35 replies to this topic

[Nanni Dietrich]

Why did BMC adopt the colour Tartan-red and white for their Mini Cooper S driven by Hopkirk, Fall, Aaltonen and Makinen in the late 1960s, and not e. g. British green or various colors (as in The Italian Job movie)?

Edited by Nanni Dietrich, 04 February 2014 - 08:14.

[Tim Murray]

This was the works colour scheme used by BMC on all their rally cars in that period - big Healeys, MGBs etc as well as the Minis.

[Catalina Park]

It was said that red cars received preferential treatment on the continent.

[Mark A]

There were some exceptions.

 

The original 850 Mini's weren't all red

Also one of the early 997 Coopers works cars was white with a black roof (977 ARX) but was then Red/Black in later years.

One of the Cooper S's was green/White (AGU780B)

[garyfrogeye]

Stuart Turner told us that the reason for the white roofs was to reflect heat away.

Edited by garyfrogeye, 04 February 2014 - 13:03.

[RS2000]

AGU780B (not a Berkshire registration like all works cars but a London one - registered for export to BMC Sweden) (Abingdon came under Oxfordshire in about 1971) is not normally considered a full "works" car.

I think Marcus Chambers wrote that painting the Healeys red was the result of observing the speed with which Italian level crossings opened for red cars. Early big Healeys had a black roof (and one, borrowed from Donald Healey, was green/white).

The experts will tell us the white roof colour is "BMC Old English White". Its interesting that in period most private owners wanted a colour that was "anything but red with a white roof".

OT but the original shell of works "S" GRX309D has been found recently (and verified by Bill Price). The registration was carried by 2,3,4 or even 5 shells in 5 appearances and establishing which is now the object of much effort.
Anyone with any information would find it gratefully received.
The original car ran (only??) on the 1966 Rally dei Fiori (Flowers Rally, predecessor of the San Remo) with Hopkirk as an early 66 Group 2 car. That is, without arch extensions but with the definitive works pivoting 4 lamp bar. GRX195D was a similar car for Baxter on the 66 Monte but not with the "4 across" lamp bar. DJB92B and GRX310D ran in Sweden and any photos of these two would be welcomed. By the next event, wheel arch extensiomns were fitted to all Gp2 (and 5 and 6) cars.
GRX309D then appeared on a Gp1 car in Poland for Fall (almost certainly not the same car) and then for the Graham Hill Gp2 car on the 66 RAC. I offer no comment regarding the car now around in those colours other than to say it seems to be widely questioned.
Fall then appeared in a GRX309D on the 66 Welsh a couple of weeks later (logically the Hill RAC car which had retired after only the smoothest part of the RAC and needed only a new gearbox) and stuffed it at "Grimshaw's" on Eppynt.
Another (race) car then went to Sebring with the GRX309D reg no.
Photos of the damaged Welsh car would be particularly useful.

...all Tartan Red/Old English white!

[BRG]

This reflects what I have sometimes said about trying to prove provenance for a historic rally car. With re-shelling a frequent practice for works teams (and the cast-off shells sometimes being sold to privateers) not to mention wholesale replacement of engines and drive trains and suspension parts, and with the number plate swopping that Ford (Boreham) in particular took to a high art in the Escort days, it is unlikely that there are many genuinely proveably 'original' works cars anywhere.  

 

From what RS2000 has written about GRX309D, there could be half a dozen versions, all of which are equally authentic, with the one bearing the registration number being even more authentic.  If people think provenance is difficult with classic racing cars, they ain't seen nothing!

[RS2000]

Before anyone else corrects it, GRX309D on the 66 Polish was a Gp2 970 (well, 999) S.
ie. 3.5J wheels and no arch extensions (and a "4 across" lamp bar rather than the 2 lamps then allowed in Gp1.

[275 GTB-4]

All the above is very nice to know, and can be seen in countless BMC Comps photos and publications....however, when did white over red first become the competition "livery"....before the big Healy's? Did it carry over from MG competition before 1955?

[RS2000]

 

275 GTB-4, on 05 Feb 2014 - 12:20, said:

All the above is very nice to know, and can be seen in countless BMC Comps photos and publications....however, when did white over red first become the competition "livery"....before the big Healy's? Did it carry over from MG competition before 1955?

1959 on the "big" Healeys (black roof in 58 - as I said above early Healeys were). Gradually for other models. As late as 63 the odd car was not red/white roof, then by 67 the odd car was also another colour (eg. a black 1800). Not an exclusive scheme then but effectively "The" scheme.
In general, race Healeys were not BMC Comps cars (as race Minis generally weren't, until later on (69). ("in general" - don't all jump on other exceptions, unless we are going to try and list them)
I think MG competitions pre-55 was also pre-WW2 so, BRG or the cream trials cars?

Edited by RS2000, 05 February 2014 - 13:56.

[275 GTB-4]

RS2000, on 05 Feb 2014 - 13:52, said:

1959 on the "big" Healeys (black roof in 58 - as I said above early Healeys were). Gradually for other models. As late as 63 the odd car was not red/white roof, then by 67 the odd car was also another colour (eg. a black 1800). Not an exclusive scheme then but effectively "The" scheme.
In general, race Healeys were not BMC Comps cars (as race Minis generally weren't, until later on (69). ("in general" - don't all jump on other exceptions, unless we are going to try and list them)
I think MG competitions pre-55 was also pre-WW2 so, BRG or the cream trials cars?

Ohhhh Kaaaay, BMC Comps were established 1955...that was my point. Did they utilise the white over red team colours "right from the get-go" (to use an Americanism)

[Lee Nicolle]

BRG, on 04 Feb 2014 - 20:15, said:

This reflects what I have sometimes said about trying to prove provenance for a historic rally car. With re-shelling a frequent practice for works teams (and the cast-off shells sometimes being sold to privateers) not to mention wholesale replacement of engines and drive trains and suspension parts, and with the number plate swopping that Ford (Boreham) in particular took to a high art in the Escort days, it is unlikely that there are many genuinely proveably 'original' works cars anywhere.  
 
From what RS2000 has written about GRX309D, there could be half a dozen versions, all of which are equally authentic, with the one bearing the registration number being even more authentic.  If people think provenance is difficult with classic racing cars, they ain't seen nothing!

I presume the English road authoritys are like here in Oz and the chassis no and the engine no are recorded for registration. IF that is the case all bar the original car were not registered. And how would a subsequent owner register a car with the same chassis no?
In the early 70s that caused some grief here too, a well known private team continued to use the rego plates on at least 3 cars and TWO different models. One car was wrecked though still sold on for other purposes. The Sh*t hit the fan when the second car was sold on and then was tried to be registered.This was hushed up but some substansial fines were racked up. Even the new owner was fined as in theory he should have known.

[275 GTB-4]

Lee Nicolle, on 07 Feb 2014 - 03:01, said:

I presume the English road authoritys are like here in Oz and the chassis no and the engine no are recorded for registration. IF that is the case all bar the original car were not registered. And how would a subsequent owner register a car with the same chassis no?
In the early 70s that caused some grief here too, a well known private team continued to use the rego plates on at least 3 cars and TWO different models. One car was wrecked though still sold on for other purposes. The Sh*t hit the fan when the second car was sold on and then was tried to be registered.This was hushed up but some substansial fines were racked up. Even the new owner was fined as in theory he should have known.

Lee, it didn't happen everywhere, but in some cases a "works" team could/would order a fresh unmolested body from the factory to replace tired shells.

 

How can anyone prove the provenance of a car under those circumstance's?

Edited by 275 GTB-4, 07 February 2014 - 04:25.

[Lee Nicolle]

275 GTB-4, on 07 Feb 2014 - 04:23, said:

Lee, it didn't happen everywhere, but in some cases a "works" team could/would order a fresh unmolested body from the factory to replace tired shells.
 
How can anyone prove the provenance of a car under those circumstance's?

Chassis number!

Edited by Lee Nicolle, 07 February 2014 - 04:58.

[275 GTB-4]

Lee Nicolle, on 07 Feb 2014 - 04:58, said:

Chassis number!

Huh? on up to 5 different bodies (say)...I doubt they would have even bothered doing the chassis stamping supplied to special order from the line...just transferred tally plates to keep the scrutes happy.

[Morris S]

Abingdon didn't so much swap body shells as swap number plates onto entirely new cars supplied by Longbridge when circumstances required, common practice with works teams. When a rally car got damaged (sometimes only after one event) it wasn't always cost effective to repair , strip it down or swap everything over to a new shell, though that did sometimes happen. Mini Coopers came out of Longbridge with a factory welded body number (chassis numbers were just screwed on and easily swapped) which are tied to a chassis number as evident in factory records. The records for all the Abingdon Minis were published many years ago by Peter Browning in his book 'Works Minis'.

The recently discovered Flowers Rally car (not just a shell ) GRX 309D has it's body number still in place and is the car first registered by the works and entered by them on the '66 Flowers with Paddy Hopkirk at the wheel. The registration number was subsequently stuck on to at least two other entirely new rally car, including the Graham Hill '66 RAC Rally car and the Hopkirk '67 Sebring car which was built brand new for the event and still exists in the U.S. This particular car was disposed of by the works complete with an engine, trim etc but minus that all important registration document, as happened with many other ex works Minis. In actual fact the registration document may well have been surrendered when the Sebring car was exported by the works to the U.S in March 1967 and sold on to BMC America after the race. All that information would have evaporated anyway once DVLC was computerised in the late 70's.

 

Going back to the original question, Abingdon started to paint the roof panel white on their Tartan Red Minis by mid '62. That's some fifteen months after Ralph Broad first did it on his rally Mini '111 CON' , as pictured on the 1960 Monte Carlo Rally. 

Edited by Morris S, 07 February 2014 - 13:20.

[RS2000]

So as not to complicate matters, I didn't mention that it was the body (shell) number that had identified the original GRX309D. For the benefit of non-UK members, A Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) plate was not compulsory until, I think, late 78. Most cars had them before then, as a small rivetted plate usually on a panel near the radiator. I don't think the term VIN was ever used until later, hence reference to "chassis number" of a unitary construction car. The actual body shell number was not recorded in official registration documents and it is only because the BMC works team records happened to have recorded the original shell numbers that the GRX309D I/D was possible.
Incidently in the two "bibles" "The Works Minis", Browning and "The BMC Competitions Department", Price, I found both had the works appearances of GRX309D in the wrong order and had indicated the Welsh was before the RAC in 66 rather than after.
When I built a car from a new bare body shell in 1970/1 (co-incidently a Cooper S), no one was interested in any shell number and I was allocated an engine number and chassis number - both the same! - by the local registration authority that bore no resemblance to the format of the separate numbers that would have been on a factory built car/engine at the time. The log book issued was stamped "built up vehicle" and the registration number issued for it followed the format for that year and that county. No body number appeared anywhere. Things changed later.

If it was not clear enough - I was trying not to state the obvious - earlier, red and white was not used from 1955. It became "standard" in years as posted but was never formally "official" in the same sense that today someone would issue glorious technicolour press releases to make a big issue of it.

Edited by RS2000, 07 February 2014 - 19:54.

[Morris S]

"The actual body shell number was not recorded in official registration documents and it only because the BMC works team records happened to have recorded the original shell numbers that the GRX 309D I/D was possible"

 

Whilst I'm sure that's true it's also true that from a body number a Heritage trace through BMIHT would have been possible and would have revealed the chassis number plus destination - Competitions Dept . From that information a registration number would have been possible to find through the original authority registration records, most of which still survive.

Edited by Morris S, 07 February 2014 - 20:52.

[GMACKIE]

garyfrogeye, on 04 Feb 2014 - 13:03, said:

Stuart Turner told us that the reason for the white roofs was to reflect heat away.

And it works !

 

In 1960, I painted the roof of my car white [no, it was not a Mini ].  Inside temp. was reduced considerably.

[275 GTB-4]

RS2000, on 07 Feb 2014 - 19:49, said:

So as not to complicate matters, I didn't mention that it was the body (shell) number that had identified the original GRX309D. For the benefit of non-UK members, A Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) plate was not compulsory until, I think, late 78. Most cars had them before then, as a small rivetted plate usually on a panel near the radiator. I don't think the term VIN was ever used until later, hence reference to "chassis number" of a unitary construction car. The actual body shell number was not recorded in official registration documents and it is only because the BMC works team records happened to have recorded the original shell numbers that the GRX309D I/D was possible.
Incidently in the two "bibles" "The Works Minis", Browning and "The BMC Competitions Department", Price, I found both had the works appearances of GRX309D in the wrong order and had indicated the Welsh was before the RAC in 66 rather than after.
When I built a car from a new bare body shell in 1970/1 (co-incidently a Cooper S), no one was interested in any shell number and I was allocated an engine number and chassis number - both the same! - by the local registration authority that bore no resemblance to the format of the separate numbers that would have been on a factory built car/engine at the time. The log book issued was stamped "built up vehicle" and the registration number issued for it followed the format for that year and that county. No body number appeared anywhere. Things changed later.

If it was not clear enough - I was trying not to state the obvious - earlier, red and white was not used from 1955. It became "standard" in years as posted but was never formally "official" in the same sense that today someone would issue glorious technicolour press releases to make a big issue of it.

Sorry, but if you take the time to read "Anatomy of the Works Minis, Rally, Racing & Rallycross Cars", by Brian Moylan...you will see where I am coming from...and tally plates were on the left of the firewall above the master cylinders. The radiator cowling had a body related number stamped on it.

 

WRT to your Cooper S heritage body shell, what country do you live in? It makes a difference to what you are saying...

[275 GTB-4]

Morris S, on 07 Feb 2014 - 13:19, said:

Abingdon didn't so much swap body shells as swap number plates onto entirely new cars supplied by Longbridge when circumstances required, common practice with works teams. When a rally car got damaged (sometimes only after one event) it wasn't always cost effective to repair , strip it down or swap everything over to a new shell, though that did sometimes happen. Mini Coopers came out of Longbridge with a factory welded body number (chassis numbers were just screwed on and easily swapped) which are tied to a chassis number as evident in factory records. The records for all the Abingdon Minis were published many years ago by Peter Browning in his book 'Works Minis'.
The recently discovered Flowers Rally car (not just a shell ) GRX 309D has it's body number still in place and is the car first registered by the works and entered by them on the '66 Flowers with Paddy Hopkirk at the wheel. The registration number was subsequently stuck on to at least two other entirely new rally car, including the Graham Hill '66 RAC Rally car and the Hopkirk '67 Sebring car which was built brand new for the event and still exists in the U.S. This particular car was disposed of by the works complete with an engine, trim etc but minus that all important registration document, as happened with many other ex works Minis. In actual fact the registration document may well have been surrendered when the Sebring car was exported by the works to the U.S in March 1967 and sold on to BMC America after the race. All that information would have evaporated anyway once DVLC was computerised in the late 70's.
 
Going back to the original question, Abingdon started to paint the roof panel white on their Tartan Red Minis by mid '62. That's some fifteen months after Ralph Broad first did it on his rally Mini '111 CON' , as pictured on the 1960 Monte Carlo Rally.

Abingdon didn't so much swap body shells as swap number plates onto entirely new cars supplied by Longbridge...yes, that also happened, but then they would have been stripped and built to the homologation standard required for the next event and any tricks added...to hell with cost effective, it was an homolgation requirement!

As for "factory welded body number (chassis numbers were just screwed on and easily swapped)"...wrong! body numbers were stamped!
 

[Catalina Park]

Mick, in England they did thing differently. Nothing like Australian Minis.

[Lee Nicolle]

I cant believe that chassis numbers were not recorded. All cars here in Oz had to have the body no stamped. From memory the Mini number was on the inner skirt. Without it makes it very easy to 'doctor' a stolen car.
And in this case sell a replica as a 'works' car. Yes those numbers can be shonked too. Though generally the original can be 'found' both on engine numbers and chassis/ body/VIN nos.
Some of these supposed ex works cars may well be in period copys of works cars. Often I am sure BMC, or all the others would sell the good bits to the privateers too.

[275 GTB-4]

Catalina Park, on 07 Feb 2014 - 23:52, said:

Mick, in England they did thing differently. Nothing like Australian Minis.

Yep...understand Mike..my copy of Parnell has gone missing...but its the welding of numbers comment that got me...

Classic Mini VIN Numbers
Find out the true identity of your Mini engine. Using the VIN number stamped on a plate on the inner wing or bonnet slam panel, and also stamped into the scuttle on later models. There should also be an identification tag on the engine block with the VIN number on.

To decode your VIN number, scroll down to find the approximate year. If unknown, check through each section.

Re-edited information as sourced from MiniMania.com

1959 - September 1969

Early car VIN format is like this:
C-A2S7L-###A

First position (e.g. C-A2S4L-###A):
A = Austin (non-Cooper and S)
C = Austin Cooper or Austin Cooper S
K = Morris Cooper or Cooper S
M = Morris
R = Riley
W = Wolseley

Second position (e.g. C-A2S4L-###A):
= A-Series engine.
Engines for this period included: 848cc, 970cc Cooper S, 997cc Cooper, 998cc Cooper and non-Cooper, 1071cc Cooper S, 1275cc Cooper S

Third position(s) (e.g. C-A2S4L-###A):
= Body type:
2S = 2-door saloon
B = Moke
U = Pick-up
V = Minivan
W = Estate (with or without wood).

Fourth position (e.g. C-A2S4L-###A):
= Series of Austin, or Morris, etc.:
1 = MkI Riley Elf, Wolseley Hornet, and Austin/Morris Moke
2 = MkII Riley Elf or Wolseley Hornet
3 = MkIII Riley Elf or Wolseley Hornet
4 = MkI Morris
6 = MkII Morris
7 = MkI Austin
B = MkII Austin

Fifth position (e.g. C-A2S4L-###A):
D = De-Luxe.
L = Left hand drive. (no right hand drive designation)
S = Super De-Luxe

Number positions (e.g. C-A2S4L-###A):
= The sequential build number:
Cars produced at Longbridge and Cowley both started with the numbers 101. These were mixed up across all model types. The numbers extend to seven digits by September 1969.

Last position (e.g. C-A2S4L-###A):
= Assembly plant
A = Longbridge
M = Cowley

[Catalina Park]

Yes, in England the numbers were stamped. It is just that they are not stamped on the car.
They stamp them on a plate and then screw the plate to the car.
To change the identity you just use a screwdriver.

The engine number is stamped onto a plate and that plate it riveted to the engine block. It is very easy to prise off the plate without damaging it and reattaching it to another motor.

[Lee Nicolle]

Catalina Park, on 08 Feb 2014 - 04:56, said:

Yes, in England the numbers were stamped. It is just that they are not stamped on the car.
They stamp them on a plate and then screw the plate to the car.
To change the identity you just use a screwdriver.

The engine number is stamped onto a plate and that plate it riveted to the engine block. It is very easy to prise off the plate without damaging it and reattaching it to another motor.

I guess English car thieves had it very easy in those days.

[Catalina Park]

Not much different here. A Cooper S ID plate that was on ebay in 2012 is now a complete car on Carsales with a $30000 price tag. 

[BRG]

I think people are over complicating this.  Once Abingdon  (or Ford Boreham, or the other works team probably) had registered a car, they seem to have had no compunction in shifting the number plate around ad lib.  The engine numbers and chassis numbers were of no concern to them.  I recall one works Ford Escort that appeared on successive weekends as a right hand drive Gp4 forest spec car with big wings, then a left hand drive tarmac spec car with different X pack type wings, then as a Gp2 car without wings but with RHD again.  All on the same registration.  I believe that eventually Essex Police may have had a quiet word about this with Boreham, just as they did about hydraulic handbrakes with no mechanical connection as required in law.

[Catalina Park]

The problems only start when five people claim to own the same car when in fact they own five cars that shared the same number plates.

[Morris S]

275 GTB-4, on 07 Feb 2014 - 21:43, said:

 ....wrong! body numbers were stamped!
 

 

 

At the risk of this thread becoming a series of replies to misunderstood postings I'll just repeat and clarify that Mini body number plates were spot WELDED to the bonnet locking platform of the cars. Yes the numbers were stamped onto the plates. The point I was trying to make some moons ago now was that those body numbers were not simple to swap when moving rally car I/D's onto new bodies (Abingdon certainly didn't swap them) as they were welded (and this recently discovered car still has it's original plate WELDED in it's original postion) but the chassis plates (yes amazingly also stamped) were simply fixed to the cars with two self tappers , easily removed and more's the point easily reproduced to fix to a recreated car in modern times.

 

 

Back to the subject, yes Tartan Red Mini Coopers had black roof panels from the factory and yes you could probably cook your breakfast on them if on the Acropolis Rally or some such.

[RS2000]

Bit of a meal this isn't it?  

Since this is a UK forum, I assume we can agree that it's not normally necessary to confirm one's from the UK when posting.

To complete the data base, engine number plates on these cars were fixed with what I believe are known as drive screws - spiral screws with a plain head that are driven into the block. Easy to attach when new. Not so easy to remove (or rather to replace once you've ground the heads off to remove the plate, leaving the original screws still in the block).

I've also lost the plot on the Escort example posted above. No works group 2 cars during the works group 4 era - one followed/replaced the other.

 

We tend to use the term "re-shelled" because everyone understands what that means in a works Escort context. Most or all Abingdon Mini "re-shells" were number plate swops to existing straighter cars or brand new ones. The only welding on a works Mini body was to attach a double skinning to the body cross member the seats bolt to. That's far removed from Escort shells extensively modified and seam brazed (not welded) outside Ford or of works Mk1 Cortinas with strengthening bits added in batches on the factory production line, More similar to works Mk2 Cortinas without such mods - and usually new for each major rally because the shells were bent on the last.

 

It's a gross generalisation but it's likely that works Minis and works Mk1 Cortinas often did three events before swapping plates. Many works Minis did one. It seems likely the original GRX309D did one. The question now is what did the original 309 do between Feb 66 and Aug 66 (when its ID turned up on another believed new car)? Quite possibly it served as a practice car. We have one known example of a works practice car, For the 66 Acropolis DJB92B (almost certainly a new car on an old reg no in Feb 66 for the Swedish) was a practice car then used on the event by the BMC press crew and donating a rear arm bracket to a competing car. It was then disposed of (with reg no, which had become a bit too old to appear again on a works car). Did the original GRX 309D suffer the same fate (but with its current year reg no /ID retained for further use)?

Again, photos sought.

[Derwent Motorsport]

I remember here in Cumbria, when rallying was popular, meeting up with some of my club mates to go to an event. A local (well off contractor) driver had sent his team ahead with a smart Transit towing the rally Escort all in the some colour scheme. I pointed out that the Transit and the Escort had the same registration. Just then the owner appeared in a  3 litre Capri, also with the same registraion and off went the convoy to the event!

[RCH]

I would say that in the entry list of practically any rally in the '70's there would have been a number of cars where the chassis number and the log book just didn't tie up. In the case of my first Imp it had been reshelled twice using secondhand shells which were a bit better than the previous one and the shell went on to resuscitate another rally Imp when I broke it up. No one bothered much then.

[RS2000]

RCH, on 09 Feb 2014 - 15:17, said:

I would say that in the entry list of practically any rally in the '70's there would have been a number of cars where the chassis number and the log book just didn't tie up. In the case of my first Imp it had been reshelled twice using secondhand shells which were a bit better than the previous one and the shell went on to resuscitate another rally Imp when I broke it up. No one bothered much then.

Some, because, whatever the rose-tinted glasses wearers wish, motorsport has always had more than its fair share of downright crooks who wouldn't even attempt to disguise a ringer. As we have discussed above, very few would be so stupid as to not change the "chassis" number over to align with the log book. The shell number is a different matter, but not fully "checkable".  

[Lee Nicolle]

Catalina Park, on 08 Feb 2014 - 08:11, said:

Not much different here. A Cooper S ID plate that was on ebay in 2012 is now a complete car on Carsales with a $30000 price tag. 

The Police have not managed to ask Ebay not to accept these adds. I have complained to Ebay on several occasions but like usual just ignored. A very sore point to me as a car dealer and enthusiast of these cars. Crooks prosper and no fraud charges are laid!

When I was selling my Sports Sedan which started as a genuine XU1 is had so many people wanting the ID plates. Which have been lost in my shed. Or maybe been pinched as they are not where I put them!

[275 GTB-4]

RS2000, on 09 Feb 2014 - 15:42, said:

Some, because, whatever the rose-tinted glasses wearers wish, motorsport has always had more than its fair share of downright crooks who wouldn't even attempt to disguise a ringer. As we have discussed above, very few would be so stupid as to not change the "chassis" number over to align with the log book. The shell number is a different matter, but not fully "checkable".

RS I don't own a pair of RTGs, but I can understand how a works team could and did assess a "chassis" after each rally with a view to replacing, it with a stronger unit, as required and over and above those that were accident damaged. Chassis numbers might be changed over or it might have just become the latest car (new Reg) for whatever team needed it.

Crooks? of course there are crooks, in all walks of life, and in Motorsport you will always get the "rule interpreters" who aim to gain an advantage over their rivals...some, none too subtley.