” EXETER ” AFTERTHOUGHTS.
PAUCITY OF GOOD DRIVING.
THE performances of the cars in the 1931 Exeter event bear out the impressions created by the London-Gloucester in December last. That is to say, that drivers do not appear to take trials work seriously enough to consider it worth while taking the trouble to learn the job. Too serious an outlook is a bad thing in any sport, but a definite keenness to perform as well as possible is essential if the game is to be worth playing. A glance at the results of recent events of this sort will show that the first-class awards have been won chiefly by drivers more or less connected with the trade, and that they go to all sorts of cars which in less
competent amateur hands fail to get home.
The Exeter itself was an easy trial this year, and, run in excellent weather, it should have provided a higher percentage of premier awards. But many were lost through carelessness in handling. Higher Hill, which was fairly easily dealt with by the majority, caught out several drivers who were rather too violent in taking the corner, while there were surprising mechanical troubles of a serious nature more usually associated with racing ,such as broken pistons, run big-ends, and even a broken back axle. In trials, however, as opposed to races for which the cars are specially prepared, such breakages cannot be
taken very seriously, as it is impossible to know what wear, rough treatment or even minor crashes the car may have sustained in its past life, and which start some trouble which waits for the occasion of some slight extra strain to give way.
Meerhay was the worst hill from the point of view of failures, owing to the very rough surface, but here again it was usually a definite error in driving or mechanical trouble which caused them.
Two makes which showed up well on hills were Wolseley Hornets and Frazer-Nashes, while the performance of Hollinghurst’s M.G. Magna augurs well for these cars when more are on the road.