856 replies to this topic

[Ken SM94]

Sorry Jim, there is no "gray area" in this rule or anything that needs to be clarified.  Do you think that for one second that SCCA would toss 8 competitors from their most popular class at the premier event over an insignificant grey area that wasn't clear??  Give me a damn break!

 

The rules are very clear and that is why you did not win your appeal.  The rules specifically ALLOW a plunge cut and NOTHING else.  The only reason you haven't been tossed before is because tech hasn't been looking for it.  I wonder why they haven't been looking for it??? 

 

What pisses me off the most about this is the fact that we (legal cars) have been running at a disadvantage to these cheats for a number of years.  Cheaters have been walking away with contingencies they do not deserve. 

 

If you thought there might be something that needed to be clarified why didn't you ask for a clarification??  Seems like someone in your position might be able to get the answers if you were confused about the rules.

 

Unbelievable.

[Blake Thompson]

 

- We might be able to keep our engines for a few seasons instead of having to change them or rebuild them every year in order to stay at the top.

 

 

Yiannis

 

It's a machine.  And not a perpetual friction-less one.  Losses will occur and as long as there are losses due to wear there is incentive to rebuild it more frequently.  Removing or adding rules or nudging toward a "crate" engine (What does this even mean?) won't solution the issue.

 

"Magic is practicing a trick longer than the audience thinks is worth while." - Penn Jillette.

[Tom Sager]

Denny that is a lie! If true you would already be running b-spec, or what you consider to be the messia of all classes sm5...

... a little off topic but Kyle did you notice the avatar pic used by Mr. Dickweed?  Kinda one-ups (or should I say two-ups) your Farrah pic. 

[Brandon]

What's the likelihood of SCCA Enterprises being the sole source of head(s) for our class?  

Is that too much of a production challenge for their "small operation" considering the forthcoming SRF v3?

 

Could other rule changes be implemented to facilitate everyone settling on a single engine going forward if SCCA-E could supply a single head (01+ VVT for example)?

 

I'm thinking of my idea about putting all years on the same spec line (permitting full update/backdate across 90-05) and settling on a 2400# weight w/the restrictor.

Permitting 90-00 a specified aftermarket chassis bracing to bring them to the same level as the 02+ as well.

 

Give that a couple years to shake-out and then can move towards removing the restrictor or reducing weight.

 

Good idea/bad idea?

[LarryKing]

Kyle, I would buy an SM5 in a heartbeat if I had the means - and the SM discussion would be rid of me for good.

 

I'm stuck with what I got - if I total it, it's game over for club racing.

 

Believe it or not there are a few poor bastards like myself that do not have a budget to support multiple cars, or owning the most East Street cars in the least amount of time.

 

Hard to fathom, eh?

 

Messiah (spellcheck is so easy a caveman could do it - or not)

[Caveman-kwebb99]

Actually not hard to fathom... I am just pointing out that there already low cost alternatives to sm... I may even be looking into one or more of them albeit not because of what happened in the earthquake ravages state of cauliflower.

[38bfast]

Debruning / deflashing is a standard machining practice and is required to remove small pieces of metal that are left from the machine process. The problem becomes the interpretation of when does deburing become blending. This situation is just a case of rules that are not clearly written and are in conflict with each other. A rewrite obviously will be in order and then we all can move on. This IMHO is not that big of a deal to specify/clarify what can be done. The part that is troubling is that 6 people that have put there best foot foward in the race are now not formally recognized for their efforts. Informally we all recognize who was the best on the day.

[FTodaro]

Sorry Jim, there is no "gray area" in this rule or anything that needs to be clarified.  Do you think that for one second that SCCA would toss 8 competitors from their most popular class at the premier event over an insignificant grey area that wasn't clear??  Give me a damn break!

 

The rules are very clear and that is why you did not win your appeal.  The rules specifically ALLOW a plunge cut and NOTHING else.  The only reason you haven't been tossed before is because tech hasn't been looking for it.  I wonder why they haven't been looking for it??? 

 

What pisses me off the most about this is the fact that we (legal cars) have been running at a disadvantage to these cheats for a number of years.  Cheaters have been walking away with contingencies they do not deserve. 

 

If you thought there might be something that needed to be clarified why didn't you ask for a clarification??  Seems like someone in your position might be able to get the answers if you were confused about the rules.

 

Unbelievable.

Ken for those of us not in the know, how much of an advantage was this, do you have anything to quantify your statement. From the layman point of view it does not look like that it would make that big of a difference. am i wrong? if so, what is the difference.

 

I am not challenging your statement i am just trying to quantify what this really means.

[Danny Steyn]

So, if I am reading Dan's post correctly, it contradicts Jim's post. Jim's position, as I understand it, is that you cannot plunge cut without taking material from the bowl area or blending because it would leave metal  burrs that could get sucked into the engine. Dan says that the round filing he used in the bowl area was a subjective call and was not absolutely necessary. If Dan is correct, then there is no contradiction in the rule and its not an issue of clarification, but simply, as Dan says, a judgment call, and in hindsight it was a bad call. Do I have this correct ? Anyone care to elaborate on this?

 

 

Debruning / deflashing is a standard machining practice and is required to remove small pieces of metal that are left from the machine process. The problem becomes the interpretation of when does deburing become blending. This situation is just a case of rules that are not clearly written and are in conflict with each other. A rewrite obviously will be in order and then we all can move on. This IMHO is not that big of a deal to specify/clarify what can be done. The part that is troubling is that 6 people that have put there best foot foward in the race are now not formally recognized for their efforts. Informally we all recognize who was the best on the day.

 

It is these very conflicting opinions that need to be hashed out here. To all - this is precisely the sort of question we should all be asking, discussing and debating. Not to throw anyone under the bus, but to openly and constructively discuss the difficult questions that are not being asked for the sake of not pissing someone off. We need to be asking the difficult questions. We need to discussing this and so much more, openly in this forum, so that when the new rules are formed, that they accurately reflect the wishes of the class. 

[MDixon]

As someone new to this class, I am so thankful that I spent the last 10 years in Spec racing (karting). If I hadn't I would be selling everything and running to the golf course. Same drama different vehicle.

[Jason Holland]

The more I stay away the more things stay the same....  

 

I don't think the competitors were cheating but the circumstances of the class and how it's been allowed to "progress" have made them cheaters. 

 

I'm not up on the rules anymore and I don't know the details of what's happened here but the bottom line is, this class should have gone to sealed motors long ago and that's really the only way out of this mess. It's only going to get worse (Can it get worse than this last weekend?). It was time for a sealed spec motor back when I was involved. It's way past that time now but I think the competitors can use this incident (incidents?) as the impetus for real change. It might be time to get profit motives out of an amateur class. Now, back to my SM invisible hole.

[Blake Thompson]

one exhaust relief cut found non compliant.

 

 

what's that mean?

[Caveman-kwebb99]

what's that mean?

 

did not or could not pass the "go nogo" tool!

[Terrell Garrett]

I'm still stuck on the oblong cut argument and the question of how someone having multiple engines found non-compliant can hold a position with SCCA.  Doesn't wash with me and obviously nobody wants to address this elephant.

 

There are a lot of people here who obviously have poor or lacking morals.  To accept that violating the rules is ok is not acceptable to me.

[Blake Thompson]

 

I will let you guys start with me

 

 

Am I wrong to suggest you're in the position to influence clarity in these rules? 

[FTodaro]

It is these very conflicting opinions that need to be hashed out here. To all - this is precisely the sort of question we should all be asking, discussing and debating. Not to throw anyone under the bus, but to openly and constructively discuss the difficult questions that are not being asked for the sake of not pissing someone off. We need to be asking the difficult questions. We need to discussing this and so much more, openly in this forum, so that when the new rules are formed, that they accurately reflect the wishes of the class. 

Danny does it make any difference to you if there is no performance advantage to a Deburred  plunge cut vs. a blended plunge cut? not from the standpoint of a rule violation but what the fix should be.

[Blake Thompson]

did not or could not pass the "go nogo" tool!

 

 

In the exhaust, the b pipe or the header?

[Ken SM94]

FTodaro, modification to the STR makes a difference.  Anyone that says it doesn't or that it is "insignificant" has never flowed a head. 

 

I have one of the heads in question and there is no way you'll get a head built to the rules to flow like it.  We're not talking about knocking off the burr left on the edge.  The STR is critical when the valve is at low lift - initially opening.

 

The restrictor plate does nothing in one of these engines until 6,000 rpms or so.  Every RPM below that point is an advantage that carries all the way through to redline.

 

I have to say that SCCA almost bent over backwards to help us with the protest process.  Many times we heard "this really needed to be done".  We have to understand that we in the SM community are telling tech what to look at (through our SMAC advisors).  At each event the tech people are ONLY looking for the items on that list that is predetermined weeks prior.  Nothing can be added or deleted from that list.

 

If you want to be sure they are looking at the things that you are concerned about you need to protest.  We couldn't get a guarantee that inspection of the STR was on the list so we moved forward with our protest.  Actually, it was pretty clear they never have looked at it.

 

Having "passed tech" only means they found nothing wrong with the items that were on the tech list.

[Todd Green]

 

One of those choices was clearly a bad one.

 

 

Could you please clarify which choice was the bad one?  The one where you built motors that were over the compression limit because the testing procedure commonly used was faulty, or are you referring to the more recent STR choice?

[Caveman-kwebb99]

In the exhaust, the b pipe or the header?

 

exhaust valve area