum's car is really 4700cc,the ONLY way it can be top dog is light weight,ie at least 200kg under Tilley,Bullas,Stubber etc.

Four-bolt bearings, Jericho gearboxes, other 'reliability' freedoms seem to have by some miracle improved performance.

Who'd a' thought?

The cars are very entertaining to watch, they go hard but do little else and as someone observed above, need to be driven well.

And hey, they don't all look and sound the same. By the way, Jim is building an AMC Javelin; should be a very interesting car.



Bruce Moxon

Check old race programs GroupNb. Bob Tweedie circa 1991 was blitzing everyone in a Falcon Sprint.I didn't know their provenance then and Tweedies car was in the pits at Eastern Creek with a mild biff in the back,exposing cracked fiberglass bumper.I thought thats a cheat but no,all kosher.Taken a long time for this vehicle to show its true colors again---OK it may not be historic to a purist,but go cheat with any car of similar age and top it ! (ps I'm a Holden fan)

Check old race programs GroupNb. Bob Tweedie circa 1991 was blitzing everyone in a Falcon Sprint.I didn't know their provenance then and Tweedies car was in the pits at Eastern Creek with a mild biff in the back,exposing cracked fiberglass bumper.I thought thats a cheat but no,all kosher.Taken a long time for this vehicle to show its true colors again---OK it may not be historic to a purist,but go cheat with any car of similar age and top it ! (ps I'm a Holden fan)

Falcon Sprints were homolgated for rallying not racing with fibreglass doors etc but were not allowed to race with them here in the past [90s]That was a talking point then.
The only time I saw Tweedie race that Sprint was in the 90s and it was only a mid fielder.
A Gp N Sprint runs on 6" rims whereas a Biante car runs on 8s As I said before whatever they have to be driven well.Though they are mostly big budget cars near the front

An AMC Javelin will be bloody expensive to develop and race. They were good Transam cars in about 71 with Penske though both Chev and Ford had lost interest.
But the Chevs and Fords and others have had near 40 years of development wheras the AMC has had basically none. Nothing performance will be advailable off the shelf, will have to made. Pistons rods, manifolds etc thougn I guess they will run a T10/Jericho and a 9" so that makes it somewhat easier. Though NOT historic!

An original syle small block Ford has SOME advantages over an original small block GM. It's almost 170lbs lighter and with its front mounted dist. and oil filter, can nestled quite a bit closer to the fire-wall, and a tad lower in the frame rails. I suspect that there is no argument regarding power output or reliability, both in GM's favor.
A Falcon Sprint, could or should have better weight dist. than most of its competition.....Hank the Duece had seen to it that there was a bewildering array of lightweight body panels incl. bumpers homologated for a wide variety of competitive events. Lee Holman would possibly have some of the best information in that regard.
nev

Quote Johnny Yuma...."Would surprise me if the Sprint weighed MORE than it weighed ex-Canada manufacture in 1964 ,which was under 1200kg."



In the Biante Masters Series there are rules for minimum weights.....

Falcon Sprint 1330 kg
Camaro 1570-1680 kg depending on build year
Mustangs 1420-1570 kg depending on build year
Falcons 1570 kg
Charger 1570 kg

So the Sprint has about 200kg advantage over most rivals.

They also have different max rev limits ....eg..289 Sprint is 7800, 350/351 7200

Ellis

Quote Johnny Yuma...."Would surprise me if the Sprint weighed MORE than it weighed ex-Canada manufacture in 1964 ,which was under 1200kg."



In the Biante Masters Series there are rules for minimum weights.....

Falcon Sprint 1330 kg
Camaro 1570-1680 kg depending on build year
Mustangs 1420-1570 kg depending on build year
Falcons 1570 kg
Charger 1570 kg

So the Sprint has about 200kg advantage over most rivals.

They also have different max rev limits ....eg..289 Sprint is 7800, 350/351 7200

Ellis

Thanks Ellis,I presume that 1330kg is with driver aboard as "ready to race" some fuel etc.

The V8 Supercars I THINK are 1350 kg--is this with driver,fuel etc or another spec ?

Looked up Eastern Creek lap records for 2007,Bob Tweedie held the Nb lap record at 1:51.1,which he set in 1993 in a Falcon Sprint (group n rules)
the J.R. Sprint would be a much quicker car but obviously ineligible for Grp.N.

Anyone got a time for a 289 Mustang at Bathurst in the Improved Production era,eg Ian Geoghegan ? Or the pre-Biante Grp.N support races to the 1000 ?

Pete did 2:40.4 winning the big race there in 1966... 2:40.7 in practice...

When did they go to 302s?

Pete did 2:40.4 winning the big race there in 1966... 2:40.7 in practice...

When did they go to 302s?

67 model mustangs are 302...so from mid 66 ...their model year commences mid the year prior if that makes sense.

Edited by Ellis French, 13 October 2009 - 08:00.

I'm now recalling that they had problems which delayed the use of 302s...

It seems to me that we often read in the papers that Pete would still be running his 289 because of some issue or other with the 302.

Power figures are interesting.
UK tuners are now getting over 500 bhp out of stock 1965 289 blocks and heads-not Dart-and plain rockers in GT 40 form-i.e. on tubular manifolds.

The wonders of modern flow benches...

Done a lot for Formula Vees as well, I believe.

The wonders of modern flow benches...

Done a lot for Formula Vees as well, I believe.

Yes Ray,

Even in Historic formula vee, unless everything is flowed, you are behind the pack.

Power figures are interesting.
UK tuners are now getting over 500 bhp out of stock 1965 289 blocks and heads-not Dart-and plain rockers in GT 40 form-i.e. on tubular manifolds.

And with that sort of power in a 65 block the crank falls out the bottom fairly regularly. Those early blocks are quite fragile compared with the later ones. I have seen several that have broken, and those are engines put together by good people and with less power than that and using about 7500 rpm. Most 289s these days seem to be built from late blocks with 289 cranks which for historic racing is really cheating, and giving the Mustangs power advantages.

Porting and flowing those early heads can make good power but they are so thin that they crack very regularly wheras the aftermarket heads make similar power out of the box and are reliable and ultimatly more efficient.

We thought it was a bit of a joke when the early Mustang runners applied to CAMS for the right to use NASCAR blocks... but typical or how people get around CAMS...

"Please Mr CAMS, can we use them because:

1. There are very few original blocks left.

2. All the ones left have been bored 0.040", and they've worn out again, requiring another 0.020" bore.

3. The block castings aren't thick enough to allow this."

So they were permitted to use a block with big thick cylinder walls, heavy main bearing webs, cross-bolted mains etc.

We thought it was a bit of a joke when the early Mustang runners applied to CAMS for the right to use NASCAR blocks... but typical or how people get around CAMS...

"Please Mr CAMS, can we use them because:

1. There are very few original blocks left.

2. All the ones left have been bored 0.040", and they've worn out again, requiring another 0.020" bore.

3. The block castings aren't thick enough to allow this."

So they were permitted to use a block with big thick cylinder walls, heavy main bearing webs, cross-bolted mains etc.

Sounds familiar. Though those real early blocks had quite thick wall and would sometimes go .060 but the main webs were the true weak point.As are the decks sometime, the later and aftermarket blocks are all substansially thicker there. And not just Fords.
The biggest problem though is all these old blocks of any brand are all rusted out. Even when sonic tested they still strike water when bored [and occasinally before] A lot of the US sourced blocks seem to be better for corrosion as they use antifreeze which is also a good corrosion inhibitor whereas in Oz good old water and let it corrode.And yes I am as guilty as anyone though these days I have learnt good coolant not only saves corrosion but makes power too as the coolant is less likely to boil in the hotspots creating less detonation and hence more power.
Electrolisis is another problem and where it comes from sometimes I really dont know. Put a multimeter into the coolant and check the voltage, often up to one volt and it will defenitly cause corrosion. Usually the welch plugs which is a very good reason to use steel ones instead of brass. They are a sacrificial annode, as is the alloy too unfortunatly. Still better than the block though.