56 replies to this topic

[Johnny D]

John, Can you say you were in a greement with most of it being said and going forward, or you may be going a different direction ?

J~

[john mueller]

I don't know anything about what is being discussed.  What I do know is that when a small group of people sit around a table and come to a decision rest assured it is not what is best for the masses. When the discussions are being held without input from those most directly impacted by those decisions I can guarantee the decisions are not trivial.  

Therefore my conclusion is that there are major rules changes being discussed, not just weights and plates.  

 

If i am right, then NASA would be silly to follow the course of their big brother.  NASA is a business looking to claim market share.  I think they have done a great job over the last 3 years earning my money.  If I owned NASA, I would be advertising to the whole SM community that we believe the class needs some tweaks but no major changes and these are my tweaks. 

 

1. Increase 1.6 tq

2. bigger plate for NA 1.8.

3. 99 same

4 01-up not sure but will evaluate as the season progresses

 

rewrite the rule on the plunge cut to have some specific tools and measurements for work that can be done. 

 

Then i would watch as more and more people came to the class.  If i was wrong I could always go back to kissing my big brothers a$$.

 

If you're referring the the latest SMAC discussions bout parity... I can pretty much say their ideas and discussion was made obsolete by our meeting in Topeka yesterday.  

 

I'm not at liberty to fully reply to your comments right now except there will be changes, weight and plates will part of the solution too (for parity).  No concrete details were discussed yesterday, mainly a direction to maintain the longterm health of the class with compliance measures.  Parity will be next.

[MPR22]

If you're referring the the latest discussions bout parity from the SMAC I can pretty much say their ideas and discussion was made obsolete by our meeting in Topeka yesterday.  

 

I'm not at liberty to fully reply to your comments right now except there will be changes, weight and plates will part of the solution too (for parity).  No concrete details were discussed yesterday, mainly a direction to maintain the longterm health of the class with compliance measures.

How is something that is from the very committee that is suppose to steer the SCCA towards what the "racers in SM" may or may not want, rendered obsolete?  

 

We had 3 years of no change to let the dust settle on development.  The 1.6s and the NA 1.8s took it on the chin.  If they didn't do something to make these cars more competitive then they might as well just tell us we are all running 99+ cars and to shut the fuckk up and take it like a man.  

 

At that point they should pull all the plates and let the 99+s have at it. 

 

Don't piss down my back and tell me its raining.  

[FTodaro]

If you're referring the the latest discussions bout parity from the SMAC I can pretty much say their ideas and discussion was made obsolete by our meeting in Topeka yesterday.  

 

I'm not at liberty to fully reply to your comments right now except there will be changes, weight and plates will part of the solution too (for parity).  No concrete details were discussed yesterday, mainly a direction to maintain the longterm health of the class with compliance measures.

Is there a target then for when the status of what is being discussed will be disclosed. Hopefully any information coming from the big wig wamm will be in the form of ideas for the class going out to the participants for comment and input.

 

I am gratified to hear that no final decisions have been made.

 

that would be like me buying a new car today and coming home and telling the wife what i did. Out of respect, I would seek her agreement, build consensus that this is the right direction and with input craft a final plan.

 

Or am I in La La Land with Danny?

[Johnny D]

https://video.search...1-s&fr2=piv-web

J~

[MPR22]

Is there a target then for when the status of what is being discussed will be disclosed. Hopefully any information coming from the big wig wamm will be in the form of ideas for the class going out to the participants for comment and input.

 

I am gratified to hear that no final decisions have been made.

 

that would be like me buying a new car today and coming home and telling the wife what i did. Out of respect, I would seek her agreement, build consensus that this is the right direction and with input craft a final plan.

 

Or am am in in La La Land with Danny?

You didn't read between the lines well enough,  "I'm not at liberty to fully reply to your comments right now except there will be changes"   Sountds like the decision have been made they just want us to stew for a while so they can finish patting themselves on the back.  Again if I am John, I say thank you for letting me watch you guys ignore your customers and I will get back to you.  Then go write the new rules with input from my customers and count the money. 

[Steve Scheifler]

Or the decision was what to put in front of the full board for a vote, as I think was already stated. I'm pretty sure you can wait a few more hours, or even another day for that. Then, if needed, we can debate whether they were in too much of a hurry and should have paused for feedback.

[Caveman-kwebb99]

Or the decision was what to put in front of the full board for a vote. I'm pretty sure you can wait a few more hours, or even another day.

 

We have been waiting for weeks.  whats another day will it make or break us one way or another probably not. I still hate waiting though!

[john mueller]

You didn't read between the lines well enough,  "I'm not at liberty to fully reply to your comments right now except there will be changes"   Sountds like the decision have been made they just want us to stew for a while so they can finish patting themselves on the back.  Again if I am John, I say thank you for letting me watch you guys ignore your customers and I will get back to you.  Then go write the new rules with input from my customers and count the money. 

 

 

You have no idea so you should just stop.  This stuff is hard.  If you think you can do better then volunteer and help fix the problems.  If not, stop speculating and creating havoc.

 

NASA doesn't need member support, we make changes based on the information we have to best meet our customers needs.  NASA believes what was discussed is in the best needs of our customers.  We didn't bend knee for anyone, we were an active participant in the discussion and steered the direction at many times...  As I said, SCCA, Mazda and NASA agree completely with the direction and measures to keep folks compliant.  

[FTodaro]

Or the decision was what to put in front of the full board for a vote, as I think was already stated. I'm pretty sure you can wait a few more hours, or even another day for that. Then, if needed, we can debate whether they were in too much of a hurry and should have paused for feedback.

I am not an expert on SCCA protocol, but in the past i have seen that rule changes are proposed, go out for comment, then we add the view point of the paying customer, and then they decide.

 

Am i wrong?

 

John, I do not envy your job. I am grateful for you and others like you. Any frustration I might pass along would never be personal or directed at anyone, BTW. 

[MPR22]

Be happy to volunteer.  Be happier to just have a vote.  

 

You actually think I have no idea of how this shit works?  I have or currently sit on more boards than you have ever even thought about.  The way this is being handled is beyond me.

 

SIGN ME THE FUCKK UP>  I actually listen to people and can articulate a position. If this is all super top secret stuff that can't be discussed then quit posting yourself and go back to the board room.   

[Steve Scheifler]

I am not an expert on SCCA protocol, but in the past i have seen that rule changes are proposed, go out for comment, then we add the view point of the paying customer, and then they decide.

Am i wrong?

You are correct sir, that seems to be the norm, but not necessarily a requirement. This is not a typical rule-change situation and they may feel it needs to be decided quickly and by a select panel of experts.

[mdavis]

Everyone does realize that SRF is changing engines right?  I think the cost to the competitors is around 3-4k.  Do not know the details of how this change came about or was voted upon but SCCA does have a history of making big changes in their most popular classes.

 

One final point,  there will always be two points of view when these decisions are made.  Those that like the status quo or even the "good old days" and those that favor moving forward.  It's the same in every class--  ever watch an F production race with Triumph Spitfires vs. Acura Integras?

[James York]

Everyone does realize that SRF is changing engines right?  I think the cost to the competitors is around 3-4k.  Do not know the details of how this change came about or was voted upon but SCCA does have a history of making big changes in their most popular classes.

 

 

 

The update kit is 12-15K.  I can't remember the exact figure.

[Steve Scheifler]

I think the SRF full conversion kit is more like $10k+? I think SCCA Enterprises commercial arm has a lot of influence since they supply everything. And it is back ordered into 2016.

But your point is valid and there are many examples.

[MPR22]

Everyone does realize that SRF is changing engines right?  I think the cost to the competitors is around 3-4k.  Do not know the details of how this change came about or was voted upon but SCCA does have a history of making big changes in their most popular classes.

 

One final point,  there will always be two points of view when these decisions are made.  Those that like the status quo or even the "good old days" and those that favor moving forward.  It's the same in every class--  ever watch an F production race with Triumph Spitfires vs. Acura Integras?

And if you want to race SRF you have only one choice.  Yeah I'm sure NASA has some class it will work in but SM can be run all over the country and depending on how things go the two major racing organizations don't necessarily need our business as a class. 

[Caveman-kwebb99]

Ross, I think you underestimate our clout.

 

If all SM racers stopped racing as of today, they would need to increase everyone elses entry by at least 60% to account for our absence.  

 

That is assuming we all woudl actually pull the needle out of our arms and go to detox programs immediatly.  We cant even get 50% here to agree on any one thing it doesnt seem.

 

It would hurt both NASA and SCCA although it would hurt SCCA for more as they dont make their bread and butter from HPDE

 

the only other class most of us would like would suck to get into right now as engines are not available tll 2016 unless you want someones old junk. makes it less likely any of would go there. 

[Johnny D]

https://www.youtube....h?v=NO04VXBIS0M

J~

[FTodaro]

Everyone does realize that SRF is changing engines right?  I think the cost to the competitors is around 3-4k.  Do not know the details of how this change came about or was voted upon but SCCA does have a history of making big changes in their most popular classes.

 

One final point,  there will always be two points of view when these decisions are made.  Those that like the status quo or even the "good old days" and those that favor moving forward.  It's the same in every class--  ever watch an F production race with Triumph Spitfires vs. Acura Integras?

I understand.

 

My point is that if the class as a whole thinks that we would be better off today if we had a strict plunge cut rule, that permitted continuing on with the minimally modified rule, (excluding the ones that when way over the top) rather than requiring all new heads  that are bone stock and will further separate the have's from the Have's nots, because they cannot flow a crate of heads, for example.

 

If say 80% felt they would rather go that direction, given  a choice, we should be able to make that choice. Otherwise you have the tail waging the dog, IMO. Should the Majority set the direction of this class or SCCA?

[svvs]

Has the actual announcement come out yet?  Maybe "V" is at the end of the chain and I haven't received it yet?

 

-Vick