Short-term solution poll
#1
Posted 10-17-2014 12:22 PM
#2
Posted 10-17-2014 12:29 PM
How about fix it before you show up. (just want to see)
I understand SCCA trying to get everyone to run.
J~
#3
Posted 10-17-2014 12:39 PM
For me it's simple. The club took a position on the rules in Laguna (right/wrong doesn't matter at this point). Right now that is the law of the land in SM. Until they are changed, or IF, non compliant cars if/when caught should be DQ'd.
We don't need a SM1 (or whatever) to allow suspected cars a place to run. That is a poor precedent to set. If the SCCA was worried about their pocketbook going forward then I guess maybe they should have came to a different conclusion at the Runoffs. In my opinion, SM1 is a sleazy attempt by the club to still take the racers money.
- john mueller, David L, Bench Racer and 6 others like this
James York
sponsored by:
Stan's Auto Center, Lafayette LA
powered by:
East Street Racing, Memphis TN
2003 Spec Miata
#03
#4
Posted 10-17-2014 12:54 PM
None of the above. Make a decision on new rule or not by early next week. Until then (this weekend) the rules have not changed.
#6
Posted 10-17-2014 01:56 PM
I will be running my car as is at the next TWS race. If you have the money and balls to protest me, please feel free. I am confident my head is legal.
Sponsored By X-Factor Racing!
You bringing the 99 or 01?
#7
Posted 10-17-2014 01:59 PM
How about fix it before you show up. (just want to see)
I understand SCCA trying to get everyone to run.
J~
I think that would be option 2?
#8
Posted 10-17-2014 02:01 PM
None of the above. Make a decision on new rule or not by early next week. Until then (this weekend) the rules have not changed.
Pretty aggressive time-wise, but if they did that and the new rule would make many of the cars non-compliant, the poll question still stands.
#9
Posted 10-17-2014 02:01 PM
I think that would be option 2?
I can see it now..."Do not allow them to race"
Tech at the front gate, right ??
Or we on the honor system ??
J~
#10
Posted 10-17-2014 02:04 PM
- Think Racing likes this
#11
Posted 10-17-2014 02:28 PM
For me it's simple. The club took a position on the rules in Laguna (right/wrong doesn't matter at this point). Right now that is the law of the land in SM. Until they are changed, or IF, non compliant cars if/when caught should be DQ'd.
We don't need a SM1 (or whatever) to allow suspected cars a place to run. That is a poor precedent to set. If the SCCA was worried about their pocketbook going forward then I guess maybe they should have came to a different conclusion at the Runoffs. In my opinion, SM1 is a sleazy attempt by the club to still take the racers money.
Pretty sure any of the cylinder heads in question are compliant for STL. So there's already a class to run in. Also there's already ITE,A,S in many regions. That's another option. Not sure why they'd even make up SM1.
#12
Posted 10-17-2014 02:34 PM
I honestly dont thing option 1 in the poll is an option at all...
I would feel terrible if I was allowed to race and possibly win when drivers like Drennan and other were denied their finish possitions in the most important race of the year, how that makes sense to anyone I have no understanding.
I dont think my car and many others should be allowed to race in SM untill they are either deemed legal or changed to fit whatever rules we are running under.
The club wants to have their cake and eat it to... Dont we all???
K. Webb
Powered by East Street Racing (Best engines in Spec Miata)
Driver coach, Spec Miata Prep shop, Spec Miata Setup
2016 Hard Charger award passing 12 cars runoffs 2016 Mid Ohio
2016 P3 RUNOFFS OVER 40 DIVISION LOL!
2015 First consolation prize Northern Conference Majors Title Pageant
2015 Winner Circus Cat Majors Road America
2015 Winner BlackHawk Majors crash fest
My Signature is still not as long as Danny boy's
#13
Posted 10-17-2014 02:43 PM
For regional points: new class
For NASA nats and one off special events in 2014: weight penalty
#14
Posted 10-17-2014 02:44 PM
This isn't about the club wanting to have their cake and eat it to - recognize there are two groups at work here:
1. The "promoter" side of the house that organizes races for the members to compete in and have fun. They are responsible for filling fields, herding cats and paying bills.
2. The tech side of the house, SOM and COA, which are tasked with enforcing the rules as they are regardless of the repercussions.
It's OK for these two groups to be at odds with each other implicitly or explicitly. It's also up to them to petition to have the rules or processes changed if they don't feel aligned.
#15
Posted 10-17-2014 02:47 PM
Pretty aggressive time-wise, but if they did that and the new rule would make many of the cars non-compliant, the poll question still stands.
The engine beef (if there ultimately is one) is between the seller and the customer in my mind. The club's decision shouldn't be difficult or lengthy. Get a few people in a room, spread a few heads out on the table, get some consensus on whether or not a plunge cut can be "trimmed or cleaned up". If yes, define that. If not keep the rule what it is. If a short term allowance to allow a slightly non-compliant head is to be offered, then pick a weight penalty and a timeframe. Could do what we've done with tires, grandfather them in through the first 2 majors events in each conference for the year. After that, conform to the rules.
#16
Posted 10-17-2014 02:55 PM
#17
Posted 10-17-2014 02:56 PM
This isn't about the club wanting to have their cake and eat it to - recognize there are two groups at work here:
1. The "promoter" side of the house that organizes races for the members to compete in and have fun. They are responsible for filling fields, herding cats and paying bills.
2. The tech side of the house, SOM and COA, which are tasked with enforcing the rules as they are regardless of the repercussions.
It's OK for these two groups to be at odds with each other implicitly or explicitly. It's also up to them to petition to have the rules or processes changed if they don't feel aligned.
https://www.youtube....h?v=m_MaJDK3VNE
J~
#18
Posted 10-17-2014 02:57 PM
Let them run, as is, in IT. or. I have 9 street 99-00 running cars with real stock heads available to swap for out of compliant ones. You do the labor and grind off a recognizable chunk so they can never be used to race as an SM head again---- but perhaps carry over reward weights would work easier and cheaper to equalize podium cars + penalties for higher trap speed readings for non-finishing cars and sandbaggers. Spend all you want. Seal on engine after races and let normal attrition weed them out. . PS Didn't out of spec parts used to be kept by SCCA?
#19
Posted 10-17-2014 03:01 PM
#20
Posted 10-17-2014 03:07 PM
Now what tool do you use for the plunge cut. None are specified so go to town, just don't leave too smooth of a transition or your head may again be deemed non-compliant.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users