174 replies to this topic

[Jim Drago]

Rule life is good, please carry on.  Naw, not really, if rule life was good there wouldn't continue to be new anti cheat rules added. New head rules, REM rule, painting intake, Whistler valve cover off and whatever else.    
  

 

Sorry Dave, but you are wrong here. 

As long as we race these cars, people will continue to find loop holes or ways to exploit the rules. When those things are pointed out, the rules are further defined or rewritten

[Bench Racer]

Sorry Dave, but you are wrong here. 

As long as we race these cars, people will continue to find loop holes or ways to exploit the rules. When those things are pointed out, the rules are further defined or rewritten

Jim, if I am wrong, why was the new REM cheat rule added. That dude is a second rule put in place for those that didn't understand or have selective reading capabilities with respect to the first rule, "Authorized Modifications", correct. 

 

Everyone hang loose on this ^, Jim has minmal days remaining to bust my balls.

[Jim Drago]

Jim, if I am wrong, why was the new REM cheat rule added. That dude is a second rule put in place for those that didn't understand or have selective reading capabilities with respect to the first rule, "Authorized Modifications", correct. 

 

Everyone hang loose on this ^, Jim has minmal days remaining to bust my balls.

It was added to spell out specifically as disallow. I am at the CRB meeting now, you want me to pull it out?  I was the one who added as I thought it was needed.

[Bench Racer]

As long as your there, please make similar the 1.6 torque to the 99 plus torque. I'm TODAY thinking, two things, originally the 1.6 engine was made for a boosted car and second, maybe something could be done with the intake butterflies to reduce the 99 torque. It takes thinking to cheat, but it takes equal or more thinking to do it legally. Your the engine guru, how about some real input other than 99 suspenison pieces. And don't give me the #56 bs, you in your 99 plus cars can back up your stuff every time you come to Road America, not so much with the #56 car.

 

Have A Fun day.

[Jim Drago]

As long as your there, please make similar the 1.6 torque to the 99 plus torque. I'm TODAY thinking, two things, originally the 1.6 engine was made for a boosted car and second, maybe something could be done with the intake butterflies to reduce the 99 torque. It takes thinking to cheat, but it takes equal or more thinking to do it legally. Your the engine guru, how about some real input other than 99 suspenison pieces. And don't give me the #56 bs, you in your 99 plus cars can back up your stuff every time you come to Road America, not so much with the #56 car.

 

Have A Fun day.

110 and 120 are similar.. Thanks for your input

[Bench Racer]

 

110 and 120 are similar.. Thanks for your input

 You are correct, both numbers are over 100 and both nubers are divisible by 10. BUT, if you divide them into their respective car weights the 110 number caries .909 pound per hp more than the 120 number. That would be 100 pounds total. Now go do some division below 5,500 rpm of car weights by their respectiove torque and you'll find the 1.6 carries considerable more weight per pound foot than the 99 plus cars. And, yes the 1.6 has less pounds per hp above 5,252 rpm which is the reason the 1.6 can play at the upper rpm's. But the SMAC/CRB know that as shown per the post by TopGear in another thread.

Don't know why I continue to rag about this.

[James York]

 
 

Don't know why I continue to rag about this.

 

 

I don't know, because you know this internet forum is not a vehicle to get rule changes......

[Bench Racer]

 

I don't know, because you know this internet forum is not a vehicle to get rule changes......

  news!!!

[Cnj]

 
Everyone hang loose on this ^, Jim has minmal days remaining to bust my balls.

Bench, why on earth do you think Jim will stop busting your balls once he is off the CRB?

CNJ

[Tom Hampton]

Bench, why on earth do you think Jim will stop busting your balls once he is off the CRB?

CNJ

I would expect quite the opposite. 

[Bench Racer]

Bench, why on earth do you think Jim will stop busting your balls once he is off the CRB?

CNJ

He'll continue, I didn't care to say, Jim has minmal days remaining to bust my balls while he is on the CRB.
 

[Jim Drago]

I would expect quite the opposite. 

I wont even have to behave

[Ron Alan]

I wont even have to behave

Are we going to see a not so nice and polite Jim?

[Jim Drago]

Are we going to see a not so nice and polite Jim?

I doubt it  

[B(Kuch)Kucera45]

^