291 replies to this topic

[Jim Boemler]

Keith,
What I can't believe is that anyone even knows the old moris code. I bet there are only a handful of folks who can understand morse code, either. But, then, I'm not an aerospace engineer.
wheel
dit dit dit da da da dit dit dit

Some of us can even spell Morse code!

[Blake Thompson]

Some of us can even spell Morse code!

what a Boemler you are.

[wheel]

_ _
_ _ _
. _ .
. . .
.

_ . _ .
_ _ _
_ . .
.

[Blake Clements]

Hello Danny Steyn, Hello Charbonneau? Comments on the new rules please.

[James York]

Danny has been handing out with Marino at Nutisystem so he doesn't have to gut his car in order to get down to weight next year.

[Tom Sager]

Hello Danny Steyn, Hello Charbonneau? Comments on the new rules please.

I'm sure Andrew "feels good" about them.

[Johnny D]

_ _
_ _ _
. _ .
. . .
.

_ . _ .
_ _ _
_ . .
.

- .... --- ..- --. .... - -.-- --- ..- .-- . .-. . --. --- .. -. --. - --- ... .- -.-- ... --- -- . - .... .. -. --. .. -. - . .-. . ... - .. -. --.
.---

[Jim Boemler]

_ _
_ _ _
. _ .
. . .
.

_ . _ .
_ _ _
_ . .
.

[Team Cochran]

I'm with Keith, this only seems to be another nail in the coffin for the 1.6l...

+25 lbs for us and a few mm less for all the others plus weight reduction?

Smaller restrictor plates equal less top end hp but very little effect on low end torque, so the upshot is now with more weight 1.6l cars will be slower out of the corners while the others are better off, this is the most important spot for increasing your chances of passing at the end of the straight!

Were there even any 1.6l cars within a sniff of the podium at the runoffs? Assuming not why are they being penalized more?

[William Bonsell]

Nationally, it would appear as if the 1.6 takes a hit, but up here in the Northwest where most everyone is driving a 1.6, it certainly helps me as I have never been close to 2300 lbs with my big ass in the seat. It just means those skinny guys run heavier now. As long as SCCA keeps running nationals on big fast tracks, the '99's will rule. But realistically, how many west coast guys run nationals. At least in the Northwest region - long live the 1.6. (Besides, I can't afford to build a '99).

Bill-

[screaming monkey]

is the s.o.s. coming from a 1.6?
This is really awesome! (not sarcasm)
This is really awesome...(total sarcasm)
parity=good
fatty needs to swat the donuts out of his mouth=long offseason

[Bench Racer]

I'm with Keith, this only seems to be another nail in the coffin for the 1.6l...

+25 lbs for us and a few mm less for all the others plus weight reduction?

Smaller restrictor plates equal less top end hp but very little effect on low end torque, so the upshot is now with more weight 1.6l cars will be slower out of the corners while the others are better off, this is the most important spot for increasing your chances of passing at the end of the straight!

Were there even any 1.6l cars within a sniff of the podium at the runoffs? Assuming not why are they being penalized more?

Geoff, if you call 20 second back a sniff, the yes Shawn Slattery got a sniff in his 1.6 in 11th position. All cars forward of Shawn were 99's. 20 seconds on a 4 mile track that is laped by SM in 2 3/4 minute is a LOOOOOONG way back.

Best 99 Q. time 2:43.330 R. time 2:43.899

Bets 1.6 Q time 2:44.487 R. time 2:45.406

One of the issues with reference to the SCCA 1.6's is that everone that drives/owns a 1.6 hides untill after the fact. When I start my rousing on this site the 1.6'ers get lock jaw. When I bring up the lack of parity at the current Runoffs site & it's the same site for at least 2 more years is the 99'er bowl the 1.6'ers over with their the 1.6'ers don't know $hit about preping, setup, driving & whatever else & the 1.6'ers shake in their boots. Yet some that own both have tryed the 1.6 at Road America to never bring the 1.6 back again.

The goal of national drivers in the SCCA is to qualify for the Runoffs & to enter. I totally understand the left coasters not entering the Runoffs, but that is still no reason for the 1.6'ers to lay over & play dead for the 99 owners. The 1.6'ers need to grow a set & support the other 1.6'ers. Don't need to tell you why the fast 1.6'esr other that Slattey go to the nasa year end event do I. There's a reason the 1.6'ers did well at Miller (no elevation track other than 20 feet), but had the yelloow 99 not had an issue the whole storry may well of been different.

Not to worry tho, the 2012 SCCA Runoff results will continue to have the 1.6 10th or further back.

[FTodaro]

As we all get older and fatter, I hope we can keep SCCA and NASA on the same page and keep raising the min wts so those youngsters do not get the drop on us.

[Tom Sager]

Geoff, if you call 20 second back a sniff, the yes Shawn Slattery got a sniff in his 1.6 in 11th position. All cars forward of Shawn were 99's. 20 seconds on a 4 mile track that is laped by SM in 2 3/4 minute is a LOOOOOONG way back.

Best 99 Q. time 2:43.330 R. time 2:43.899

Bets 1.6 Q time 2:44.487 R. time 2:45.406

One of the issues with reference to the SCCA 1.6's is that everone that drives/owns a 1.6 hides untill after the fact. When I start my rousing on this site the 1.6'ers get lock jaw. When I bring up the lack of parity at the current Runoffs site & it's the same site for at least 2 more years is the 99'er bowl the 1.6'ers over with their the 1.6'ers don't know $hit about preping, setup, driving & whatever else & the 1.6'ers shake in their boots. Yet some that own both have tryed the 1.6 at Road America to never bring the 1.6 back again.

The goal of national drivers in the SCCA is to qualify for the Runoffs & to enter. I totally understand the left coasters not entering the Runoffs, but that is still no reason for the 1.6'ers to lay over & play dead for the 99 owners. The 1.6'ers need to grow a set & support the other 1.6'ers. Don't need to tell you why the fast 1.6'esr other that Slattey go to the nasa year end event do I. There's a reason the 1.6'ers did well at Miller (no elevation track other than 20 feet), but had the yelloow 99 not had an issue the whole storry may well of been different.

Not to worry tho, the 2012 SCCA Runoff results will continue to have the 1.6 10th or further back.

Dave, I think you and others will be surprised. The new 2012 SCCA weight and plate rules are nearly identical to the 2011 NASA ruleset. I competed at 3 NASA events this year and if you would have tagged along, you would have witnessed 1.6 cars winning along with 1.8's and '99's. Frankly it was the closest racing I saw all year. I think we're all familiar with the results for 1.6 cars at one track. 2012 will be a new ballgame, Should be a blast to drive and watch.

[Mike Collins]

For all the 1.6 cars worries about the weight gain. Bolt on a set of Hoosiers and add 1 gallon of gas and you will be at weight!!!

[pat slattery]

No sense in complaining until the racing starts, but on paper, I think the 1.6 went backward. 1.6 gained 15 or 25 lbs depending if you run NASA/SCCA, and I believe the 99 got a 1mm larger restrictor vs last years NASA rules. Not sure why the 1.6 had to add any weight. That should have been the standard car to base all others against for parity.

If the 99 doesn't lose torque with the restrictor, the 99 will have about a 2 ft pound of torque per weight advantage. I probably didn't explain that right, but hopefully you understand.

[Keith Andrews]

For all the 1.6 cars worries about the weight gain. Bolt on a set of Hoosiers and add 1 gallon of gas and you will be at weight!!!

Wow, lots of weight on those tires. Are you saying 7lbs. of fuel and 8lbs of tires?

[Mike Collins]

Wow, lots of weight on those tires. Are you saying 7lbs. of fuel and 8lbs of tires?

WOW, someone with a Brain.

I love all the folks who post to just boost post count before they actually f'n look at ANY of the data or go out and weigh something!

I would like to personally thank all the folks who applauded the work done by the SMAC and NASA. As a SMAC member I would like to thank Dan Tilley for the countless hours he put in setting up computer models for the rest of us who lack his expertise. He ran and reran models with every variable we could dream of.

For the rest of you internet Einsteins, just bring your best stuff to the track and you will have a good race.

[Bench Racer]

WOW, someone with a Brain.

I love all the folks who post to just boost post count before they actually f'n look at ANY of the data or go out and weigh something!

I would like to personally thank all the folks who applauded the work done by the SMAC and NASA. As a SMAC member I would like to thank Dan Tilley for the countless hours he put in setting up computer models for the rest of us who lack his expertise. He ran and reran models with every variable we could dream of.

For the rest of you internet Einsteins, just bring your best stuff to the track and you will have a good race.

Mike, have a wounderful day. Turned a new leaf..........

To your first brain comment, no coffee yet this morning.

To your second comment, I need to do something for the site that's viewed as positive, the post counts.

To your third comment, how about posting some of these computer models results of a 1.6 & a 99 for Road America. Show folks that there is paritry at Road America where the premium SCCA event of the year is held at least through 2013.

To your fourth comment, do you call finishing 20 second back a good race.

[James York]

Geoff, if you call 20 second back a sniff, the yes Shawn Slattery got a sniff in his 1.6 in 11th position.

.

Yea, that's what happens when you don't stay on the track. But let's not let any facts get in your way!