What number above the written rule are you ok with? .005? Let us know, then we can change the rule to that number and all will be fixed right?
Sean
I understand this post. There has to be a limit somewhere. And then as Jim says you build a tool with a slush factor in... Its a step, but it doesn't address the built-in culture. Wasn't there a head "illegal" at daytona that wasn't oversized but had a stray deburing tool mark? (that's how I read between the lines anyway). Forgive me for using an ASedan example here, but Andy M lost a NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP over and illegal carb. Like here in SM, we were trying to write rules that define spec parts in order to limit performance instead of writing rules that limit performance directly, so the carb rule was a spec unaltered carb aspect, and visual scotchbrite marks were present. The marks were not measurable, but visual, but still an indication of non-compliance against the key work "unaltered"...
(Note: now you see rules that say "normal cleaning methods" ok, even in SM - thats where that came from)
The gotcha mentality is a fraction of what it was when I started racing. Tech is much more friendly than when they looked for any excuse to bust someone. I have not seen that in years, although I am sure there still are cases where it happens. On the other hand, the SM community has demanded precisely written rules, to be aggressively enforced to insure that everyone is running a compliant car. Perfect system? Hardly, but as close as we can get with a diverse group and limited funds. I do think something has to be done for guys like Danny, who has had his engine torn down too many times. The CRB will be working on that in the future.
wheel
p.s. if you are worried about getting busted for one hole .002 over, make all of them .002 under - no problem. Knowing the rule, and knowing that the measurements are being done, why get even close to the max. As Jim points out, nothing is to be gained by that last couple of thousandths.
I agree with Jim here the gotcha mentality is way less, and dare I say shifted from Tech people looking to be a pita to Tech people responding to class pressure from other competitors feeling like they need to use gothch rules to level the playing field.
I cite the 2 examples above, and I think we need to write into SM category rules a NEW TECH STRUCTURE TO ADDRESS THE CULTURE. As I have posted before, I think this starts with a competitor base tech period where the struggling midpack guy gets to look over leaders as well leaders looking over each other... Again like solo has done for years. This does several positive things that bring later dividends, including bringing the class together and tightening the racing, and even will address driving issues like we saw at Mid ohio. I would think if those guys had to be standing in the same group about 3 times throughout the year and then there is a problem on this weekend, the conduit to get things out in the open generally will lower the chances of on track grudges... (just an example of a side benefit of a culture change..)
Everyone reading this agrees that .;002 on a valve made no difference, and everyone realizes there must be some published limit. The key to having this example work out right is for SCCA (or SM at least) to get rid of the notion that "performance benefit" of some issue cannot be evaluated, just compliant or non compliant. Furthermore, the completely blind notion of a non-compliant competitor not finishing in front of a compliant competitor has to be tossed in the trash. There is not a one sentence solution for this, but I can easily visualize where a competitor influenced tech that is happening goes a step further after tech has done a diligent job in finding a .002 out valve, to have a straw poll about the significance of something like this that could be binding.... And at the same time rules that let a steward take all this in and do a 1 second penalty instead of a dnf.
SCCA should take note, these notions are already creeping into the way NASA does things. It is informal, but it is happening. At BOTH the west and east nationals this year in SM, some or all of the competitors were gathered to hear input into adminstration of some part of the rule book. IMO a brilliant way to make sure whats going on passes the common sense test. (and even despite this, a culture of the letter of the rulebook unfairly IMO ruined the day of about 3 racers when the entire group was say wait, just make the executive decision to fix it). I could cite other examples of this from my local NASA region, which all starts with a manditory drivers meeting in tech after the race at least once a day. It is a notion that is working.
Kyle