Smaller restrictors

[tedsimmons2]

As dictated from the SCCA high command without discussion or details of how the need for smaller restrictors was determined. Is the smaller restrictor necessary - maybe? Couldn't prove it by my lap times but other MC engine cars are very fast but then again so are some Rotax powered cars. I'd just like a little more information than just an edict from Topeka seemingly based on one letter from a member. Maybe I missed the discussion on why the restrictor is necessary.

CLUB RACING BOARD
DATE: July 20, 2014
NUMBER: TB 14-08
FROM: Club Racing Board
TO: Competitors, Stewards, and Scrutineers
SUBJECT: Errors and Omissions, Competition Adjustments, Clarifications, and Classifications
All changes are effective 8/1/2014 unless otherwise noted.

Formula/Sports Racing
F5
1. #14301 (Jack Walbran) Request for Competition Adjustment for 4-cycle Engines
In F500, Honda CBR600RR, Suzuki GSXR600 and Yamaha R6, change the restrictor as follows:
32 reduced to 30mm Flat Plate Intake Restrictor

[jim murphy]

Remember that the word "request" is in this statement but no request for input which is not normal. Please go to the CRB's website and submit your request for clarification.

[Daryl DeArman]

Perfect, just in time for the Runoffs!

Again, left scratching my head as to why folks want to race in a class with competition adjustments. I guess if I owned a car that I wanted to race with the same platform for 20 years without any concerns about being left in the dust I'd understand. That's never been my expectation...apparently I'm weird.

[Daryl DeArman]

Since when have errors and omissions or competition adjustments been required to go through a request for input stage?

Issuing a TB with an effective date of 8/1/14 certainly doesn't appear to be a proposal. The initial letter was the request.

[jim murphy]

One person makes a request, the CRB announces that it is to be done
"WITH ONLY 10 DAYS TO IMPLEMENT IT". Something smells rotten!!

[cory mcleod]

As dictated from the SCCA high command without discussion or details of how the need for smaller restrictors was determined. Is the smaller restrictor necessary - maybe? Couldn't prove it by my lap times but other MC engine cars are very fast but then again so are some Rotax powered cars. I'd just like a little more information than just an edict from Topeka seemingly based on one letter from a member. Maybe I missed the discussion on why the restrictor is necessary.

Ted,

Good to see you last weekend at Watkins Glen. Hope you get your engine issue sorted out - 2 DNFs is no fun at all.

I doubt we'll ever know for sure, but I think the data collected by the SCCA at the June Sprints may have something to do with this change.

Cory

[tedsimmons2]

I doubt we'll ever know for sure, but I think the data collected by the SCCA at the June Sprints may have something to do with this change.

[Daryl DeArman]

One person makes a request, the CRB announces that it is to be done
"WITH ONLY 10 DAYS TO IMPLEMENT IT". Something smells rotten!!

The something rotten is the ability to make COMPETITION ADJUSTMENTS on a whim without any requirement to logically support and disclose the data before making such adjustments.

However, certainly not any smellier than the Jeremy Hill screwing prior to the 2005 RunOffs.

Damn sexy cars and class, too bad competition adjustments had to be on the table to get the concept accepted.

[jim murphy]

The something rotten is the ability to make COMPETITION ADJUSTMENTS on a whim without any requirement to logically support and disclose the data before making such adjustments.

However, certainly not any smellier than the Jeremy Hill screwing prior to the 2005 RunOffs.

Damn sexy cars and class, too bad competition adjustments had to be on the table to get the concept accepted.

And Jay Novak posted on our other forum that the FSRAC, that he is a member, of did not discuss this item. Is there grounds to file a protest (or whatever) against whoever did this?

[clint]

Its pretty much going to fall on deaf ears when writing the CRB. Personally I like the format of the pro races and could care less about the scca format. Atleast in the pro format WE have control over the rules. My vote would be to go to another race organization and let the class die within scca. After it does, no competition adjustments will need to be made for parity purposes. I have strong opinions about this subject simply because NO other data was compared other than the ONE race. A race in which a driver sand bagged (proven by previous results by the same driver). Also a race in which a car that has superior aerodynamics was compared against a car that is equivalent to a shoe box that has four wheels hanging off of it. The results were skewed at best and a suggestion was based off of this . There's no doubt that the two drivetrains are close and at some point may need to be adjusted, however one event is not enough to make a educated decision.

[Vulnavia]

Now can we have a longer wheelbase, wider track. Dampers perhaps?

Will

[Daryl DeArman]

The CRB is allowed to make these adjustments whenever they want by publishing them in the fastrack. The membership has given the CRB this power by choosing to participate in a class that permits competition adjustments. The fact that the CRB is not elected by the membership further enhances their abilities to do whatever whenever.

Perhaps the class would have died on the vine without such a provision. Perhaps another series will benefit. Perhaps the participants in the class will just keep racing their sexy cars overlooking all the politics and just have fun, knowing they could get Jeremy'd at the drop of a hat.

[formulasuper]

"Jeremy'd" not to be forgotten.

[clint]

Rule of thumb: Sandbag so you dont get restricted or so you can get the competition restricted even when its obvious youre doing so.

I never thought with the expertise that SCCA has available to them,that they would not be able to tell when someone is sandbagging. I was wrong, I stand corrected.

[Jnovak]

Rule of thumb: Sandbag so you dont get restricted or so you can get the competition restricted even when its obvious youre doing so.

I never thought with the expertise that SCCA has available to them,that they would not be able to tell when someone is sandbagging. I was wrong, I stand corrected.

Clint, do you think that perhaps he may have had some trouble with the 2 stroke CVT combination? Like maybe 2 broken pipes over the weekend.

Perhaps you should investigate things occasionally.

[Daryl DeArman]

Clint, do you think that perhaps he may have had some trouble with the 2 stroke CVT combination? Like maybe 2 broken pipes over the weekend.

Perhaps you should investigate things occasionally.

In my opinion that makes the ineptness even more evident. Why would that data even be submitted if that were the case? Why would that data be utilized for comparison if that were the known case?

I think somebody running the MC combination lost a plug wire, I'm sure they have some acceleration data the CRB could consider.

[Daryl DeArman]

"Jeremy'd" not to be forgotten.

Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

[rob66x]

You guys on the east coast are lucky , you have the pro-series to go to. weve got nothing but scca. I dont know why we need smaller restrictors I thought they should have gone the other way ,with none. at thunderhill I'm about 6 seconds off of Jeff Jorgensons track record. I dont think its all me.

[Leon Mitchell]

At the June sprints there was no sand bagging. There was some pipe issues, Jack, Michael. I will say this - Michael Mueller like you Clint does not have it in him to sand bag, he is a stand up guy, from a respectable family and is a true and fair racer! As you know Clint, and have often said, the two strokes are temperamental at times. They do require more tuning than the M/C cars. I will remind everyone that the M/C cars were to be brought up to the level of the 2 strokes, the 30mm restricter was used as the original baseline. I will say in my opinion the two different power plants are close. I am for both, I like both. But there does seem to be a slight advantage with the M/C cars on the larger tracks. Yes being fair a car that I sponsor and help with -Herb Noble- jointly! I help with suspension and handling, motor and clutching done by - Brad Huelling- ran very well at the sprints and was definitely the top of the speed class in 2 strokes, and was able to run with the M/C cars. But once the M/C cars start running more and going to the bigger tracks you will see a definite advantage in top end, I think the small restrictor adjustment will even things up, and if the restrictor drastically affects the cars from being competitive I will be the first to ask for it to be changed. I just would like to see everyone take a deep breath and stop the name calling, and accusations, we have a great group of people here that are very passionate about the sport we are in, and combined as we are now would be allot stronger together. The cars are, for the money the best value out there regardless of the power-plant, and they have advanced so much in the last 8 or so years and people have noticed, lets not loose what we strive to gain!!

[Jnovak]

In my opinion that makes the ineptness even more evident. Why would that data even be submitted if that were the case? Why would that data be utilized for comparison if that were the known case?

I think somebody running the MC combination lost a plug wire, I'm sure they have some acceleration data the CRB could consider.

During the 2 race weekend they data systems on multiple 2 strokes and multiple MC powered cars. They had data on numerous cars. I am not saying that I support the change at all because I do not. Just stating that they had lots of data. including our car that finished 2nd.

I just think it is wrong to accuse someone of sandbagging when you actually have no idea about that. I think that Clint would be very insulted if someone accused him of sandbagging.

[clint]

Clint, do you think that perhaps he may have had some trouble with the 2 stroke CVT combination? Like maybe 2 broken pipes over the weekend.

Perhaps you should investigate things occasionally.

Broken pipe both days? Seems if that were the case, it would have been detected and repaired on the first day. Ive said it offline, now im saying it on a public forum. Theres only a few guys that can consistently AND precisely tune the two-stroke/cvt combination in the country. Also, theres only a few drivers that I consider to be at the top of their game at EVERY event they go to. Mike is one of those guys. With that said, if there was no sandbagging going on then why was the times so far off both days compared to usual times turned? I will be fair and discount the second day due to crack in the pipe. What about the unusual gap between the times normally run and the times that were turned on the first day? I don't think anyone will disagree when I say that the track conditions were record setting conditions. Now, If someone can layout a logical answer to that question WITHOUT answering it indirectly, I will gladly take a shutup pill on this one and leave it alone. Until then, I will continue to pick it apart.

[clint]

Oh, I wouldn't be insulted. I would just challenge them to letting me drive their car on the same day and have them drive my car on the same to put clarification to the matter. This has been a long standing offer of mine, so far no one has taken me up on it.

[Daryl DeArman]

During the 2 race weekend they data systems on multiple 2 strokes and multiple MC powered cars. They had data on numerous cars. I am not saying that I support the change at all because I do not. Just stating that they had lots of data. including our car that finished 2nd.

Based on the comments you made on that other site I thought you felt there wasn't enough data. Maybe "lots" isn't enough? I've been guilty of paralysis by over analysis before.

The National Office collected the data for the CRB. I have personally reviewed the data but to my knowledge it was never discussed on an FSRAC conference call. I will not say any more about this.

The decision has been made and those of us in the F600 community must work within the system. I do suggest that you send letters to the CRB requesting that more data be obtained ASAP.

[Jnovak]

Based on the comments you made on that other site I thought you felt there wasn't enough data. Maybe "lots" isn't enough? I've been guilty of paralysis by over analysis before.

My comment was meant to state that we must have data from the use of the 30mm restrictor asap. do not know when or how that will happen.

I am never paralyzed by data. It is what I have lived by my entire career.

[reidhazelton]

It's pretty disgusting that people are all pitch-forks-and-lynch-ropes and saying Mike is (or was) sandbagging. Are you effing kidding me? I consider him a friend, and I know him well enough to guarantee that he would not sandbag, especially at The June Sprints. Clearly his broken pipes showed how much he was trying to step up his game and get every tenth of a horsepower out of the thing. He IS NOT going to lay down at the June Sprints. That's him home track, race, and it means more due to that. Sandbag? Of all the stupid sh.....

Anyone saying that really better come up with a better line of reasoning, because frankly, it's pathetic.

If you want to start attacking, insulting, and demolishing the name of a fellow racer, one who many of you here have raced wheel to wheel with, it a pretty sick day in F5/600 and one which you have created.

[Daryl DeArman]

My comment was meant to state that we must have data from the use of the 30mm restrictor asap. do not know when or how that will happen.

I am never paralyzed by data. It is what I have lived by my entire career.

Got it.

As far as not been paralyzed by data, that just means you've never had too much, and never worked for the NSA.

[jim murphy]

Now can we have a longer wheelbase, wider track. Dampers perhaps?

Will

"Dampers" (Coil-over shocks are what you are refering to?) are against the class low budget philosophy established back in 1984. We use friction dampening at the pivot bolts of the rocker arms - works well and is cheap.
Longer wheelbase may happen sometime in the future and wider track would be tied to this.

Jim
Been messing with these cars since 1982.

[jim murphy]

You guys on the east coast are lucky , you have the pro-series to go to. weve got nothing but scca. I dont know why we need smaller restrictors I thought they should have gone the other way ,with none. at thunderhill I'm about 6 seconds off of Jeff Jorgensons track record. I dont think its all me.

Contact Clint McMahan, tell him your setup and ask for his help with your F600, I feel confidant that he will help you.

Jim

[reidhazelton]

Broken pipe both days? Seems if that were the case, it would have been detected and repaired on the first day. Ive said it offline, now im saying it on a public forum. Theres only a few guys that can consistently AND precisely tune the two-stroke/cvt combination in the country. Also, theres only a few drivers that I consider to be at the top of their game at EVERY event they go to. Mike is one of those guys. With that said, if there was no sandbagging going on then why was the times so far off both days compared to usual times turned? I will be fair and discount the second day due to crack in the pipe. What about the unusual gap between the times normally run and the times that were turned on the first day? I don't think anyone will disagree when I say that the track conditions were record setting conditions. Now, If someone can layout a logical answer to that question WITHOUT answering it indirectly, I will gladly take a shutup pill on this one and leave it alone. Until then, I will continue to pick it apart.

Were you there? Did you race? Hard to think you were because the track was the worst I have ever seen it, and I've been there a few times.

I was. I did. The track was total crap nearly all weekend except for a one-hour gap on Saturday morning. Tim and I were hammering each other, hard, and were 1-2 seconds off our normal pace. Record setting condition? Uh, no. I have set the FF record there. Twice. Those condition were not like those times. Trust me.

Sandbagging? Pathetic. If your argument is so weak that you have to jump right to the conspiracy theory, your cause is D.O.A.

Mike must have been sandbagging starting over 2 years ago. What a clever guy to see all this coming. 2:23.48 in 2013, and a 2:23.55 in 2014.
http://junesprints.com/wp-content/up...Race_Final.pdf
2012:
http://junesprints.com/wp-content/up...ce-Results.pdf

[tedsimmons2]

I will gladly take a shutup pill on this one and leave it alone.

[reidhazelton]

Oh, I wouldn't be insulted. I would just challenge them to letting me drive their car on the same day and have them drive my car on the same to put clarification to the matter. This has been a long standing offer of mine, so far no one has taken me up on it.

Who's to say YOU won't sandbag?

[Jnovak]

At the June sprints there was no sand bagging. There was some pipe issues, Jack, Michael. I will say this - Michael Mueller like you Clint does not have it in him to sand bag, he is a stand up guy, from a respectable family and is a true and fair racer! As you know Clint, and have often said, the two strokes are temperamental at times. They do require more tuning than the M/C cars. I will remind everyone that the M/C cars were to be brought up to the level of the 2 strokes, the 30mm restricter was used as the original baseline. I will say in my opinion the two different power plants are close. I am for both, I like both. But there does seem to be a slight advantage with the M/C cars on the larger tracks. Yes being fair a car that I sponsor and help with -Herb Noble- jointly! I help with suspension and handling, motor and clutching done by - Brad Huelling- ran very well at the sprints and was definitely the top of the speed class in 2 strokes, and was able to run with the M/C cars. But once the M/C cars start running more and going to the bigger tracks you will see a definite advantage in top end, I think the small restrictor adjustment will even things up, and if the restrictor drastically affects the cars from being competitive I will be the first to ask for it to be changed. I just would like to see everyone take a deep breath and stop the name calling, and accusations, we have a great group of people here that are very passionate about the sport we are in, and combined as we are now would be allot stronger together. The cars are, for the money the best value out there regardless of the power-plant, and they have advanced so much in the last 8 or so years and people have noticed, lets not loose what we strive to gain!!

Thanks for your voice of reason and common sense Leon. I am sure that most of us want the class to be balanced and fair for both the 2 stroke cars and the 4 stroke cars. if this adjustment it what it takes to get us to that point then I am fine with that. let us all keep learning and move forward.

[Jnovak]

check this out guys. is this close enough?

http://www.apexspeed.com/forums/show...232#post438232

[ken kaplowitz]

who was driving what?
ken kaplowitz

[formulasuper]

"There's only a few guys that can consistently AND precisely tune the two-stroke/cvt combination in the country."

Clint has it correct here and this is probably the biggest problem with this equality situation. As a previous F440/F500 competitor of 10 yrs, I found, as most of my fellow competitors did, that getting the CVT tuned exactly correct for every session to be a daunting task that required constant adjustments for a infinite number of factors. When I would happen to occasionally get it all correct, including correctly jetting the 2 stroke for any change in air density since the last session, my car could run up front. But not get any of the changes exactly right & I'd be mid-pack at best. The bike engine powered cars being computer controlled & manually geared have way fewer variables & run much more consistent lap times from one session to the next.
I changed classes way before the MC engines were approved for these cars, however I'm a firm believer that MC power plants are the best bang for the buck for amateur formula & sport-racer cars.

[J Weida]

The personnel attacks against a respected competitor should not be allowed on this site .

[Jnovak]

The personnel attacks against a respected competitor should not be allowed on this site .

You are TOTALLY CORRECT!

[Jnovak]

who was driving what?
ken kaplowitz

let's see if I can get this right from todays race.
P1 Brian Novak - Maverick 600 Suzuki
P2 Cal Stewart - NovaBlade 600 Suzuki
P3 Fred Edwards - Maverick 600 Suzuki
P4 James Weida - Scorpion 593 Rotax
P5 Clint McMann - Scorpion 600 Suzuki DNF
P6 Ryan Barth - Chassis?? 600 Suzuki DNF

results here:
https://www.race-monitor.com/Results/Session/5067954

[jim murphy]

Ryan is in the same chassis as Tom Edwards - Scorpion.
What happened to Clint and Weida?

Jim

[Jnovak]

I understand that Clint had some sort of engine issue. Weida was in 3rd at lap 17 or18 then pulled off. Not sure what the issue was.