856 replies to this topic

[38bfast]

The one thing that is consistent is that SCCA will rule to exactly what is written in the GCR.

[Bruce Wilson]

Yes there are a lot of missing facts.  People are taking the high road and i respect that.  Steve S offers a way to get this opened up so we aren't associating any builders to the parts in question. I hope somebody takes him up on his offer.

[Bench Racer]

Has anyone viewed an OEM plunge cut where the primary or a secondary OEM process massaged the machined edge of the plunge cut? Post a picture.

[Danny Steyn]

A group of principled guys had proof of what was going on, and probably feel that it is just one small violation among the many that they commit. So instead of calling them and discussing it, they salivate at the opportunity to embarrass them on the largest stage.

Dr Domm. I find your post to be in poor taste. I have nothing to do with the protest nor do I know the protesters, but to insinuate that they were "salivating" to "embarrass them" would mean YOU must know them well and know their intentions.

There have been grumblings behind the scenes for a long time that things are not quite right, and this was an attempt to correct it.

Someone eloquent person posted on Facebook that what we have here is like a market correction on Wall Street. Corrections are good as they reign in runaway bull markets that ultimately crash. Here the class is being policed, as any good club should be, by its members, and this is a VITAL function of the market/class. Just my opinion.

[Ron Alan]

Anyone remember whistlegate? Cliff Brown put his name on the protest(though not alone i'm sure)and essentially blew the lid off a known problem that was driving some back east nuts(maybe out here to), It was done at a big event with multiple top drivers and came pretty stealth. SCCA in the end chose to follow the written procedure they had to perform the whistle test which deemed all legal. But the first test performed deemed all but 1 I believe illegal...opening the eyes of many to a loop hole. How big was that hole? Obviously big enough that some engine builders felt it was worth the risk knowing a CC tech was virtually impossible. Funny I saw know one crucify Cliff or accuse him of poor timing...in fact just the opposite...a lot of high 5's. 

 

For anyone to suggest the timing of this was suspect I don't feel is thinking it through. At what point would all the big players be in one spot competing? Especially those you felt were non-compliant as you interpreted the rules that you may never race against again? As was the whistler issue, the STR issue was also out there...incuding several public posts here and several conversations behind the scenes with some of the players. As Jim said, they took all there heads off and looked at them when they arrived in CA. He knew of a potential protest...not sure if he shared with others.

 

So I guess it boils down to this. 2 groups of people...including engine builders on both sides, read the rules and came to 2 different conclusions. One conclusion had the potential to offer small gains in performance over the other. Both groups felt their conclusion was correct. These 2 conclusions hit the jury this week and one group lost...along with that loss a lot of truly innocent people got hurt in the process. As was said nicely before, SCCA followed what they had in front of them and were consistent as with prior issues.

 

So as SCCA moves forward the next question is...which group will they "clarify" for?

 

 

MPR22,

 

Your clarification on the last sentence of rule #4 was excellent! Much better than the carpenter version i wrote early on 

[Ron Alan]

For the most part i'm glad to see civil posts the last couple days. An exchange of ideas and opinions goes a lot further than personal attacks. And its always good when Lambchop comes in with his one liners! Its important to remember outside our little community right here know one gives a rats asss(ok, maybe a few!). I've been accused at the track of cavorting with the enemy...but those who know me know I make friends with anyone(who wants enemies?) who will let me hang around  and drink their beer! Kidding aside...being respectful and giving respect here goes a long way. 

 

Thanks to Jim, Dan, Louis for what they had to say.

 

Back to the discussion!

[Bruce Wilson]

Its important to remember outside our little community right here know one gives a rats asss(ok, maybe a few!). 

 

Well the media is now weighing in (Jalopnic and motorsport.com),  Lisa Noble is being asked for comment and BOD conversations are in full bloom.  Due to the enormity of the class and negative SCCA publicity, could policing ourselves become a thing of the past?

[Longdaddy]

Even if the most surreal and  paranoid scheme one can concieve, around what Brian states, was true (i.e. someone somehow sitting on the smoking gun for a year waiting to inflict maximum damage on other competitors and their most vulnerable moment*), even "taking an issue with it", as Brian put it, is holding Ken and Will to a higher standard than any of those who was protested, or the shops who built their motors - as former had obligations to stay compliant, and latter had responsibilies to their businesses and the club/class to which they are marketing/selling their products to. At the same time, any effort Ken or Will (or anyone else) could have made to help others to be compliant in advance of run-offs, is something neigher required nor suggested by the rules of the competition, or, for that matter, common sense.

 

If anyone is truly convinced Will should have done something differently, your point would be far more credible if you come forth with narratives of how you discovered your competitor was non-compliant, and did your best to minimize damage to them. I am sure this happens occasionally, but if that's the expected standard, that must happen often. At least, more often than people entering competitions in non-compliant cars.

 

Holding those who raise serious issues with behaviors that damage us all to a standard higher than what we hold ourselves to (as "regular non-protesting competitors who cannot tell an exhaust valve from the connecting rod") will create far more serious issues than juvenile taunts from jalopnik or 2014 trophies being rearranged - either would be forgotten shortly by most, while the reputation of all of us, and the club we are members of, will be affecting every race weekend we go to (or choose not to go to anymore).

 

 

Like most, I don't open up my motor to verify it's legal but it's my car, my responsibility to field a compliant entry and my 3rd place thrown away.  I accept all those things and hold no hard feelings toward Will and Ken for the protest itself. 

 

However, I do take issue with the fact that Will and Ken have known about this for a year since they took possession of some high-performing cylinder heads from well-known engine builders.  For 12 months, they had a long list of options for addressing it ranging from making their fellow competitors aware of their suspicions, to contacting the SMAC/CRB for clarification to protesting at a regional or Majors event.  A lot of collateral damage might have been avoided by taking action before the Runoffs.

 

*an insane theory, as fas as my opinions on this go, and hopefully not something anyone is attempting to imply.

[Ron Alan]

Back up a couple years...does the "go, no go" tool have to do with the width/diameter of the plunge cut? Or is it measuring something on the valve seat?

[FTodaro]

Anyone remember whistlegate? Cliff Brown put his name on the protest(though not alone i'm sure)and essentially blew the lid off a known problem that was driving some back east nuts(maybe out here to), It was done at a big event with multiple top drivers and came pretty stealth. SCCA in the end chose to follow the written procedure they had to perform the whistle test which deemed all legal. But the first test performed deemed all but 1 I believe illegal...opening the eyes of many to a loop hole. How big was that hole? Obviously big enough that some engine builders felt it was worth the risk knowing a CC tech was virtually impossible. Funny I saw know one crucify Cliff or accuse him of poor timing...in fact just the opposite...a lot of high 5's. 

 

For anyone to suggest the timing of this was suspect I don't feel is thinking it through. At what point would all the big players be in one spot competing? Especially those you felt were non-compliant as you interpreted the rules that you may never race against again? As was the whistler issue, the STR issue was also out there...incuding several public posts here and several conversations behind the scenes with some of the players. As Jim said, they took all there heads off and looked at them when they arrived in CA. He knew of a potential protest...not sure if he shared with others.

 

So I guess it boils down to this. 2 groups of people...including engine builders on both sides, read the rules and came to 2 different conclusions. One conclusion had the potential to offer small gains in performance over the other. Both groups felt their conclusion was correct. These 2 conclusions hit the jury this week and one group lost...along with that loss a lot of truly innocent people got hurt in the process. As was said nicely before, SCCA followed what they had in front of them and were consistent as with prior issues.

 

So as SCCA moves forward the next question is...which group will they "clarify" for?

 

 

MPR22,

 

Your clarification on the last sentence of rule #4 was excellent! Much better than the carpenter version i wrote early on 

A Daytona regional is not the runoffs. In an effort to send a message to the motor builder took out some guys who truly were collateral, I am not faulting Ken or Will I am saying I would have done it differently because i could have achieved the same result without the collateral damage in my opinion.

 

I too am glad that we can share our opinions without making personal attacks, but I am going to share my opinion.

[High Chair]

All I know is that I along with many others have made our feelings clear for the last few years that the arms race in Spec Miata has gotten out of control. It has truly become a case of the have and have nots with the end result being that the average SM entrant has been left behind and really has no chance at winning a race. This is not what Spec Miata is/was about! Computers, fuel, compression, bent parts, angled valve jobs, plunge cuts, etc, etc. Throw in the variations caused by engine builders trying to make their engines the best and you get what we have today. I'm as guilty as anyone but I hope going forward that we get a handle on it once and for all to improve the class for everyone. If I have to junk my head and go find a core than so be it. If the powers that be can write rules that can keep all engine builders within one or two HP using the current heads I'm ok with that as well. There is no better time than right now to make the needed changes to our class.  At this point everyone knows what happened at the SIC and Runoffs; the question is what are we going to about it? 

[DrDomm]

Dr Domm. I find your post to be in poor taste. I have nothing to do with the protest nor do I know the protesters, but to insinuate that they were "salivating" to "embarrass them" would mean YOU must know them well and know their intentions.

There have been grumblings behind the scenes for a long time that things are not quite right, and this was an attempt to correct it.

Someone eloquent person posted on Facebook that what we have here is like a market correction on Wall Street. Corrections are good as they reign in runaway bull markets that ultimately crash. Here the class is being policed, as any good club should be, by its members, and this is a VITAL function of the market/class. Just my opinion.

 

Danny, it's always a risk to post something on this site...especially for someone who isn't at the front of the grid, doesn't have the history in the sport as others, has never assembled an engine, and doesn't know everyone involved.

 

That said, I spent hours trying to understand what happened (with my limited mechanical understanding) and then posted what the situation looks like from a distance (to someone who just assumes the parts he buys are compliant).  I started my description of them by using the word "principled".  That was meant as a compliment, but you missed it.  Anyway, that is the sense I get about these guys (Will and Ken, specifically referenced here).

 

But instead of taking the high road, and calling or sending letters to engine builders/competitors, asking for a clarification from SCCA, or blatantly posting their perception of mass non-compliance here (not that vague NASA post from Ken), they waited until the biggest race of the year to file a mass protest.  I used strong language ("salivate" and "embarrass") purposefully to illustrate what this looks like.  Until someone posts that they tried to fix this situation in a friendly manner first, I'll assume that they sat on the information waiting to get people disqualified, instead of trying to get people to be compliant before they loaded their cars up for a long/expensive journey.  To me, that's poor taste.

 

Perhaps I'm naive, and the only way to make people play fair is to catch them in the act and expose them.  But I like to think that there's a better way than what happened (to the drivers).

[LarryKing]

 

they waited until the biggest race of the year to file a mass protest

 

Ya gotta admit - it got everyone's attention.

 

Not sure sidling-up to folks in the paddock would have had much long-term effect.

[Bench Racer]

Posted information from Jim Drago:

"When handed the final decision from the COA, we were told, ”We feel the rules are need to be addressed, we feel the heads in question are what most are running and we have asked the CRB to clarify the rules in such that these heads are all compliant for 2015”. So what is non compliant today, will be compliant in a few months. Not my doing, not CRB, not SMAC but coming right from the highest court of the SCCA."

 

My take from the above if it's 100% factual, sweep it under the carpet, slide the rule in a wrong direction for OUR class. This above decision has a continious impact on all of us. If there are no consequences for peoples actions (not following written rules) a few years down stream Spec Miata will become added to the production car class or other bigger bucks class. This rule sliding is exactly how the production car class became wildly out of control. During the mid 1990's overall production class rules were changed to what was called limited prep rules to rein in the COSTS, hopefully gettting more cars on track. Today these limited prep rules are called prep level 2. 

[Todd Green]

 is something neigher required nor suggested by the rules of the competition, or, for that matter, common sense.

Unless you are running a NASA sanctioned race:

 

17.6 Bad Faith Protests
Any competitor, entrant, or team member having knowledge or suspicion of illegal parts or modifications to
another competitor’s vehicle has an obligation to immediately disclose that information to that team, or to the
Race Director.. Filing a protest in violation of these rules will cause action to be taken against the protestor.
This will not however, affect the acceptance, rejection, or outcome of the protest.

 

Now, that is the rule, not my opinion.  I don't have any issue with what the protesters did at the Runoffs.  What I would hope the above rule is for is the case when someone unknowingly has a non-compliant car.  Case in point, I bought my car already built from someone who was getting out of racing.  It was missing the weather strip at the back of the engine bay.  Never having seen a Miata before I had no idea, so a competitor pointed it out and I got one installed for the next race weekend.  Much better than going through a protest process.  It also had the side benefit that I started comparing it to other cars to see what else could be wrong and found out that my exhaust kept breaking because the tranny bracket was missing.

 

Anyway, on the other end of the spectrum if someone is blatantly cheating, say they put in an aluminum flywheel, I think the above rule is silly and they should be taken to task with a protest and appropriate punishment.

 

Also just a heads up in case this rolls over to the Western Championships.

[pat slattery]

The year before the latest head rule specs were created the rumor was that the top 5 or 6 finishers could have been dq'ed, but were all sent thru with the new rules that we now have

[Todd Green]

But instead of taking the high road, and calling or sending letters to engine builders/competitors

Our justice system is pretty much based on the idea that the punishment has to outweigh the benefits of the crime. If you can gain a "competitive advantage" in racing and the only repercussion if you get caught is for someone to say "stop that", then why would you not keep doing such? (If that is your nature.)  It's naive to think that they'll just not move to some other gray area (or already are and just haven't been caught yet).

[Dave Cox]

This needs to be constructively discussed here, but let's not lose sight that no matter what is said on the internet boards letters still need to be sent into the CRB both with solutions and, for those with less of an understanding of how to fix the rule, desire on which way the rule should go- for the clarification to allow the heads found non-compliant or not. The more submissions on what we, as competitors, want, not just the rule wording, the more understanding the CRB will have as to what the competitors want and determine if the proposals fit the desires.

[pmiranda]

If we could all use sealed crate engines then that would be ideal, but apparently in SRF where the do that people buy a dozen engines and keep the strongest one, so that avenue is not a solution either. That's why I said "as close to crate engines as we can". I don't know what the solution is. I just know that constant amendment of the rules to allow more and more things is 180 degrees removed from the answer. 

 

Hi there, I race SRF and look longingly at your windshields on rainy days. It's true some folks did try buying and dynoing multiple engines or sending in engines for rebuilds until they got better results, but the dyno window has gotten smaller so you don't really hear much about that these days, especially with the Gen3 engine coming out. Spec gas was a much bigger controversy at the sharp end of the field, and the performance dropoff of the spec tires continues to be a favorite topic of controversy. You're always going to have some complaints and inequity, but I think you see the small-budget folks higher up the grid in SRF than you do in SM. I doubt it's just from sealed engines, but I think that would help control costs.

I'm guessing the fastest way to get to engine equality in SM would be a claiming rule. I'd hate to go through that myself but it might be better than what just happened.

[CruzanTom]

 

If anyone is truly convinced Will should have done something differently, your point would be far more credible if you come forth with narratives of how you discovered your competitor was non-compliant, and did your best to minimize damage to them. I am sure this happens occasionally, but if that's the expected standard, that must happen often. At least, more often than people entering competitions in non-compliant cars.

 

I don't know the facts well enough to say Will and others acted improperly. However, you asked for examples of how things could have been done differently.

 

I have been peripherally involved with two situations where things were handled slightly differently. Both times a group of SM drivers suspected that a car was non-compliant because of performance. Each time a group of drivers approached the suspected non-compliant car owner and stated their concerns. The owner was told that a protest would be filed if the car was entered in another event. On one occasion, the owner withdrew the car from the weekend. When he appeared at another event the car's performance was normal. On another occasion, a different owner entered the next race and was promptly protested. One occasion was in the Midwest Region, the other event was in the Southeast.

 

Given that many protested at the Runoffs were merely drivers who traveled long distances and not engine builders, I might have given them an opportunity  to inquire with their builder and decide whether to continue. As for the ultimate protest, I have no problem with it.

 

Tom