Letters from readers, October 1962

N.B. —Opinions expressed are those of our Correspondents and Motor Sport does not necessarily associate itself with them.—Ed.



May I as an avid reader, congratulate you on being the first motoring journal to publish photographs of the new Morris 1100?

If readers care to thumb back to October 1960 (page 847) they will find two photographs of the new car. This shows that Motor Sport are really on the ball (crystal perhaps ?).

Haslemere David J. Bradley.

[We have received several letters reminding us of this picture, which was submitted by a subscriber, proof that our readers have excellent memories and wide-open eyes!—Ed.]

Jaguar versus Lancia 


I was most pleased to read Andrew Lloyd’s letter last month backing your opinion that the E-type is not a fully-qualified G.T. motor, as indeed is the Aurelia G.T.

It is with great admiration that Jaguar have learned that an all independent designed suspension is what is wanted for a well-balanced G.T. car, and people for many years could not understand why they did not use it.

But now they have it, they have certainly produced an outstanding sports car, with which no other manufacturer can compete so far as price is concerned. But Lancia has had the experience of independent units since 1922!

Thus this would explain why Jaguar have experienced many early faults at the rear—a lack of Breeding!

It is still an uncommon sight to see an E-type around the race tracks of England without its boot lid waving at the spectators. Wouldn’t you think they would have an Engineer at Jaguar’s who could design a machined catch that would not come open under hard cornering conditions, or is the body whip so great that it is impossible to keep the boot lid down ?

I thoroughly agree with Motor Sport‘s decision that the E-type does not qualify as a G.T. car. I wonder why such people as the late Aly Khan, Hawthorn and Spencer Moulton etc. have owned the “last of the real Lancias”? It could not be for financial reasons for they all were very wealthy men—no, the reason is that this is nearly a perfect Grand Touring motor car, in which all the good points of the classification G.T. are combined with precise engineering, Italian workmanship, and a genius in design that no other G.T. car has yet excelled.

Yateley. Gerald R. Batt.

American Automobiles


In describing your impressions of a 220 b.h.p. Ford Galaxie, you invited comments on current American cars from this side of the Atlantic.

Your readers would be interested, I think, in the Chevrolet and Ford high performance models. Each company manufactures an engine rated at over 400 b.h.p., which may be ordered in any standard body at an extra charge of about $375 to $400.

A number of heavy-duty parts are used in building up these cars, to assure an extra margin of strength. The remarkable performance offered by these modestly priced production cars can be judged from a recent test on the General Motors track in Detroit.

A standard Chevrolet sports coupé, equipped with the 409 h.p. engine, was clocked at 153 m.p.h. This is quite a change from the recent past, when Chevrolet was considered a durable and economical, but dull transportation car.

The comparable Ford, which develops, I believe, 405 b.h.p. offers equally impressive performance. Of course, these cars in the 400 h.p. class are not the docile, smooth, and silent machines that the ordinary production cars are.

The ultra-high compression, solid valve lifters, rather than the standard hydraulic lifters, semi-racing cams, etc., all combine to produce a hard, purposeful engine sound, and a comparatively rough idle, that is instantly recognisable. Such cars as the Mercedes 300 SL, Ferrari and of course your excellent British Jaguar XK-E, may remain the glamour queens, but it is interesting to see that an enthusiast who cannot afford such high-priced machines may now purchase equal performance at a moderate price.

Many thanks for your always interesting and informative magazine.

Idaho, U.S.A. William Mulhall.

A reliable British car


On looking through August Rumblings I am forced to smile on reading “one after the other.”

I own a 1937 series II Morris 8 saloon, which except for 1/16in. off the head is standard. 14 months and 20,000 miles ago the engine was fitted with new rings, big-ends and mains (a rebore being considered unnecessary). In July this year an afternoon decoke was performed to prepare for my main holiday.

Last weekend I returned from Venice (via the Gotthard) having clocked a further 3,000 miles, during the trip nothing was required except to replenish oil (one pint Castrol per 450 miles), water (½-pint per day during the hot weather), and petrol (45 m.p.g.). Although I must admit that the bonnet was opened many times to allow locals to inspect.

My wife and I travelled happily at 45 to 50 m.p.h. taking in our stride French and Belgium “. Pave.”

I am rather proud to own a reliable British Motor Car.

Leeds. James B. Coop.

Mini matters


Your invitation for comments about C41 tyres on Mini cars prompts the following observations. My Morris Mini Minor is now just over four months old and has done 8,250 miles, including a 2,000 plus holiday on the Continent. For the first 3,000 miles the tyres were run at the recommended pressures (24 lb.) during which period of super enthusiasm 60% of the front tread was spread about the roads of southern England and old ladies jumped for cover and the appalling shrieks which accompanied even fairly modest cornering. Road-holding under all conditions experienced was a revelation. During this period the front tyres used to lose about 3 lb. pressure per two weeks and the back about 1 lb. Subsequently the front pressures have been increased to 30 lb. which has completely eliminated all cornering noises and markedly reduced the rate of wear, so that at 6,000 miles, when I first moved the wheels around, the front tyres were good for many miles on the rear in relation to the wear rate of the original back tyres at that distance—some 20%. Up to this time none of the tyres had lost any more than 3 lb. in two weeks, but since returning from our Continental tour both of the original front tyres have suffered deflations, one by a leaking valve and the other a cut across the tread by some object unknown. Certainly neither instance was attributable to hot air from the radiator.

The car itself has behaved well with nothing breaking and no leaks. Our 731-mile drive from Boulogne to St. Tropez with wife, children aged 8, 7 and 5, plus 75 lb. frame tent and all the sundries accomplished in 17¼ hours’ driving time including four petrol stops and several for minor family emergencies is a tribute to Mini’s staying power—even if I did get a very painful right knee. Two longish stops of 2½ and 1 hour means that our total time was almost twice that of your E-type dash, but we didn’t exceed 75 m.p.h., we averaged 38 m.p.g., there were more of us, and a Mini is so much cheaper.

Harrow. J. Thorpe.



In answer to H. Eagle, Motor Sport, September 1962, I offer these figures in public for the first time. The car in question is 13 years old and has a total mileage of 134,000. It has been decoked once at 94,000 miles. All engine dimensions are standard and original. Oil is flushed and changed at 6,000; each alternate 6,000 is run without a filter element. The back axle lube has never been changed and has required less than 1 pint topping up. I don’t know whose oil it is, it was put in at the factory. The transmission was rebuilt at 100,000 miles the only other parts required have been for the brakes and two wheel bearings.

Performance-wise, 0-60 can be fiddled in 11 seconds, sometimes under. Normally she won’t give an inch to the latest V8s from Derby. A stop-watch ton? Any day of the week! Oil consumption three pints driven hard, petrol 24 m.p.g. when held under 60 m.p.h.

Best runs? Edinburgh G.P.O. to St. John’s Wood station in 7 hours 40 minutes in the rain three weeks ago, no pressing; and 3,820 miles in 4 days 5 hours, solo!, at age 11.

The condition? Even the clock still works accurately, and the driver can hear it ticking up to at least 55 m.p.h. The make ? That’s my secret, but these figures are open to official scrutineering.

I will NEVER sell this faithful servant that has NEVER let me down.

London. D. Blades.

The T.T.


Congratulations to Southern Television on their first-class presentation of the R.A.C. T.T. from Goodwood. And all praise to Tony Brooks for his always informative and often instructive commentary.

But need the Surtees-Clark shunt ever have happened ? When we were just lads in the Little Worplesdon branch of the Soap-Box Racing Drivers Club it was unheard of to change at mid-race to NEW tyres. Anyone lucky enough to come by such things always carefully scuffed them off with a few quick laps of the backyard THE DAY BEFORE.

Sunninghill. Eric Beetham

Candid Comment on the Rapier


Being the owner of a 1960 Sunbeam Rapier 3 I was sorry to have missed your questionnaire on this car. Nonetheless you may be interested in my opinions and experiences which are given below.

The car was purchased new in May 1960 and is used as my personal car on most occasions apart from commuting to and from the works which is done in a new Ford Anglia.

After careful progressive running in to 2,000 miles loss of oil pressure was experienced at 4,000. The car was returned to the works at short notice and this cure remained effective to 10,000 miles during which time it had been driven with considerable restraint, as I thought that the oil temperature was unduly high if it was driven briskly. This is the first personal car for some twenty-five years which was not initially fitted with a oil temperature gauge.

At 10,000 miles the timing chain was causing excessive noise and a loss of oil pressure again occurred. The local agents fitted the later pattern high capacity pump and examined the bearings which I was told were in order.

On fitting an oil temperature gauge my worst fears were confirmed so that immediate steps were taken to fit a proper heater/ cooler so that at all times the oil temperature is now maintained at 180°F. plus or minus 10°; the oil temperature reaching 120°F. within five minutes of starting. The car has since been driven as briskly as its very limited performance enables it to be with no further troubles at all.

At 22,000 miles its performance having always been disappointing had reached the stage where the car was an infuriating blunt instrument quite incapable of dealing with traffic and feeling its great weight, particularly on hills. As there was very much that I liked about the car very diffidently I decided to sharpen it. The results were very encouraging and the process was finished off by the attentions of a phrenologist. The car is now a pleasantly keen blade and suits my requirements better than any other car at present providing four seats, a drophead body and reasonable performance and refinement. The brakes have been first class and recent examination shows them as being likely to be good for some 50,000 miles before relining is necessary. The steering to my mind is very good indeed being reasonably light, positive, predictable and fortunately being one of the few cars which are not fussy as to frontwheel balance as is for instance the Morris Minor. The seating is first class, the position of the foot pedals, steering wheel, horn, traffic signal, overdrive very good indeed, but the arrangement of the instruments and switches being apparently carried out by a pixilated and irresponsible artist. The only trouble which has been experienced with the motor is incurable door rattles and the regular falling off of the inner cap of the front wheel hub. The car was ordered with a leathercloth hood, but a black nylon one was supplied and I was told “accept or wait three months.” This as I feared is a most unsatisfactory material soon becoming shabby, having to be replaced in approximately eighteen months.

I am at a complete loss to understand such of the management of Rootes Group with whom I have been in touch, as there are parts of the car which are of a very high standard and others which are deplorably low. When these lows are pointed out to the management they are completely uninterested, though they have been helpful when actual trouble, as in the case of the low oil pressure, has occurred.

They have designed a good chassis and have a fairly good engine, but have not taken the trouble to point out to the chassis designer that it is desirable to carry a spare wheel and that it is also found to be good practice to expose the sump to a flow of air. They are too lazy to place the grease nipples and oil ways of the front steering and suspension system in the right place or to state in their Owners’ Hand Book greasing charts and workshop manuals, that it is essential to jack up the suspension linkage/chassis when greasing the steering to overcome the aforementioned difficulty.

Prior to purchasing the car I contacted my acquaintances in the Automobile press and was told that a number of Rapiers had most unsatisfactory steering. The steering on my car was initially all right, but gradually became worse up to 10,000 miles when greasing every 500 miles was not adequate. I thereupon took the car to the local main dealers with whom I have been dealing since and was able to find out subsequently the necessity for the procedure outlined above. With the modern high duty greases my car will run satisfactorily for at least 1,500 miles between greasing.

The general level of mechanical silence is high and has been greatly improved by fitting an Interior Silent Travel Set of felt mats. Wind noise around the top of the windscreen reaches fantastic and deafening levels; though I have carried out some tests I have not been able, due to lack of further time, to secure a cure.

The car is, of course, very much too heavy being almost the weight of an American Compact. In road trim my car weighs 2,400 lb., whereas with any intelligence a small car of this size should not exceed 2,000 lb., but with skill and knowledge intelligently applied together with the use of modern materials there is no reason why the weight should be greater than 1,600 to 1,700 lb.

Petrol consumption of the standard car is ridiculously high as I only obtained 22 miles per gallon on a long run, this reducing to 20 miles per gallon after fitting the oil cooler. On general knock about use with no journey less than six miles I have obtained 25 m.p.g. This is about 4 miles to the gallon less than my previous car, a modified Austin A90 Atlantic drophead, in spite of the latter’s 3,400 lb. and top speed at substantially over 100 m.p.h.

Thundersley. O. B. Greeves.

Dunlop on the defensive 


Some of your readers’ recent observations about Dunlop tyres seem to me to deserve comment. The difficulty is to know where to start, because so many different points are involved. One reader has apparently been unlucky—and with tens of millions of our tyres in use it would be unrealistic to claim that none of them ever goes wrong. Another reader sounds as though his troubles are the result of sheer ill treatment. And so on. Perhaps, therefore, I may just confine myself to the single, but important, question of tread wear.

Considering the enormously increased strains tyres have to face nowadays from greater engine power, better suspensions, faster driving and especially cornering, disc brakes and rougher roads, it is really something of a tribute to their makers that so many people confidently expect them to last as long as they used to. And they do! Drivers who are not in too much of a hurry can still make their tyres last thirty, forty, fifty thousand miles or even more. (Original testimonials can be seen on request, as the saying is. My own company receives a lot of them.) On the other hand, drivers who use the potentialities of modern cars to the full must expect to scrape their tread rubber away comparatively quickly. As a matter of interest, our test drivers can take the tread off any set of tyres in 300 miles or less, if they have a mind to.

Other factors also affect wear, for example the weather. Tyres lubricated by cold rainwater wear more slowly than those grinding along hot, dry roads. So if your tyres happen to last 1½ years, it will make a considerable difference whether the period includes two summers and one winter, or two winters and one summer. The effect of all this is that, in our experience, the limits of wear of identical tyres on identical cars can quite normally stand in a ratio of about 7 to 1. In other words you can expect a tyre to last, in rough figures, anything between 4/5,000 miles and 28/35,000 miles. And, as I have indicated, you can do better or worse than this if you try.

In this context the significance of braced-tread tyres (our version is called “Duraband”) are surely fairly well known by now. These tyres deliver two or even three times the mileage of conventional tyres—but only for drivers who push them hard. The ordinary motorist will not get much benefit from them in mileage and will be inclined to notice the disadvantages—the roughness and heaviness at low speeds. He may also dislike the different way the car handles. Motor manufacturers—who, notwithstanding the views of some of your correspondents, generally know what they are doing—fit the tyres they believe will best suit the majority of their customers, taking all the likely circumstances of use into account. For specialists with special problems the tyre makers provide a whole range of other tyres for various types of service. It seems clear that many of your readers (who, not surprisingly, appear to include a large proportion of “sporting types “—one of them says quite openly that his gear changes “are usually made at valve bounce”) would benefit from investigating the various specialist tyres available.

In case I have still not made my point, I can only observe that some of the finest motor manufacturers in the world fit Dunlop tyres (including, of course, some of the German makers that many of your readers greatly admire) and that our new standard tyre, the Gold Seal C.41, is being demanded by our customers in a volume which has surprised even our own optimistic sales people. It is a very good tyre indeed in its class.

London, S.W.1. J. D. Sinclair, Chief Press Officer, Dunlop Rubber Co. Ltd.

Gold Seal versus “X”


While others are on the subject of tyres, may I add my experience with tyres on my Triumph Herald?

These cars have a reputation for being hard on tyres but I was not pleased to find that the four Dunlop Gold Seals fitted to the car from new, were treadless after 7,000 miles—including 3,000 miles gentle driving for running-in, etc. I kept them for a further 800 miles then replaced them with Michelin “X”s, these latter have now covered 21,000 miles and have many more thousands of miles’ wear left.

Incidentally, I find that the old Dunlops are excellent tyres for using as boat fenders.

Armagh, N. Ireland. Noel Marshall.

Jaguar on Michelin “X”


I should like to endorse Mr. G. A. Marshall’s tribute to “that tyre.” Having seen the light some time ago I ordered a Mk. II 2.4 Jaguar with Michelin “X” as original equipment. This car has now covered 25,000 (6,000 in the U.K.) and the tyres are only part worn. I should get at least 10,000 miles more. The car is used in town and when outstation is driven at 70-80 m.p.h.

I have found however, that a lot of small things have gone wrong which are annoying.

(a) I have had six fanbelts and would be very pleased to be placed 5,000 on the list “when” Jaguars supply a decent set of replacement pulleys free of charge.
(b) Steering overhauled at 10,000.
(c) The rev.-counter at 17.000.
(d) The speedometer was repaired at 19,000.
(e) The battery replaced at 24,000.
(f) Rubber bushes are replaced continuously at high labour charges.

On a car of this class I find these faults irritating in the extreme especially with 190s at the same price and garage!

Malaya. “Ulu Jim.” [Name and address supplied. — Ed.]

The shortest model-run?


It could be that the shortest belongs to another Ford. About 1930 Fords introduced at the London Motor Show a “Popular £100” model.

I can remember seeing only one or two of these about (which may well have been works jobs)—the Popular (Model 7) which went so well when introduced in 1932(?) was in several respects different from the original Show model.

Sale. H. A. Franklin.


You mention in “Rumblings” in the September issue of Motor Sport the short production life of the Ford Consul Classic in its 1.3-litre form, and ask if there have been similarly brief lives. Three such come to mind from the post-war years.

First, there was the Austin. A4o Dorset, the two-door version of the Devon. It lasted about five months, I believe, from October 1947 to February of the following year. Then there was the other two-door A40, the Cambridge of late 1954, of which very few indeed were made. In fact, I do not recollect ever seeing one.

But the rarest of all these rare birds must be the Hillman Sports Saloon, one of which I saw in a Manchester showroom about a couple of years ago. It looked as if the Rapier and the Minx had been misbehaving themselves, for it had the body of the former, and the radiator grille (and presumably the works) of the latter. As far as I know I have never seen another of these, and certainly I have never met anyone who had ever heard of the model. I think that all these models can qualify for inclusion in a list of short-lived models, since the longest-lived of them enjoyed only one third of the life span of the original Classic.

Sale. J. O. K. Humphreys.


Yes, I can think of a modern popular model which had a shorter life than the 1,340 c.c. Classic. It was the 107E Ford Prefect. This car, as far as I know, was only a stop-gap while supplies of 1,340 Classic body pressings were delayed. In fact, I think, only 1,000 models were produced. If only 1,000 models were produced can one be justified in calling it a popular model ? Yes, I believe it was a popular model and still is in the second-hand market.

On another subject altogether, it needs little intelligence to discover why the Morris 1100 is so-called or why the Herald 1200 is also aptly named. I can also see how Mercedes arrive at 180, 190, 220, 300 etc. But someone please tell me why or how Fords arrive at the following :— E93A, 100E, 105E, 107E, 109E, 113E?

I have racked my brains but cannot see any conceivable way of arriving at these figures.

Upper Norwood. A. E. G. Fletcher.

[No doubt the mystery of the Ford type numbers will in time become as absorbing to historians as are Bugatti type numbers today — Ed.]

Oh Baxter!


Whilst watching the Italian Grand Prix from my fireside through the medium of the “goggle box,” I observed Mairesse’s Ferrari forge past McLaren into third place and pull 100 yards or so ahead. For the next five or six laps my blood pressure was pushed up by Raymond Baxter’s continued reference to McLaren’s “third place” instead of fourth. Eventually, to a crescendo of excitement, Baxter announced that Mairesse had just passed into third place, a fact that we in England were well aware of.

Are all B.B.C. commentaries as bad as this, and can’t they find some enthusiast who can keep up with the race? Up to now Baxter has been my boy, but ….

Harold Wood. Sheila Taylor.

The M.O.T. Replies


How widely read your magazine is. Two days after the publication of the current issue, I received a reply from the Ministry of Transport with regard to my letter to them 40 days previously on the subject of parking on the M1. (See my letter published in the current issue and your paragraph headed “Justice” in the August issue.)

Now, at last, everything is crystal clear. I have been given a most lucid answer to my query of what constitutes an emergency. I quote from the letter from the Ministry: Ref. RTC/51/5/02. I would refer you to regulation 7 (2) of the Motorway Traffic Regulations 1959/2.1. 1959 No. 1147-H.M.S.O. 5d.”

Further, I posed a hypothetical question with regard to this incident and the new law on police checks on drivers’ eyesight, and the Ministry refers me to M.T.R. 15(1) (a).

Now we know, don’t we ?

London, N.W.4. Barry Simons

Stupid crazy British justice


As a most ardent supporter of all motor sporting activities and a regular reader of the best monthly magazine Motor Sport. I am also a member of the Police Force, and I read with .interest your letter entitled “British Justice” in last month’s issue. Harrogate is not the only place where this could happen; there is another small town by the name of Otley not far from Harrogate where the magistrates are crazier still, to quote just one instance: A youth of 20 is summoned for whipping his younger sister with a dog lead, hitting her over the head with a shovel handle, then ripping all her best dresses up. Result: Absolute discharge; no costs. Same Court, same day, motorist summoned for a slight error of judgment, when in atrocious weather conditions he skidded on the icy road surface, collided with another vehicle and caused a scratch on the other car’s cellulose, no injuries to any person. Result: Fined £25 and licence endorsed. I ask you, is that justice ? So fellow Motor Sport readers and other motorists, don’t infringe the traffic laws in Otley.

[Name and address supplied.—Ed.] 

Are modern Concours d’Elegance becoming a farce?


In reply to Mr. F. D. Parry’s query, posed in the heading of this correspondence, I would reply ” Yes! There is a risk of this happening. if competitors do not study the regulations.”

It. is a pity that Mr. Parry did not allot-as much time to this study as he did in the preparation of the nether regions of his fine car for the Bath Festival Concours d’Elegance, the regulations for which (sent to all competitors) clearly stated that judging would take place under the floodlights, from a short distance Away. He might also have deduced that in order to judge some 60 cars between 10.30 and midnight, no more than 90 seconds could be allotted to the judging of each car.

To correct the entirely erroneous picture he has created, may I make some relevant points on the organisation of this Concours?

1. A Bath Festival sub-committee planned the setting of this Concours, including the floodlighting, marquee, dance, etc.
2. The organisation of the competition was in the hands of the British Automobile Racing Club.

In expressing surprise “that two organisers connected with the Bath Festival should win the first and second prizes in their class,” Mr. Parry is not only inaccurate but casts aspersions on the B.A.R.C. and the four judges—which would seem to be a piece of very bad manners.

Whatever your views on the conduct of a Concours d’Elegance, I think you will agree that your correspondent should be in possession of the facts before he embarks on controversial correspondence of this nature.

Freshford. G. A. Cavendish.

The twin-cam M.G.


Might I add a note of encouragement to C. J. D. Russell, whose letter appeared in your September issue?

Early this year I became the fifth owner of a 1959 M.G. Twin-Cam, this against the advice of well-meaning friends.

Since purchase, I have completed 10,000 fairly rapid miles, bringing the total up to 31,000. This includes a 3,000-mile Spanish holiday. So far I have had to renew my water-pump and speedometer cable, the latter went whilst the car was being driven in somewhat arduous conditions in reverse. (I stalled on a level crossing in France!)

So far the performance is still faultless, a registered 115 m.p.h. has been reached with oil pressure never falling below 60 p.s.i. a fairly good indication I think.

My only complaints are as follows: Oil is consumed at the rate of a pint per 60 miles and my engine, whilst idling, makes a Scammell sound like a sewing machine.

M.G.s have assured me that both these complaints are quite normal!

It would appear that I am one of the more fortunate ones but I can only advise C. J. D. Russell to leave well alone.

St. Albans. J. M. H. Cooke.

Standing room only


I think I should issue a salutary note of warning to those members of the motor racing public who are naive enough to believe that a “stand” is a place where they can sit. At the International Gold Cup Meeting at Oulton Park on Saturday, September 1stt, in the company of a small party, I purchased tickets for the “stand at Lodge Corner.” Once inside we discovered that the enclosure was full to overflowing and promptly made a request for the return of our money. The stand attendant had no authority to do this and we were referred to “the offices” nearby. There, in the presence of an august body of gentlemen drinking at a trestle table, I was informed by their spokesman that a “stand was a stand and not to be sat on.” He proceeded to amplify this point by saying that the planks had been measured off every 18 inches and represented standing room for 400 people.

I protested that in many racecourse and football “stands” I had been allowed to sit.

At this he became very cross and told me, in effect, that if I wasn’t very humble I wouldn’t get my money back. Indeed, rarely have I witnessed such .a deplorable display of bad manners.

“A word means just what I choose it to mean,” said Humpty Dumpty, ” nothing more — nothing less.”

I’m glad to say that the people who occupied the stand remained seated in comfort and I hold the naive belief that the cash-paying customer will get his way in the long run.

Cheadle Hulme. James McCairn.

The cost of watching motor racing


Mr. A. C. Pritchard, who wrote in your September issue under the above heading, hasn’t given much thought to this subject, it would appear.

He has omitted any charges for the capital cost of the ground, or alternatively the rental; the track, approach roads, grandstands, pits, and other buildings also cost money to make and maintain; race-meetings have to be advertised if you want to have any spectators, and I have yet to hear of this being done free; property and employees have to be insured; local rates have to be paid. None of these expenses are allowed for.

Nor does he mention that the catering is almost certainly done by outside specialist firms, and their profit does not go to the organisers; indeed, they may want a guarantee from the organisers to cover them against loss if the day of the race turns out wet.

And, Mr. Pritchard, you can’t just find 500 people to come and work for you for one day, even at £5 a day.

You probably need at least 20 permanent staff at an average of not less than £1,000 per annum, if you plan to run four, or maybe six events a year.

Think again, Mr. Pritchard; where else can you get a day’s entertainment — live entertainment, I mean — for 12s. 6d.? If you can’t afford this, stay at home and watch the “telly.”

London, W.1. F. B. Grant.