89 replies to this topic

[Brandon]

I honestly don't recall seeing the proposal being submitted to the CRB before it was finally voted on and approved for 04/2014.  Any references folks can point me to?

(and I'm a thorough reader of the FT's as they're posted; the CoA report is always a fun read)

 

Secondarily, if it's not going to be rescinded then I guess I'd better get my $25 checks written-up for the coming race weekends for mechanical protests before the group heads out on track.

It will be a challenge to the competitor with a painted manifold to prove their coating is in fact "paint" with no other benefits.

[Caveman-kwebb99]

I am sure you will be very popular in in paddock...  If your really worried about cheating, I can think of many areas in which I would protest someone and none of them have to do with a painted intake...

 

This mole hill has become a mountain, mostly due to a couple of conspiracy posts...

 

BTW the trade center was really bombed by the US miliatary in ordr for us to be able to start a war with Saddam.  Also our govt has been covering up the fact that we are being visited by allien space ships on a regular basis, and Jim Drago is an Alian

[Jamz14]

Brandon, I think the responsibility would be on tech to prove that it is a coating and not paint. Not the other way around. So you will lose $25.00 and some friends .

[Bench Racer]

Brandon, I did not see a word about this before it was brought up under the following.

 

SUBJECT: Errors and Omissions, Competition Adjustments, Clarifications, and Classifications

All changes are effective 4/1/2014 unless otherwise noted.

 

 

And the folks in the know are keeping their mouths shut. < This is what creates the mountain out of the mole hill. The other thing that creates a mountain out of a mole hill is when someones pet project is sold under, Errors and Omissions. Not allowed in Showroom Stock, not allowed in Improved Touring and not allowed in Limited Prep Production cars. Anyone that believes insulation paint does not exist needs to find a new pile of $hit to live under.  

[Bench Racer]

Brandon, I think the responsibility would be on tech to prove that it is a coating and not paint. Not the other way around. So you will lose $25.00 and some friends .

Jamz14, please provide one (1) peason to allow intake manifolds to be painted. If the intake manifold can not be painted the tech job is real easy.

[Jamz14]

Bench,

 

I can't. But that isn't my job and I don't give a rats behind about changing it. You guys will fight that and I will follow whatever shakes out. I've learned my lesson about being smarter than everyone else. Not my job to make tech easier for anyone. If you think I am coating my intake, then have at proving it.

 

If it becomes an issue, then the smart people will figure it out and change. Me, all I care about is going as fast as we can this year and I'll let you guys take up valuable development time worrying about stuff like this.

[Bench Racer]

Jamz14, I could if necessary prove your intake is covered with something just as I could if necessary prove your transmission and differential gears are REM'ed. If people wouldn't _uck with the rules as they are life would be so much easier for all Spec Miata racers. No one changed this intake manifold rule because they don't like the color of aluminum.

[Jamz14]

Bench, I have no doubt that you could. Next time I am back east and you are the tech shed inspector, I'll expect that my intake will be pulled and sent in for analysis along with 1/2 the other cars. If life for my competitors is harder, so much the better for me. There is absolutely nothing that I can do about this. If the big boys want this rule, then the big boys will get it, period. So while our competitors are complaining, we will be racing!

 

I don't care in the least why the rule was changed. My only job is to maximize my time and effort. I find that following the big boys is the best way to do that. Leaves me time to concentrate on the driver where the bigger gains are to be had.

[Brandon]

This is a rule change disguised as an E&O which if it was an E&O, there would have been previous iterations of the GCR we could reference that noted this now-missing rule.

Considering all the eyes scouring the GCR I'd have to say it was never previously included in our SM ruleset (I'm willing to be corrected).

Everyone should be against this rule-making process - as it's a new rule it should only be permitted starting 01/01/2015.

 

Frankly, I know of very few people in the NE who have their intake manifold painted so my protest threat may be moot from that perspective.

 

Jamz - I believe you're correct with that statement; there must be tests to validate said rule (see go/no go tools for head work, whistler for CR...) and absent any test the protest would be upheld and potentially reversed at the CoA with a further "E&O clarification" for a proscribed test (if the "E&O method" is considered valid).

 

Mountain == molehill is accurate yes, however, said molehill will quickly turn into the 'special paint mountain' which will continue the horsepower arms race in a limited-prep class

Notwithstanding the aberration of rule-making in this instance which everyone should be raising hell about.

[RussMcB]

Is it possible for someone who was involved to share the background of why it was considered and then agreed upon for publishing?

 

Like others, I don't care about painted intakes, but I would like to feel confident in the rules process.  Transparency and forthcoming would help.  Silence seems to be fanning the flames.

[Caveman-kwebb99]

Jamz14, I could if necessary prove your intake is covered with something just as I could if necessary prove your transmission and differential gears are REM'ed. If people wouldn't _uck with the rules as they are life would be so much easier for all Spec Miata racers. No one changed this intake manifold rule because they don't like the color of aluminum.

 

My honest belief and this influenced by my own thoughts and nobody elses.  The manifolds are being painted for one reason and one reason only...

 

Engine builders are in competition with each other, they want their product to be differentiated as well as they want the customer to go "Oh WOW" when they see that new engine.  There has been the painting of Valve covers for years before any intake was being painted and nobody cried foul then, so painting an intake became a natural progression to make the engines appearance better.

 

Maybe someone has some special coating, Im sure it exists, Im sure there are test proving it add a gazillion hp, it is like every new exhaust that is made and tested to prove it is better, I know you are smart enough to know that for every test showing one result you could do multiple tests showing the exact opposite results, all testing takes money, any reliable testing has control groups, money for testing comes from those that make products, so how do you think the results will be show cased?  

 

Again, there are so many areas in which people could cheat, areas that could provide much more, the same people who argue that a manifold should not be painted are often the same people who argue against invasive tech, there are a million ways to get an engine better then anyone elses, yet only a very few ways to get it the legal way, one of which is just plain hard work!  I think there are plnty of engines out there that would be ilegal if opened up in a tech shed, yet they are no more powerful then the best in class, yet this doesnt seem to worry most...

 

I know I will never change your mind on whatever you believe to be true, I have only posted here as I think a different persepective needs to be covered.

 

And Brandon, you will have to race with and against those that you may protest, you will have to answer for yourself how important it is to protest those people, risk vs reward...  What will you gain vs what will you lose? Hope it all works out for you.

 

I can say I believe having anymosity with others that you race with is much more dangerous then when they are friends or share mutual respect...  

 

I once had a alot of anymosity with another local racer, seemed we had contact a few times, contact made the anymosity worse, as well as made our compete level go through the roof which caused more incidents...  Not sure how we ironed it out really but I think both of us would say there is total respect for one another now, and there are no longer incidents, not that we are best buddies but I do like him and respect him now and I love to compete against him.  Either of us could have been injured in the process, thank god we did not, as I am 1000% sure neither of us could have lived with that result...  Just something to think about.

[Bench Racer]

The rule has zero impact to me, other than the process it is being sliped in under.    Back in the 50's production cars were what Spec Miatas are today.
When a rule pops up like a pinata under ERRORS and OMISSIONS, there's more to the story. But then, the CRB answers only to the BoD.

[Brandon]

I now wish I had re-phrased my letter to the CRB as I should have based my request for rescinding on two points: the non-factual basis this was an "E&O" and in actuality a new rule and thus should have been proposed, approved, & included for 2015 per the CRB's own guidelines for 'rules changes'.  

 

As noted, I don't recall ever seeing or knowing (nor have I see anyone else come up with a reference) anything other than a bare metal, uncovered aluminum intake manifold being permitted in SM.  This makes the inclusion of the new rule (my second point of contention) an improper one as part of our 2014 ruleset.

 

Kyle - like any other "unconstitutional law", it must be violated and tried to an outcome that ultimately results in it being overturned.  This requires the protesting of any/all painted manifolds whether they are being ran by your best friends or worst enemies.  Whether the procedure I have in mind is what actually plays out via the protest & appeal process I'm not certain but I'd hope people wouldn't take it personally.

 

However, if this "E&O rule implementation process" stands I believe we've found a significant circumvention of our "stable annual rules season" which the CRB has expressed in answers to multiple letters for not approving changes to cars/classes during the racing season.  And as Bench has noted, the CRB only abides the BoD so I guess we need to start writing letters to the BoD...

 

 

I'm not touching the implication of the existence of intake manifolds "painted" with performance-enhancing coatings but as others have noted, there is silence from other "rules observers" who have chimed in repeatedly about previous rule violations.

[davew]

I just want to know who is impersonating Kyle Webb? The above post is articulate, with proper spelling and grammar. There is not a single semi-pornographic reference or video anywhere.

 

Maybe the Drago alliens beamed him up and replaced him with my high school librarian.

 

Long live the CAVEMAN

[Jim Drago]

I have read all of this, intentionally not answered because after returning from a family vacation ( never looked at the site all week) this thread had blown up a bit and I was accused of intentionally dodging the subject and there was some big coup in the works. Then baited further to respond.. So to share the irritation, I intentionally did not respond :)Not fair to the few non habitual offenders not for me to respond . So hear it goes.

My position as CRB Member
This change was a result of a post Tom Hart put out about being potentially Dq'ed for having a painted intake. ( Yes, I know it was not legal at the time but many have done for a long time.) So rather than send letters and incriminate themselves with a letter, Wheeler and I took MULTIPLE calls on this asking if they were really going to get Dq'ed for this etc. I felt and still feel that it is a weenie deal, one way or the other. We have a CRB call tonight and we will again speak about this. The entire discussion is a weenie deal IMO. We never expected much backlash at all to be honest. This was nothing more than an attempt to solve a weenie issue ( painted intakes in tech) and created a different weenie issue. No guarantees the CRB will change what we did last month, but we will discuss and have heard your objections and why. Your positions are stated clearly and I WILL NOT get into a debate here. If you would like to call or email privately, please do so.


My personal opinion…
If you are seriously worried about someone applying a thermal coating to their intake, first you should try it and see what the “gains” really are. Don't read the claims from some web site. After you figure out it is a COMPLETE waste of time. Then you should think to yourself for a moment before typing... If someone is willing to paint the intake to hide a thermal coating, do you really think that is their first stop to the dark side? Really? That is about the highest and most expensive unripe fruit at the VERY TOP of the tree you can get. If people are willing to do this, believe me they have 25 things done to the car that are FAR more bang for the buck that you should be worried about. Now that all are so concerned hiding a thermal coating with spray paint, what would it take to check for coating? One spray of brake clean on a rag?

You can paint your transmission case and have it full of coated gears if you chose.. far more beneficial!!

You can paint your diff housing and again fill it with coated gears.. again far more beneficial

You can paint the valve cover and engine block and fill it with coated pistons, rods, cranks, rings, bores you name it. Again, FAR MORE beneficial and MUCH harder to tech than painted intake. But for some reason we have hung our hats on the intakes. As I have said at least 50 times in the past, if someone is willing to cheat to win, wants to cheat to win.. You will not stop them. At some point you have to live with yourself.

Here is the recipe for those that need to cheat to compete and have no conscience.

Cheat the hell out of the engine.. I mean really cheat! Just make sure that you whistle within compression range, make sure intake is not painted or ported, make sure exhaust manifold is not ported, make sure head is not ported from what can be seen by removing the manifolds. If you do that you could win EVERY race for your entire SM career except the Runoffs and never be caught less a protest. Just be careful when you approach the guys at the front, they are strangely in tune when someone has just a little too much.. They may protest. But never fear, most front runners, despite popular opinion are pretty decent guys and usually have a private conversation first and politely question the legality of your car as a potential mistake or some other non offending accusation. In short, you typically get a one time make your car legal before being protested, but not always.
So if you decide to continue to push and finally get protested.. You just refuse to pull apart and say you broke or didn't know how or some other BS reason and head home and take your penalty( if you even receive one). Rumors are that it happened just that way last year.

And guess what you get for all your efforts? You are still going to get beat by the front runners with legal cars. I can't imagine how stupid one would feel after all that.

[Mike Collins]

They may protest. But never fear, most front runners, despite popular opinion are pretty decent guys and usually have a private conversation first and politely question the legality of your car as a potential mistake or some other non offending accusation. In short, you typically get a one time make your car legal before being protested, but not always.

I normally ask and then write the paper....

[LarryKing]

Jim, thanks for the great advise. One question, are we sure ALL the front runners are legal.

 

As far as painting intakes goes, I think some folks would be just as happy with a stack of Tamiya models as they would with a real car.

[CruzanTom]

My position as CRB Member
This change was a result of a post Tom Hart put out about being potentially Dq'ed for having a painted intake. ( Yes, I know it was not legal at the time but many have done for a long time.) So rather than send letters and incriminate themselves with a letter, Wheeler and I took MULTIPLE calls on this asking if they were really going to get Dq'ed for this etc. I felt and still feel that it is a weenie deal, one way or the other. We have a CRB call tonight and we will again speak about this. The entire discussion is a weenie deal IMO. We never expected much backlash at all to be honest. This was nothing more than an attempt to solve a weenie issue ( painted intakes in tech) and created a different weenie issue. No guarantees the CRB will change what we did last month, but we will discuss and have heard your objections and why. Your positions are stated clearly and I WILL NOT get into a debate here. If you would like to call or email privately, please do so.
 

 

Boy, I didn't realize I opened a can of worms with my post. I was pulled for a "random" inspection at PBI  (I wasn't on the top 3). After the intake paint was pointed out to me, we determined the paint could be scratched off with a fingernail - no thermal properties, just a little cosmetic touch. I was mid-pack but I looked good!

 

The paint I really need to change is my car color - I have been pulled two more times for "random" tech since Palm Beach! Maybe a dull gray instead of a Gulf livery would help me stay out of tech until I start finishing up front.

[Brandon]

Thanks for the reply Jim and the clarity is appreciated.  Sorry to have you return from vacation to this sh!t storm!  

 

Approving this allowance in the manner the CRB did is what troubles me the most (irrespective of any potential benefits of any exterior coating this was meant to address).  E&O is just that - for errors and/or omissions from earlier/previous versions of the GCR and this item was definitely not E&O worthy.

 

Confirming if any coating/paint on the intake being beneficial it's not for me to decide: per the rules prior to 04/01/2014 intake manifold coatings were not allowed.  Unfortunately for the valve cover, there is no specification regarding a coating/paint so it would be a protest-worthy item (weenie for sure) but valid and enforceable.  The competitor in question should have just accepted any outcome and found unpainted parts to swap-in for the remainder of 2014.

 

I can understand their desire to not be subjected to a potential 'weenie protest' (I won't debate those; I didn't have the SCCA patch on my suit until last year and that was a violation that could be protested along with my painted valve cover) however I think this could have been addressed as you & Mike have suggested without resorting to an E&O inclusion.  And as you've noted, a lot of the people we race with are decent people so more often than not it won't take a protest.  But up until today, if you had a painted manifold you could be DQ'd for it.

 

I'd suggest a new rule for 2015 that explicitly states equivocally one way or the other: paint/coating allowed (and on which parts) or no painting anywhere.  And if permitted, then include a process for confirming said coating is definitively paint and not something potentially beneficial.  Is there a process for validating whether transmission/differential gears have been treated?  Can we (should we?) spec something like "Krylon #123-456" as being allowed?  I know other classes have 'part #XYZ-890-1 may be installed' so I'm not cognizant of how far we want to go with a new rule.

 

I know I don't have to spell it out, you double-champ you, but any time there's a gray area without boundaries, they will be exploited to their fullest potential/benefit and you will have folks making claims about "prepared to the limit of the rules" (you do have the uber-special intake paint, right?).  Similarly with your statement about cheating up specific assemblies, it may not necessarily be the paint making them fast.

[Jim Drago]

One question, are we sure ALL the front runners are legal.

No idea. I try my best to put blinders on and worry about Jim and Jim's program.