my email address is dandersen@andersenracingteam.comOriginally Posted by Art Smith
my email address is dandersen@andersenracingteam.com
Sorry Dan i was typing when you were typing
Charles
Saving money and racers are never used correctly in the same sentence. I thought you knew that...
Hi Steve,
Couple of things, and I too apprecite your response. First, you say "along comes Elan and you" as if I am somehow part of this proposal. I am not, other than, as I said, being an interested prospective customer if the engine gets approved. As to my judgement that Elan engines are the best, I have not expressed that judgement as the jury is still out. If Elan is saying their engines are the best, I would not expect any manufacturer to say otherwise about their product, would you? I imagine if you ask Sandy or Steve who's engine (of their two) is the best, you'd get two answers.
As to too many boxes of engine parts, I'm with you on that. Remember, I liked the pinto package and I was not in favor of FC going zetec.
Dan
Dan, thanks for the post. As someone opposed to the rule I'd like to share some of my thoughts.
One of the reasons for the "venom" towards Elan is the heavy handed approach they are using threatening legal action if their intake isn't allowed.
FC has always been an open chassis class with very restricted engine rules. Even your own series only allowed one intake. When writing the Zetec rules for SCCA we continued with that spirit.
The chassis parts you refer to as being open are open for anyone to make (wings, noses, diffusers, etc). Elan is not asking for an open intake rule they are only asking for their intake to be legal. In my eyes these are apples and oranges comparisons. As one of the co authors of the zetec rules for SCCA I can say we specifically chose the QS intake due to its large installation base therefore reducing engine costs to existing and future owners. There are commercially available racing intakes available but we went with the QS intake so members wouldn't have to buy a new intake. It's unfortunate that the Cooper series chose to have an intake custom made rather than using something already available but since the QS intake was in wide spread use it made financial sense to adopt it. I posted photos of another intake we evaluated in another thread on this site if you'd like to see it.
The QS intake manifold is priced very reasonably. We evaluated cost when writing the rules. The QS intake was actually the cheapest injection intake evaluated. The only cheaper solution was a carburetor version.
We all know the reason Elan built their own intake was due to a feud with QS. They should have sold QS duratec parts, if they had QS would have sold them Zetec parts. QS has offered to sell intakes to any competitor including those who buy Elan engines therefore they are available.
Elan complained to SCCA that QS wouldn't sell them intakes and asked if they could build their own. They asked someone who didn't have authority to comment. Elan knows the process to request a new rule or rule change and chose not to follow it knowing if they followed the correct process it wouldn't be allowed. Instead they heard what they wanted to hear and proceeded. They saw an opportunity to circumvent the rules process and gain an advantage so rather than copying the existing intake they chose to build a better one.
No one is pleased with QS for handling the situation the way they did but I do not believe the club members should have to pay for the inability of Elan and QS to work together.
The crux here is that the club has a process. As has been stated - people are ready to quit over this, and the guy who told Elan to go off and build it - Is being "protected" by the President of the club because he's married into his family. The process was bypassed. Mr Pares post earlier was dead nuts on.
Dan, you make the statement that SCCA told Elan to go do this - it was not "SCCA", it was some pencil pusher. I can't walk into the IRS and say - my neighbor doesn't pay taxes - and the next day expect them to padlock the guy's front door - just because his dog craps in my yard. Andersen racing shouldn't be lumped in with these crackpots I agree - This has turned into a whole whirlwind of stuff and this is the best stage to "bend" people to their thinking. The only fault as I see it - as with most New Yorkers...... is your a Yankee fan.
Now, on the engine itself. I think this is really - at this time - seperate from the issue at hand. And this is NOT directed to Andersen.....
The only person who has offered data up to the prying public here was Andersen racing. I've heard many verions of what took place. I think its safe to say by the end of that test - both cars were out of compliance for f2000 rules anyway. So those times are not reprentative of what will happen.
As I understand it, a dyno sheet was submitted recently for this ruling. The dyno sheet is a QS engine with an Elan intake - far from what is intended to be the final version - it is also not reprentative of what will happen. The brackets for the timing pickup, a different pickup than what has been the same now since '02, were only completed recently. Its sounding like the intake is only the tip of the iceberg - other "things" will come in to make it work. The trick intake aside - there should not be another version of timing floating around in FC - who knows whats taking place with the cams and advancing the crap out of the ignition.
The Elan unit costs more - at least the intake will cost more than a QS unit. I have no doubt they will try to undercut prices at first - as they did when they finally showed up to the F2k races with parts. Lured some of you in I know..... Call Rich now and see who you get. But in the end - like jet engines - they expect to get you on the spares. Its going to cost more - then Sandy will come out with an evolution - and so it begins...
I know the F2k series all along has said they run to SCCA FC rules. They won't have a leg to stand on if this gets passed. Most players realize that I think. I've also heard that Elan intends to start their own spec F2k series and run in support of the IRL. So maybe the only question if this thing does get passed - who will have the sanctioning first....
Its amazing to me that guys that have known each other for so many years can turn their backs from one another and try to catch a ride on the Elan express. I guess you have to experience it to get soured - though some like the taste it seems. Talk to half a dozen suppliers - you will understand why Sandy wasn't crazy about the idea....Maybe in 8 months when the weasel get deported for either the Lola secrets or the autoclave kick backs - or Elan just colapses everybody will get along again. Maybe he can give us another "How dare you"
So who does own the last VD made in England anyway??
Oh - so if anyone has correction for my hearsay - go ahead...... Like Jon - I'm heading to the bar... Plough and stars though.
2006
2007
WOW!
Can of worms!?!?
How about a trunk-full of venomous snakes?
I go on vacation for a week and all hell breaks loose.
Tomorrow, I will re-send the letter I originally sent to the CRB, BOD, etc., on the Elan manifold issue to them again (with appropriate editing) in regards to this issue.
AS many of you have already seen, this is what I sent before:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zetec Engine Letter – Specifically Addressing the Elan Intake / Engine Proposal
It has come to my attention that an “alternative” intake manifold and injector system has been constructed by Elan Power and has been presented to the SCCA for consideration for use on the Zetec engine in the Formula Continental Class. For the reasons that follow, I strenuously object to the inclusion of this new “alternative” intake and injector unit:
1) There is not a shortage or issue with respect to the supply of intake manifolds and injector systems from Quicksilver RacEngines.
2) To my knowledge the cost of the intake and injector system has not increased in any significant amount since the inclusion of the Zetec engine in Formula Continental.
3) The proposed intake manifold and injector system produced by Elan differs significantly in design and manufacture from the already approved Quicksilver system and will undoubtedly perform differently, requiring much testing and dyno time to TRY to make this unit equivalent to the present, proven set-up.
4) There exist enough issues (Pinto engine changes such as the aluminum head, new pistons, etc.) with respect to the equalization of the Pinto and Zetec such that the FC class would be harmed by the introduction of another variable at this time.
5) In addition, one of the main premises for (and benefits of) inclusion of the Zetec engine into the FC rules was that it would be a durable, standard, almost spec, engine, resulting in a significant reduction of engine costs and engine variability (dreaded engine of the week syndrome). This has already convinced many competitors to convert to Zetec, including me. If any totally untested and unproven variables, such as the Elan intake, are allowed, this will go against one of the basic reasons that the Zetec was thought by the FC competitors to be a good idea in FC. It would, in all probability, result in a significant number of budget-restricted competitors, such as me, deciding not to run FC at all.
Therefore, to keep a relatively-level playing field for all, regardless of budget constraints, such engine variables as this MUST NOT BE ALLOWED!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I cannot believe that SCCA is trying to ram this down our throats, especially when I had indications from SCCA CRB personnel that this sort of thing was NOT in the best interests of the class and WOULD NOT HAPPEN! As I said above, this is the sort of thing that could drive low-budget competitors like me out of FC entirely!
Dave Weitzenhof
Thank you Chas.
I think you nailed it in your last sentence.
Laugh Riot
That's very funny Dan. Ha, ha, ha. Maybe you should listen to Foschi and stay out of this. You have already caused enough trouble.
Chas,
Thanks for the inout. I had heard there was bad blood between QSRE and Elan, but I do not know the details at all. As to heavy-handed and/or not following a certain rules process, that is also news to me, but entirely possible, I guess.
As to my series, we only allowed Pintos, but the various engine builders played with a lot of stuff like carburetors to gain an edge. With FC and the Pro series allowing Pinto's and Zetec's, and now with the aluminum head, it is an entirely different situation than mine.
Dan
Hi Matt,
Thanks for the reply. A couple of points:
-you mention something about the test we did at Sebring, and both of the cars being "out of spec". Not sure what you mean by that as the #9 car was, I believe, as raced last year at Lime Rock.
-as to the engine tested, it is my understanding that whatever is ultimately approved will be a package as presented to the SCCA. The different intake requires different timing, map, etc. to result in the matched performance of the QSRE. I don't believe the package, after approval, can be modified any more than a Quicksilver or Elite could be modified from it's approved package.
-you mention the Elan unit costs more. Do you know what they are charging, because I don't. I'm not sure they have even set any pricing yet, but I could be wrong.
-Is that a rumor you've heard regarding the IRL? That would surprise me a lot, if true. Love to hear where that came from.
-I don't know about "turning a back" on anyone. Business is business, and most teams go where the price and service combination earn their business. We buy from many sources, and we appreciate suppliers who service us well and provide competitive pricing. Last year we bought Van Diemen stuff from Brad, Bill Stephens and Elan. I don't see that changing.
-As I mentioned in my post, I have received three new Van Diemens, two of which came this month. They were all shipped from Van Diemen in England as rollers, with engines added in Atlanta. Have I received the last? I doubt it.
Go Yankees!
Dan
I thought Elan made a duplicate cheaper than Sandy/QSR. It doesn't take a genius to make a better performing manifold ask any engineer, I think my 6 yo daughter could do it.
I still have not heard why we need a different designed intake, does the QS break often? Does it knock over crew in the paddock and is a safety issue? So it is a totally different design that will need different timing and mapping and and and and. How does this make sense in any way. As a matter of fact I think if it happens we will have a class action lawsuit against the SCCA and Elan. We racers will have to buy the better of the two manifolds or more likely both manifolds and of course pick the one that is best suited for certain tracks. I bet one manifold will be better at Road America and one will be better at Mid-Ohio therefore all race cars will require 2 manifolds. Perfect class action with the remedy being that SCCA/ELAN will have to provide all racers with both manifolds or money. You see I read the rules bought my car and the rules were changed to my and all other teams detriment thereby necessitating an additional expenditure that a judge will rule has to be paid by SCCA. Fits perfectly into a class action since the remedy effects all persons in the lawsuit. What complication for NO REASON
I
I remember being in the paddock, at Road Atlanta in October,and distinctly remember ,Derrick Peacock Engineering Manager for Elan Motorsports, stating their desire to get into the business of building race engines ,he also complained of their inability to obtain intake manifolds from QSRE , I am not sure of the history of the relationship of QSRE and Elan, it seems that they share mutual dislike?and this may have started with Elans refusal to allow QSRE the oppurtunity to build the duratech for the SCCA car? ,perhaps QSRE is getting even with it's refusal to sell them intakes? I don't quite understand why QSRE refuses or if they still refuse to sell to other engine builders their intake manifold,if someone knows the the story behind the story on any of this I would appreciate to be educated on this matter?Please don't laugh me out of the building on this next statement, maybe QSRE was doing all this refusal of selling intakes to keep costs contained and maintain a very level playing field engine wise?(BY THE WAY IT SEEMS THAT UP UNTIL NOW THEY HAVE DONE EXACTLY THIS!) I am very gullible but still find it hard to believe the intentions of QSRE were so honorable.At the same time I can also tell you that Mr. Peacocks statements in regards to the actual design of their intake were not following the spirit of the rule, as I see them to be , he stated ,and I remember his statement very clearly, "we can build a manifold that has better torque ,better acceleration , and more horsepower," wasn't the zetec introduced as a "spec" engine to eliminate the need to further develop the engine.All you "imageneers" out there that are going to chime in and tell me that's what racing is all about are absolute morons looking for an ego stroke, racing at this level isn't about developing engines or chassis components, although there are many who play race engineer and try to convince others that is what they do. racing at this level serves 2 purposes.
1.To help young drivers develop and improve their skills and help them along their path towards the higher levels of racing (A purpose that it has done very well indeed look at the current crop of high level open wheel and gt drivers many with f2000 experience )
2.To provide fun and entertainment for those who have no career motorsports aspiration.(look at all the old dudes acting like children in the paddock at a f2000 event)
BTW another "better"intake will serve none of these purposes.
Sorry to be so long winded about all this , the point being shame on QSRE shame on Elan both it seems to me partially responsible for this current mess , I am of the opinion that the current intake is fine and if Elan wants to make one make it to the precise dimensions of the QSRE unit, and not try to gain an advantage that all FC/F2000 competitors will have to pay for.The current unit is less than ideal but it is my understanding that these "flaws" make it the affordable unit that it is.STOP THE PISSING MATCH FOR THE SAKE OF THE RACERS WHO AFTER ALL BOTH ELAN AND QSRE DEPEND FOR THEIR SURVIVAL!!!
Manifold
I agree, if Elan wants to make a manifold it should be the exact functional duplicate of the QSRE manifold. This business of building an improved manifold may prove very costly to the class & Elan. Not only the very serious costs associated with having 2 manifolds but how about the serious effect on entries & the current level of competitor dedication to FC that will be lost.
I ask Elan to reconsider their efforts to get this new manifold approved. This manifold will not improve FC or F2000 but it will certainly polarize the competitors. I also suspect that Elan will lose all credibility with the majority of FC competitors & this cannot be good for their business model.
Thanks ... Jay Novak
Thanks ... Jay Novak
313-445-4047
On my 54th year as an SCCA member
with a special thanks to every SCCA worker (NONE OF US WOULD RACE WITHOUT THE WORKERS)
Moving Foward
FC/ Zetec Community.....
Please "vote" your conscience on this matter.
There is a specific time frame to do so. Cut off is Feb 22
As wonderful as Apex is, the SCCA does not process opinions from it.
Be involved! Write your letters, Pro or Con to both CRB and the BoD
BTW, with all due respect. If your not an FC driver, owner, or someone who has a vested interest in this situation, please respect those who do and let them be the ones counted in this matter.
SCCA contact information listed at this post on Apex.
http://www.apexspeed.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26807
With all due respect, any SCCA member who owns a racecar, regardless of class, has a vested interest in the SCCA rules-making process.
John Nesbitt
ex-Swift DB-1
Yes John , Absolutely correct,
I also believe many of their process are fractured. However, the SCCA is specifically asking for input on a 2 litre engine rule at this time. We need to stay on task with this particular issue,
I feel (as I believe you would too) uncomfortable having a a driver, owner from another class or even an individual who doesn't own a car or drives a car decide a technical matter specific to my class.
Last edited by Phil Picard; 02.17.08 at 12:30 PM. Reason: Re phrase
My response to the CRB, BOD, etc.
My response to the request for input re the proposal:
For the reasons that follow, I strenuously object to the inclusion of this new “alternative” intake and injector unit:
1) There is not a shortage or issue with respect to the supply of intake manifolds, injector systems, restrictors, or engines from Quicksilver RacEngines and/or Elite.
2) The proposed intake manifold and injector system produced by EPP differs significantly in design and manufacture from the already approved Quicksilver system and will undoubtedly perform differently, requiring much testing and dyno time to TRY to make this unit equivalent to the present, proven set-up.
3) One of the main premises for (and benefits of) inclusion of the Zetec engine into the FC rules was that it would be a durable, standard, almost spec, engine, resulting in a significant reduction of engine costs and engine variability (dreaded engine of the week syndrome). This has already convinced many competitors to convert to Zetec, including me. "Open commerce" WAS NEVER THE INTENT of including the Zetec engine in FC.
4) Adding un-needed additional suppliers of already easily available and reasonably-priced critical engine components will require competitors to test each added variety, to determine (despite the best intentions of equalizing maps, etc., which NEVER make things completely equal) which combination performs best at each track. This scenario is out of the reach of budget-restricted competitors such as me.
There exist enough issues (Pinto engine changes such as the aluminum head, new pistons, etc.) with respect to the equalization of the Pinto and Zetec such that the FC class would be harmed by the introduction of further variables at this time.
5) If un-needed variables such as the EPP intake / injector system, are allowed, this will go against one of the basic reasons that the Zetec was thought by the FC competitors to be a good idea in FC. It would, in all probability, result in a significant number of budget-restricted competitors, such as me, deciding not to run FC at all.
Therefore, to keep a relatively-level playing field for all, regardless of budget constraints, such engine variables as this MUST NOT BE ALLOWED!
In addition, rule changes MUST NEVER BE RUSHED THROUGH as this one seems to be, in order to maintain any semblance of integrity in the SCCA Club rules change procedure.
Last edited by DaveW; 02.17.08 at 12:46 PM. Reason: Screwy formatting
Dave Weitzenhof
Phil,
There are three elements to this issue: 'what', 'why', and 'how'.
On the 'what' (ie. the technical specifics of the rule), I agree, this is a matter for the F2K community to decide.
On the 'why' and 'how', I disagree. The Club's rules-making process is of vital interest to all owners. I expect the Club to follow a standard, predictable, and transparent process in creating its rules. This is the same process it follows in making rules for my class. So I am affected.
John Nesbitt
ex-Swift DB-1
John, I believe you are exactly correct. The SCCA Club needs to follow its own rules for rule changes. If the procedure needs to be changed, that, also, should be a subject for discussion and input of the members. THIS IS SUPPOSEDLY OUR CLUB!
Dave Weitzenhof
A recap as I see it
If you look at this dispute between QSRE and Elan in the context of a business, you have to come to the conclusion that either there is one supplier of engines or the competitors are going to be caught in a hi dollar game of one upsmanship between competing "spec engines".
There are close to 100 engines out in the field. Each engine cost some where between $11,000 and $15,000. I tried to estimate the number of active FC cars in SCCA and came up with 200 to 250. So something less than half might be Zetecs. I would bet that the non Zetec half for the most part will not convert. These are probably older cars who's owners are on much smaller budgets or because they look at the current performance relationship between Zetec and Pinto see no real reason to change. The performance to dollar value relationship for the Pinto is very good, right now.
The problem for engine builders is that the Zetec engine does not need their services once the engine is built. So you have got to make all your money up front. The market is close to saturated. The market for new engines may only be 20 per year and it is probably declining.
QSRE has made a good offer to Elan to supply them complete engines and buy the cores they have. Sandy recognizes that the business will not support two manufacturers.
Now for Elan to make any money and recoupe their investment they have to create a demand for their engines. They really need to do better than 100% of the current demand for new engines. Best way to do that is to offer a better product. And that is what they have done. The trick for Elan is how much better.
The problem now is that people at SCCA did not see this train wreck coming a year ago. And Sandy inadvertantly set up the sanerio for a train wreck.
Lets assume that when Elan went to SCCA and got permission to build their own manifolds, those involved at SCCA might have thought that ment to build a duplicate of the QSRE manifold, thus there would be 2 sources for the same product. Probably not a bad idea. That is reasonable assumption for me to accept especially when the persons granting the permission might not have had the time or fore thought to see the ramifications of that decission.
Now Elan being sharp business people see an opportunity to increase their market share and they take the green light from SCCA as the go ahead to build a better spec Zetec engine and grab market share. To assume that anything else would happen is to be totally niave. They want to recoupe their developemnt costs and make money.
Now our SCCA type tries to correct his mistake but Elan says: "you fix this or I will sue and by the way I will screw with Enterprises because I can". So he/they try to figure out an accomodation, instead of correcting their mistake. Isn't this the stuff of sit-coms? Is any body laughing yet?
Now we have the train wreck. Elan will sue if SCCA doesn't let them have their way and there may be a class action law suite if SCCA gives in.
The simplest solution is to say that their is only one design for the induction system, one engine map and one standard to build the engines to. Elan made a bad investment in an alternative design but they can correct the situation if they build an exact duplicate of the induction system. But I am not too anxious to see that happen because SCCA does hae a particularly good record of policing rules until the run offs and then it can get arbitrary, capricius and sometimes down right wrong.
Also the people at Elan knew what the rules were and that what they wanted was an inside deal to snatch the FC market for engines and eventually chassis. The Enterprises business was not good enough. They are operating in their self interest.
Will SCCA do the right thing and make every one live by the published rules? Who knows.
This is a massive rules change and it should be treated as such. I would like to believe that there is someone at SCCA who can say that the season has started, the rules are as they stand, get over it and get on with the season.
are the suppliers in control ???
the FOG is finally beginning to lift here in the desert. ignoring for a moment the person or persons currently working for the membership in Topeka that don't understand the limits of their authority and/or the Club's rules making process, does this whole mess boil down to the Enterprise's "sole source" FE car & engine supplier refusing to sell Duratec parts for FE cars to the Club's "sole source" FC parts supplier and the Club's "sole source" FC parts supplier refusing to sell FC parts to Enterprise's "sole source" FE car & engine supplier for FC cars???
if so, this is the classic loss of control suffered by individuals and organizations that procure sole source hardware without a specification and the objective means to verify compliance. in the absense of specifications and the objective means to verify compliance, the Club's leadership (???) has ablacated control of the membership's interests to suppliers. the suppliers are now in control; hope their return-on-investment (ROI) targets aren't over the top this year.
again for those of us with memory problems, why is the Club in the formula/sports racer car sales and parts business??
Art
artesmith@earthlink.net
Yeah - I thought that getting a Zetec conversion would solve that problem. Oh, well. I sent in my letter, too. If I get too pissed about this I may go back to FVee... It IS about the racing, after all...
Dave Weitzenhof
You have hit on the root of the problem - the basic conflict of interest between both controlling the rules and selling a product controlled by those rules.
Dave Weitzenhof
While this issue of the intake manifold is specific to the FC community, and really should be voted on only by FC participants, it still might not be a bad idea for participants of other classes to write in protesting the lack of following of the proper rules making proceedure.
I submitted a letter to the BoD requestion that they look into a formalization of the process, with clearly defined limits as to what constitutes a clarification vs. a spec line change vs. a rules change. If enough people write in asking for this sort of positive action on their part, it might actually get considered.
Good riddens
That is the best news I have read since this crap has started. Go back to FV and take the other wienie winers with you.
John
Last edited by Indyman; 02.17.08 at 4:41 PM.
But, it is impressive that you could make a less comprehensible post than buudrow, and he was on painkillers.
no argument here
John, Dave
Yes, I agree, 100% I am not arguing that the SCCA doesn't skirt their own process apparently at will, and appear to have a lack of accountability when an error is made . a significant component as to why this this whole élan mess is where it is. Yes they have leadership issues, process issues, and we the check writing membership should collectively have influence to move them in a positive direction. Yes, Yes, something has to be done....
BUT AGAIN at this point and time, those are separate issues and should have a specific forum
I wrote my letters twice, to the CRB and to my areas member of the BoD
Thanks Dave for the same ! And all those who also participated.and will by the 22nd
Then, Lets look at the larger picture regarding SCCA'S inconsistency and such. Lots of smarter folks then me type on this site and I'm sure collectively, something could be brought forward
A hopeless task
What a mess. I don't know if the SCCA feels this way, but the problems here are probably unresolvable. Any old class like this has 25years of baggage, members who don't want any change, special interests, impossible equivalency issues, etc. The SCCA faces a hopeless task.
One way to handle this thing is to sort of give up on classes with problems like this, and instead start a new class. Like F1000 for instance, which doesn't have problems yet, only excitment and enthusiasm, and $4000 stock engines that make 180hp per liter. Then SCCA can sit back and let the old class run its course, until it dies a natural death.
what?????
Lee,
Not the best topic to bring up here.
Unless your trying to inspire 12 pages of rock tossing.
Another sales pitch
What a coincidence that you, Lee,sell F1000 cars.
This is one reason that SCCA can't listen to all the crying, there is always a differant agenda from the complainers once SCCA digs into the motive of the complaint.
John
Quit the whining.
Fact is that the Ztec was allowed into FC with specified parts from QSRE, NOT Elan.
And if Elan wants to sell mainfolds and build engines, well they have to get in line and get approved, based on competitor input and requests to the CRB and approval by them and approval by the BOD.
Sounds like QSRE and Elan are trying to take their fight to the mat, at the potential expense of the competitors.
Elan already builds a spec chassis for SCCA, so I would find it hard to think that they could win any kind of anti trusr suit.
Is they want to sell Ztec engines, let em buy the parts form QSRE like evweryone else.
They aint special as far as I am ocncerned.
So Elan can go stuff it with their request to build a non spec part for a spec engine.
Funniest post of the thread so far.
You have not been listening!!!!!!!!!!!!!! One more time. QSRE would not sell the part to Elan. QSRE did not have exclusive rights to be the only engine builder. The deal was they had to make them and sell them to ANYONE that wanted them. Bla bla bla. and here we are again with another misinformed guy that is going to write a letter making sure SCCA knows that the membership has no clue.
FF2000
The point of my post was not specific to FF2000.
ANY class with seemingly unresolvable problems might be solved by taking two steps back, trying to see the forest for the trees.
One solution is to give up on that problem and start something new and fresh, without the baggage. It's an easy way out.
I have no idea if the SCCA thinks that way.
This is all fun in the off season but we all know that this manifold will go no where. The SCCA will never approve it and if so it would be IRRELEVENT since the SCCA means absolutely NOTHING to FC. It is dead as an open wheel venue and thankfully so since they did NOTHING for us. It is a Miata road rallye organization. If I never go to another SCCA event it will be to soon. The trump card is held by Wright/Rand/Gabourd who can kill the manifold in a second, they are more important than SCCA will ever be to FC. All we need to do is convince them that SCCA is WORTHLESS and change the rules to keep cost down.
And also I hope Elan brings lawsuits because I am very bored and have some new toys to pay for. There is nothing like winning lots of money from an entity that can pay the judgment. What fun
Charles getting bored Finelli
Who says they do not have exclusive right.
It is irrelevent anyway F2000 will shi. can the new manifold, thank god. Let the 2 cars that have the new manifold go run around in circles by themselves in SCCA, in S, FC, CFC, F500, Atlantic, DSR, F1000 class and anything else that the SCCA sends out with them.
SCCA is dead long live F2000 the predominant open wheel road racing venue in the northern and southern hemisphere now that Champ car/Atlantic is dead.
charles having fun Finelli
Did anyone analyze the relationship between Elan and SCCA Enterprises? Some discovery and depostions might reveal why it appears that this manifold is being rushed through, Hmmm
Doesn't SCCA have a horse in the race? FSCCA cars maybe, built by who? Hmmm
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote