Previously Proposed 2013
Ehrhart-Calvert Revision DRAFT
20 August\ 2023
The award is presented at each TEAE United to the owner of the car or cars that does the best in the combination of the Popular Vote and the Autocross or alternative driving event. .
(To be eligible for the award a person must participate in both a competitive driving event the Autocross and the Popular Vote.)
He/She must own the car that is in the Popular Vote and must own and drive the car in the autocross driving competitive driving event. The car receiving the Popular Votes and car being Autocrossed in the competitive driving event does not have to be the same car.
The person must have been a member of TEAE prior to the participation in the events. Autocross or the Popular Vote, whichever is held first.
The award is open to the owners of Tigers and Alpines only. Tigers must have a Ford engine based on the 260-289-302 small block V8 and Alpines must have an Alpine (Rootes 1600 cc or 1700 cc series four cylinder) engine. No cars with engine conversions are eligible. Engine modifications are acceptable.
The award is based on the combined finishing positions in the Popular Vote and Autocross driving events, using the finishing position (e.g. 1, 2, 3, 4…) as the points assigned. The award goes to the owner of the car(s) with the lowest total points. In the Popular Vote, the points will be determined by where the car ranks in the Most Popular Alpine or Most Popular Tiger vote. In the Autocross driving event, it will be based on the overall finishing position of the car in the Autocross driving event (by class).
Example: An Alpine that the person owns gets third place in the Most Popular Alpine vote. This would be three points. The person drives a Tiger that he they owns to the fourth fastest overall time in his the class in the Autocross driving event This would be four points. His point total for the Wally Swift Award would be 7 points.
If there is a tie in points, the award goes to the fastest autocross time next best driving driver with the best driving event finish. If there is no one meeting these criteria, the award is not made for that year.
There will be a perpetual trophy and a personal trophy given to the winner. There will be one perpetual trophy that has a plaque containing all previous winners’ names and will pass from winner-to-winner at each United. The personal trophy will remain with the winner.
If there is no Autocross driving event at a United, no award will be made for that year.
Award Background
Wally Swift was one of the founders of Tigers East/Alpines East. He owned an Autocross prepared Alpine and was the original owner of a concourse award winning Tiger. His prowess on the autocross circuits at regional and Sunbeam club events was always best in class and better than Tigers in most events. His red Tiger was a standard bearer for the marque and almost always won best in class and best in show at club and regional shows.
As a result of his employment with Chrysler Corporation, Wally was a wealth of Sunbeam knowledge. Wally had an ongoing personal passion for all things Sunbeam including his Sunbeam friends. This award is intended to reflect that Sunbeam spirit by recognizing an owner who drives and shows a car that is a prime representative of the marque in appearance and performance.
Yes V6 Alpines should be allowed as well as Harringtons, Hillmans, and all the other obscure Rootes cars-and Algers too. As the number of autocross cars at Uniteds seems to diminish each year why not encourage as many to participate as possible?
Thanks for the inputs. Several points have been made up to this point. My comments (italics) apply to both the Swift and Porter awards. I trust they clear up some issues and pave the way for amendments suggested. TT
Summary of comments rec’d
1. Why just Alp’s and Tigr’s. Why not other Rootes vehicles to encourage more marque participation?
I would concur with this suggestions. Keeps the essence of the award in place while allowing for other marque vehicles to participate, especially in “Other comparative driving events”. This does change the scope of the original award but not the spirit of Porter/Swift who would be passionate about this change.
2. Set a minimum number of participants at an event to justify the award?
I don’t agree. If one person meets the requirements, they deserve the award.
3. Maybe a driving event summary document with guidelines for the various types of driving events, and put criteria for engine size, etc. in place only where required.
Two points here;
A. Guidelines for event driving types are procedures beyond a rules document that these are.
B. Engine size/type issues arise frequently in discussion. The base line is that the Tiger must be a small block Ford and an Alpine must be a Sunbeam block. What is done to those engines is not under the purview of this document.
4. Why allow a 302 but not a V6 ? See above.
5. Do not delete “autocross” term in keeping the spirit of Swift/Porter. but add “or other competitive driving event”
I would concur with this. The primary reason to amend the Porter /Swift awards was to allow issuance of the awards when autocrosing is not offered at an event.
A second note from David Kellogg
May I suggest a ‘Both And’ solution?
Insofar as this IS the Wally Swift award, may I respectfully –and perhaps a bit scratchily, à la Wally ( as You well know he could be )– suggest that Keeping the word Autocross, whether we continue to have autocrosses in future, will preserve the spirit of the original award, and of Wally’s greatest joy? I mean, for Heaven Sake, he died doing it!!
In my outspoken opinion, to remove the word Autocross from the wording of the award, whether or not we continue autocrossing in the club– dilutes the purity of the spirit of the man I knew and ( just as You and others do ) honor.
What is the need to strike out autocross?
If it’s left in, along with competition driving events, his and his family’s spirit will be respected and his memory honored, in both word AND deed.
I’m not against updating things in the club by any means. Yet by NO Means do I feel that deleting ‘Autocross’ is necessary to achieve the goal You intend.
This may sound picky. If so, so be it: I’m loyal to the past along with embracing the future.
I’m reminded of a cartoon drawn by a friend who worked as an illustrator for the Boston Herald ( shows You how long ago it was ). A child was being shown a tree, which was surrounded by a fence: the caption read, “I remember when there were Lots of those. Just wanted my son to know what one looks like.”
Very Best,
David
This from David Kellogg
Hi TT,
I’ve reviewed the revisions of the Wally Swift and Keith Porter awards.
I didn’t know Keith Porter, though I’ve presented that award and was coached by you and some others who knew Keith, learning about his spirit and influence on the club as a result.
What I would like to address is the numerous changes in the Wally Swift category. I did know Wally pretty well, both from many phone conversations about Harringtons, and from discussions –sometimes heated– about Autocross.
My first question is whether the changes proposed are in response to fall off in the autocross attendance: is that the case? Are these changes being made to keep the trophy alive, in anticipation of there one day not being an autocross?
Second, when did a car being evaluated in the Popular Vote become a criterion for the WS Award? Has that always been the case?
Once I’ve learned your answers to these questions, I can better formulate comments about the changes you propose. At present I find myself wondering if Wally would have assented to these changes.
And, in the interest of clarity, would you be willing to specify what constitutes a “competitive driving event”. I think that, too, would aid in clearer thinking about the changes proposed.
Thanks for your listening ear. I look forward to learning more about your thoughts and hope you feel these questions take us closer to that intention, which is the spirit of my inquiry.
To be fully forthcoming, I have been privileged to receive the Wally Swift award twice, and hope that inside perspective may guide my further thinking on this subject.
Warmest Regards,
David Kellogg-Achin
This from Barb Geschke:
Perhaps a technicality here, but I question the inclusion of 302 engine for Tigers in the WS award. Didn’t we avoid controversy in the past (from 6 cyl Alpine people) by saying the criteria was factory motors only?
Also, recall that I had volunteered to look at the awards (see minutes we approved today). And yes, I should have spoken up right away but it sounded like there was an action plan. The changes you’re suggesting sound fine to me.
I did do some reaching out on this and spoke with a past recipient of the WS award, as well as another long time member/past president. Wasn’t as easy as I thought, as I got conflicting views. The latter thought any changes should be discussed by general membership. I’m not in favor of that, as you will get 15 opinions, each with their own agenda. All that being said, I again want to say that there should be NO issues with the changes in wording that you have suggested.
Also, I don’t know much about TAC, but it might help to explain what is involved in training and perhaps encourage some new people there. Was also thinking $50 cost is in the low side, considering the significance of the certificate.
All my humble opinion.
Barb
My 2 cents to kick off some discussion…
If we are going to revise the Autocross awards and if we are going to encourage owners of other Rootes vehicles to join our club, we should enable them to participate fully, so perhaps driving events should be open to more than just Tigers and Alpines. And how about the V6 Alpines?
There are some who feel that we should retain the Keith Porter and Wally Swift awards as originally intended, and there are some good reasons for doing so, particularly considering the historical aspects of the awards. Maybe these should stay as Autocross awards only and new awards named for other significant members be established and awarded only if that type of driving event is held in any given year. The costs for a few more perennial trophies can’t be too burdensome.
It may also be reasonable to set a minimum number of driving event participants to justify making an award at any given United.
Suggestion: Maybe a driving event summary document with guidelines for the various types of driving events, and put criteria for engine size, etc. in place only where required. (An Imp, Rapier, Minx or Venezia should perform as well in a rallye as an Alpine or Tiger.)
(comments apply to both awards.)