Chriss

Hi Carboy0 and all I have only just noticed there has been some activity on the C2C forum. I apologize for not paying more attention. I have been focused in other areas of CT activity recently. Thank you Howard, Mike and Clive for advising, all correct. I hope to be making an announcement about the C2C22 in the new year. It is being planned even as I write and it should be a good one, if we can pull off our plan! It will be held on the 25th/26th June. The entry will open a few months after the announcement. There is some IT to do yet. There is normally a section on the website under events describing the C2C. I would refer you to that, but it is not currently shown. I'll see if I can get it reinstated.

Hi NIck, Chas & all The guy from Hereford should see this video, maybe it would make him rethink. It goes to show that there are very few people that really know enough about this subject to make rational decisions. To every solution there is usually a downside, and often this is an inconvenient truth for a group with a vested interest. Clearly BEVs are not the panacea that many make them out to be, in fact in the short term they make the situation worse because of their up front emissions caused by their manufacture. I have been sceptical about this for some time. I have just done the fag packet calculation below and am surprised by the result. My daily driver is a 1993 Saab 900. It is 27 years old and in good condition with 175,000 miles on the clock. If 14 years is a normal lifespan for a car this one had had 2 lives already, and in the condition it is in could have 3. The CO2 cost of this car has been approximately construction; 12 tons, operation, fuel 60 Tons, spares & tyres etc say, 4 tons. Equals 76 Tons or an average of 0.0004 tons per mile. The CO2 Cost of a BEV with a life of say 14 years? Construction 25 Tons, electricity generation 8 tons, spares and tyres say 1 ton (without a replacement battery) and 70,000 miles life. Equals 34 tons or 0.0005 tons per mile. There is quite a bit of latitude in these figures, but they won't be too significantly inaccurate. I think that this shows (approximately) that the lifetime generation of CO2 for a BEV and a classic car are of the same order. It shows that the BEV is, short term, more damaging to the environment than an old i/c car because of the up front manufacturing CO2 cost and the continuing CO2 cost of electricity generation, which is far from CO2 free. This does not consider the CO2 cost of constructing wind farms with their imported concrete and steel, mostly from distant shores, which can total 400,000 Tons for a very large wind farm. Nor does it consider that most BEV drivers will replace their car after about 3 years. Constructing a new car of any type is about the worst thing we can do short term, maybe should concentrate on getting more life out of what we have got already. It would seem to me that the people in the above video have some idea of what they are talking about, however the view of the man from Hereford prevails. We will have to work on it.

Chas, you wrote "On a recent trip to Hereford in my Stag, I was accosted by a chap in the hotel car park and confronted with the idea that I was single-handedly killing the planet. Firstly, I pointed out that my car was 50 years old - or had lived the lifetimes of 8 -10 modern cars and was made mostly of steel, leather and wood. Not plastic, lithium, cadmium, nickel and all the other heavy metals or materials that really are polluting the planet. Neither did it require extra miles of copper (mined in Africa and shipped here) to allow it to plug in, let alone 1000 tons of concrete to keep a windmill upright. It was, therefore, the ultimate in re-use and recycling and was a lot more eco than the battery driven monster that he was driving." An excellent response. Please may I quote this in my future work? I witnessed a similar incident to this at Wetherby Services during the RBRR. It is precisely the kind of thing that that we want to be able to avoid / deflect. A major aim of the scheme that I am working on will be to help CT members who find themselves in this type of situation and it is one of the reasons why we need to work with the FBHVC and other clubs and tackle this at a national level as well as club level.

Alistair 2,000 miles in a car doing 25mpg generates approximately 1 ton of CO2. CT during its events generates about 200 Tons CO2 pa. That would take 2000 broad leaf trees to offset that amount of CO2. But there is a problem, it would take about 15 years for the trees to grow big enough to absorb that amount and then they would only absorb that amount of CO2 for another 15 years.

Nick To plant the number of trees we would need to offset our event mileage we would need an area 1/2 mile * 1/2 mile each year for the next 20 years. That would be some garden!

Hi again Jason It is good to see others in the club and particularly yourself are thinking along similar lines. However there will be some club members that are strongly opposed to this line of thinking. It will not be easy to come up with something that most members support, although I feel from our past experience in 2006/8 with the RBRR there will be strong support from members who participate in events. Your input on likely levels of support from RBRR entrants would be most welcome, along with other suggestions. Club Triumph's contribution (at about 200 tons CO2 pa through events ) is infinitesimal. Probably members mileage accounts for more. Were we able to negate all our emissions it would not have much impact, and also the case if all historic vehicle clubs were able to to the same. The impact we can have is to increase the chance that when politicians decide to outlaw the i/c engine from private use on the road the combined historic vehicle movement can negotiate some exemptions. Also a further impact we can have is to reduce the chance of incidents such as the the one I witnessed (from a distance) at the services at Wetherby during the RBRR when a member of the public verbally assaulted one of our members and to provide for some response, if not protection. I look forward to further discussions on this subject. Chris

Hi Jason We have been working on a club wide CO2 neutralisations scheme at Main Committee level for some months following an initiative from Malcolm Warren. I have been appointed to the Committee to work on the details. We (CT) have identified the following main threats to CT: 1. The environmental and political challenges presented by the continued use of fossil fuels 2. The continued availability of fuels suitable for internal combustion engines 3. The active participation of younger generations in historic and classic vehicle activities. and are working with the FBHVC to dovetail into a soon to be announced national scheme for Historic Vehicle clubs with the following aims: 1. To support the FBHVC in lobbying politicians and industry to protect the Historic Vehicle Movement and to help create a united approach to self defence within the movement 2. To provide members with a counter to negative reaction when in contact with the general public. (e.g. RBRR sponsorship canvassing) 3. To give Club Triumph members the opportunity to neutralise the impact of their classic car activities 4. To enhance the profile of Club Triumph with periodic publicity opportunities 5. To demonstrate social awareness to the public and to encourage younger membership. Providing a way of mitigating our emissions is still under discussion, but covers the points that you make above. However there is no simple, straight forward and timely solution to mitigating our emissions (negligible as they are). There are major downsides to most possible solutions and some acceptable compromise will have to be sought. You correctly recognise an increase to CT turnover that may result from such a scheme. This is a major complication for which the FBVHC could provide a solution. Were it not for Covid-19 I would have introduced a CO2 mitigation scheme to the C2C this year. Unfortunately given the circumstances of organising the event I just did not have the bandwidth. The scheme I am working on will cover members' general mileage and include mileage during all events. It will respond to members input on how to collect and spend funds. It will be focused on countering the threats through a scheme that achieves the objectives. Details will be announced when we have been able to hold further discussions about how a national scheme would work with the FBVHC.

Hi Jason Team 154 is now the Not So Magnificent 7 We have a 1983 Acclaim, gold, 1300cc we hope! Cheers, Chris

Theo That would be enough for carbs, but not for EFI. EFI needs > 2 Bar.

That was what my impression was and that is why skin and rice pudding is involved.

Matt, if you still have a mechanical pump fitted it probably cannot supply enough fuel pressure. That's may be why you are lean. You will need around 2.5 - 3 Bar fuel pressure. But it may be another government Covid measure to limit drivers and passengers from breathing in too much infected air. Do you wear the obligatory MSUK air filter when driving? Or am I hallucinating and seeing Covid restrictions in everything I do? ......mmmm touched the keyboard must wash hands.

In addition to thanking the participants I would like to thank others who helped to make this event possible. They are Mike Bishop, Dale Barker and Ellis Stokes who gave their expertise on organising events, regulations, dealing with MSUK and generally being old and wise?! Howard Brissenden who prepared the Satnav files by way of a Road Book. Darren Sharp who avoided being run over at the start and disqualified all entrants. Roy Castle who wished he never got involved with Club Triumph and steadfastly refuses to become a member, but is happy to chauffeur me around the route. Craig Gingell and Clive Senior who built the website and Forum from which an attempt was made to manage the event. MSUK RLOs Cumbria and Yorkshire who were helpful in preparing for the event and flexible in adapting it. Headland Family Restaurant, Flamborough who could not have done more to be helpful and provided luvly grub, hightly recommended. Thank you all. Chris

Hi Dave According to the rules, you were at the finish, the route is advisory and you are allowed to get from the start to the finish as you wish. You finished! Well done and thank you. Hi Allan Thanks for the update. I'll phone them later today. Chris

Finally Club Triumph has got to run an event in the Covid era. I don't think I have ever seen a group of participants so keen to get started for an event. Gagging for it would put it mildly. The route we eventually drove was a bit of an improvisation most of which I had not been able to reconnoitre beforehand. Feedback was that a few thought it a bit too difficult, most thought it was great and some fantastic. We were not helped by the fog. The Headlands Restaurant did exactly what we asked of them and I certainly enjoyed my fish and chips and big breakfast. If you did too please would you give them a thumbs up on Google Reviews and Trip Advisor. They went out of their way to help us and I would be very happy to start their again. Chris Gunby has mailed me to say that after a night in Carlisle Hospital, he and Nigel Hill should be ok and will be getting home, unfortunately not so for the car. It looks as if Paul Smith, Dorota Malczak and K9 were rescued by superhuman effort from Dave Kirk and John Talbot, assisted by Don Cook and Ian Pearce. Well done guys. There were 26 finishers and honoury finishers. There was only one was a mechanical retirement. That shows the high standard of preparation from the teams. Great work. I hope that everyone did not feel that the event was over regulated. It felt to me that while organising the event 10% of the work was the event and 90% was regulation from Motorsport UK, GovUK and Scotgov. There is normally some regulation, and for all events CT has they have to conform to MSUK General Regulations and CT regulations that are event specific. This is why we have to have the Declaration and Indemnity acceptance. However, It was a consequence of the additional Covid Regulations that lead to the route changes, the Alston quiet zone, the lateral flow testing and me having to provide much more information to MSUK. I hope we won't have to do most of that in future. Thank you all for being so tolerant and for being so helpful. Building the new Website and Forum also created a lot of work for this event. It is the first CT event to use the new system. I hope you did not find it difficult. I have not had a number of the features that the previous website had, but I felt the system was easier to operate. A number of you would have bought t-shirts if you realised you could buy them at the same time as buying entry. From my point of view I need more information at the point of entry, as many entrants did not complete their information until very near to the event and some did not. Mass emailing all participants was one feature that we have lost, so I have had to address all my communication to the entrants on the assumption that they would spread the news to their crew. This happened in the majority of cases, but some entrants did not keep their crew up to date. I noted that some of the crew were keeping themselves up to date on the Forum. However, not that many of the participants were using the Forum and that I could not rely on the Forum to broadcast messages that everyone would read. CT lost lost the facility to broadcast text messages. It did not work that well and was difficult for me to operate. This year there was no facility to broadcast to the entrants. My mistake in transposing phone numbers from the web system to the Entrant information did not help as the numbers were jumbled in order and I could not phone individuals. I apologise for that, it would have helped me understand what happened at the accident. Next year I intend to operate a whatsapp group so that I can leave voice messages or texts. You will need this app for next year. I have used Google Maps to plan the route. It is easy(ish) to use and gives accurate distance and time calculations, but it is lacking in ease of transfer to SatNav systems. Howard Brissenden will be fully involved in planning the route next year and we probably won't use Google Maps, but other systems that ease the downloading to SatNav. I used SatNav to navigate for the first time this year and it does have advantages once you take the leap of faith and relinquish control. The main advantage is that the crew can rest and be relatively fresh when it is their driving stint. Although this event isn't the endurance of the RBRR the nature of the route makes the driving and the navigating much more intense. Looking at the state of everyone at the finish, if I had asked "Who's up for going round again?" The answer would have been "Yes, but I am too knackered to do it now." The above paragraphs indicate that for us all to enjoy the preparation and running of the event better and to be less tired at the end we all need to up our IT game a bit. I'll have to get a smartphone and gen up on SatNavs and we'll need more information at entry. Anyway to end, thank you all for entering and being so helpful in the preparation of the event. I hope that you enjoyed it and are up for it again next year. It would help for that if you gave feedback below, perhaps as what went well, what could be done better. Some suggestions I have had also are, can we have polo shirts as well? and now that we have had to do the event with a lot of daylight, would you prefer the events to be run say in June. This will result in more quiet zones. Some really love driving in the dark, some may like to look around a bit. Cheers, Chris

For those in peril on the roads.... That's magnificent. Paul it was Dave Kirk, John Talbot, Don Cook and Ian Pearce that helped you. Dave did actually finish and Don gets an honoury finish. Well done guys. Paul I hope you made it home safely before you ran out of dog food. We have never had that before as a reason not to finish. I am concerned how close that passing truck was, it looks like you are doing this beside the road or had you been able to find a safer place? I hope you are up for it next year! Chris

That's the spirit Matt. But McJim it was what you would call a nice day in Scotland!! Dark, foggy, raining, 1 in 4 gradients, corners so sharp you needed to handbrake turn, 7 hours between stops and don't talk about the precipices. Just an easy C2C really only 3 did not finish. When the tough get going....

Hogie, who has ever heard of oil dribbling out of a Triumph?

Darren, have you got a picture of Henrico Flamborgini's co-driverusse?

Ben, I am sure that you appreciate I was joking with my reply above. Unfortunately, the signs I was getting have not been delivered and we are going to have to improvise......with car number plates! 🔫 🔨 🔧

Hi All Julian Wadsworth, GT6, North Yorkshire, needs a co-driver urgently Does anyone know someone who can help out. They do not need to be a CT member. If so post here, or mail me, or both. This is urgent. If it is not sorted by 10:00 on Saturday Julian will DNS. In hope, Chris

Cardboard from eBay parcels and a marker pen 📏 📐 🔨✏️

I only wish you were joining us, Tim

I have solved this problem.

The restaurant will not have external signage and spacer markings will be needed for the queue that will doubtless form for vinyl and rally plate, T-shirt collection and registration ticking. The restaurant will have adequate internal signage. I have to report back to MSUK that the event had adequate signage. I can find something adequate for less that £20, but can anyone help do this for free?

Thank you Howard