You can't stop somebody from outspending you, what you can do is have rules in place that hope to make it a very poor cost:benefit ratio beyond a certain threshold. No fancy dampers in this class is a fairly sizable savings. Not allowing custom configured frankenstein 600cc MC engines is another. Geartronics type systems yet another.
That's assuming Chuck believes that particular statement is true. Its a loaded statement where the gun is pointed at you and you have your finger on the trigger. Either take the beating of him making a generalized statement of saying "you're a fool IF you believe this"or pull the trigger by agreeing that the statement that everyone knows is true , is not true in your own mind.
Perhaps I could have called the idea itself foolish, but fool is hardly a personal attack.
Liar, snake, cheater, Jihadist, etc (pick your own insult/attack from the f500.us site) are personal attacks in my humble opinion.
And what exactly does it mean to "buy speed" anyways? Spending money to field and prepare a nice car? I know chuck is just repeating whatever dixon says so maybe it would be better to ask him, but still, "buying speed"???
Someone better tell the guys who are spending money to field well prepared cars they have no place in F5.
Experience has shown that those with 'excessive' financial abilities getting involved in a class like F500 have historically wanted to change the class so that they could exercise their financial muscle. I have no problems with well prepared and excellently driven cars that fully exploit the currently existing rules in the F500 class.
[QUOTE=F five hunj;439181]"Perhaps I could have called the idea itself foolish, but fool is hardly a personal attack.
Liar, snake, cheater, Jihadist, etc (pick your own insult/attack from the f500.us site) are personal attacks in my humble opinion."
I think that the webmaster will decide this and he will probably decide that your calling someone a fool is a personal attack. It could have been done much better by saying: "called the idea itself foolish" - just good manners.
Jim
After reading these posts and e-mailing Jim Murphy offline - whatever side of the argument you are on, you are doing the F5/F6 class a disservice. Why would anybody looking here get enthused about the class (whichever engine) if you read this c--p. Why would the CRB and advisory committee treat you guys seriously.
I was on the CRB for 10 years and a BOD member for six and I can tell you that this does the class no good - and you wonder why they just make their best guess on restrictors!
The restrictor is a Competition Adjustment - like weight the CRB / Advisory Committee does not have to go out for member input on these. As I said to the FC guys - ranting on Apexspeed does NOTHING for the decision making process, only letters through the system with facts and no insults (those letters tend to get ignored).
Phil
Response from the original poster:After reading these posts and e-mailing Jim Murphy offline - whatever side of the argument you are on, you are doing the F5/F6 class a disservice. Why would anybody looking here get enthused about the class (whichever engine) if you read this c--p. Why would the CRB and advisory committee treat you guys seriously.
I was on the CRB for 10 years and a BOD member for six and I can tell you that this does the class no good - and you wonder why they just make their best guess on restrictors!
The restrictor is a Competition Adjustment - like weight the CRB / Advisory Committee does not have to go out for member input on these. As I said to the FC guys - ranting on Apexspeed does NOTHING for the decision making process, only letters through the system with facts and no insults (those letters tend to get ignored).
1. Reading these posts should be enough to give one the flavor of the c__p being posted not sure what additional c__p Jim Murphy could supply via an offline email. OK, got that off my chest I’ll be a little more respectful in my continued response below.
2. The two sides are pretty well entrenched in their respective positions and are making a concerted effort at NOT getting along. It will take a mature, independent voice to bring some sanity to the mutually destructive comments being made by both sides. Hopefully this will be the CRB/AC.
3. While not very clear in my original post, it was really about the short notice given by the “competition adjustment” enacted on July 20th effective as August 1st. 32mm or 30mm is a decision made by the CRB/AC using their best judgment based on information collected hopefully over a sufficient period of time.
4. Chris Huskamp’s historical explanation is satisfactory to me and I have tried to keep my mouth shut since then. Not entirely successful.
5.? Because we are a recognized SCCA class, pay dues, and should be afforded the same considerations as any other class in the SCCA, e.g. FC with their Pinto/Zetec issues, Formula F with their Ford/Honda issue.“Why would the CRB and advisory committee treat you guys seriously”
6. Both the Formula F and the FC issues have caused enthusiastic responses by their respective constituents. These issues are being worked out, maybe not to everyone’s satisfaction but with mature guidance the CRB/AC is trying… I’m hopeful the CRB/AC will afford the F500 MC vs. Rotax issue the same guidance.
Last edited by tedsimmons2; 07.24.14 at 8:05 AM. Reason: include quote mark
Ted
If I gave the impression that F5/F6 was not going to be taken seriously I'm sorry - I was referring to fairly nasty threads on websites on any issue relating to the class. We had similar issues with FC at the height of the issues.
My E mail to Jim was trying to get it into a more civil discussion as he seems to be the cheerleader for the MC engines and to reiterate the rules process vs comp.adjustment nature of restrictors.
Phil
Just to give a update on the restrictors, I ran the 32 and 30mm restrictors back to back at Barber Motorsports Park. The outcome was 1.6 sec a lap slower with the 30mm restrictors in the car. The 32mm restrictors was consistent as a usual. I was running with the same drivers (time wise) as I have been this entire season. The decision to have the MC cars run 30mm restrictors in my opinion was one of the worst knee jerk reactions I've seen in SCCA thus far. One race with only two cars being compared that were so far dissimilar in aero is one of the worst displays of ignorance I've heard about or witnessed to this day. With the resources that SCCA has available to them its pretty obvious what and how this rule change came about. Its a shame to see this kind of political BS in a club that once had everything going for them. Its becoming more and more obvious to me an others as to why and how other race organizations has come about and not only remained successful but are growing at the same time.
The reality is that we need to live with this change until the CRB realizes that they have gone overboard on the restrictors. this simply means that we do not give up on The MC engine concept. the future for the F500 class is with the new MC engines and the facts are that there have been more MC powered cars built in the last 3 years than any other cars in the F500/F600 class period.
Complaining simply will not help. Racing the cars and making more of them will make the difference. Next year we will be racing one of our new cars and I agree that we will not be able to competitive with the best cars in the class.
Keep racing Clint. you are currently the best in the MC powered group So just keep up the good work and go for it.
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)
They are very cool cars, IMO, but why would anybody who wants to be competitive buy/build and race one today?
I believe the process to fix it is backwards. People generally don't buy lots of uncompetitive cars and then once they have enough influence lobby to make them competitive.
Remove the stink from the process, the cars are awesome, they will sell....but not if the politics prevent them from being competitive.
Email the BOD with what you think about this. Otherwise they will never know.
When emails come piling in on one subject, it does make an impression on the BOD.
Jim
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)
I don't think this will be the last restrictor size change for the class.
Time will tell if that approach works. Hopefully the guys who own them find them so much fun to race that they can just race each other and be okay with that until they can be made to race on a fairly even playing field.
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)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)