Prelude to FRP @ Sebring

[problemchild]

Yes it was a SCCA event but the FRP presence was overwhelming.
The newcomers, Dario, Tyler, Raymond, and Christian put on a helluva show at the front.
When the dust cleared after the Sunday feature, it was previous FRP winners, Sundaramoorthy and Bamford on the podium with Colasacco. Lots of hard racing, attrition, and some hurt feelings! Great show!

If the Sebring racing was any indication, 2018 FRP F1600 will be outstanding!

Race 1
Raymond Essma
Tyler O'Connor
David Livingston
Bob Perona
Christian Lall Dass
Yuven Sundaramoorthy
Joe Colasacco
Steve Bamford
John Schimenti
Dom Seddio
Greg Peluso
Dario Cangialosi
Hartley MacDonald
Freddy Rhemrev
Charles Foster
John Robinson II
Race 2
Yuven Sundaramoorthy
Steve Bamford
Joe Colasacco
John Robinson II
Raymond Essma
John Schimenti
Tyler O'Connor
Dario Cangialosi
Dom Seddio
Greg Peluso
Joel Haas
Hartley MacDonald
David Livingston
Christian Lall Dass
Bob Perona

[BWC54]

What were the penalties given to the first 2 finishers in the Sunday race to knock them off the podium?

[jchracer]

What were the penalties given to the first 2 finishers in the Sunday race to knock them off the podium?

Christian Lal Dass was essentially DQ'd for not having an operable fuel sample port. I know rules are rules but I didn't think the penalty fit the infraction. They are new people to SCCA (2nd race) and they did not get a warm welcome. Just one of the reasons I think they will run FRP instead of SCCA in the future.

[rdracr]

A) Driving infraction (passing under the yellow, I believe) and

B) Lack of a fuel port not allowing a fuel sample to be taken

[jchracer]

A) Driving infraction (passing under the yellow, I believe) and

B) Lack of a fuel port not allowing a fuel sample to be taken

B) Not really, fuel sample could have been easily taken. Just lacking the required port.

[problemchild]

The race was very entertaining. About half way through, there were about the lead dozen cars within proximity. Then, about 4 separate incidents resulted in several cars missing and the remaining cars spread out over about 1/2 a lap. The 4 rookies setting the pace at the front were very impressive!

[rdracr]

Christian Lal Dass was essentially DQ'd for not having an operable fuel sample port. I know rules are rules but I didn't think the penalty fit the infraction. They are new people to SCCA (2nd race) and they did not get a warm welcome. Just one of the reasons I think they will run FRP instead of SCCA in the future.

The Super Tour Entry into their Log Book was on the last page (#33). There was NO fuel sample port. So I really doubt that one had never existed before this event. The penalty was assessed by the race director and he was tough all weekend.

[BWC54]

That's a hard lesson. 2nd to last because of no fuel port. It's a shame because it's also Ford powered and finished 2nd against all those Hondas.

Christian Lal Dass was essentially DQ'd for not having an operable fuel sample port. I know rules are rules but I didn't think the penalty fit the infraction. They are new people to SCCA (2nd race) and they did not get a warm welcome. Just one of the reasons I think they will run FRP instead of SCCA in the future.

[andyllc]

That's a hard lesson. 2nd to last because of no fuel port. It's a shame because it's also Ford powered and finished 2nd against all those Hondas.

There is no performance advantage to the Honda. I have driven a lot of miles with good Kents and good Hondas. I truly hope people are not afraid to race against a Honda if they don't have one. The motor is not what makes somebody win or not win in this class right now.

[Steve Bamford]

There is no performance advantage to the Honda. I have driven a lot of miles with good Kents and good Hondas. I truly hope people are not afraid to race against a Honda if they don't have one. The motor is not what makes somebody win or not win in this class right now.

The combination of the car, the engine & more specifically the driver made the difference. The young man past me & kept motoring away, aggressive but clean pass & kept his speed up pulling away. It was a shame to lose the positions as he ran a good race & wasn't the drivers fault. With that said it is only one race & I'm sure the car will have the required update going forward. JR2's Kent was also impressive this weekend with the same combination, good engine, car & driver.

I'm sure the Yellow Mygale that was in the front was also upset they didn't finish up front with a final lap incident as well but that's how races finish sometimes.

[Wren]

The penalty was assessed by the race director and he was tough all weekend.

There’s tough and there’s dumb. Let the punishment fit the crime. We went a long time without one in FB and the worst we ever got was “hey, you really need to get a fuel sample port on the car.”

I will never understand the mentality of some of these SCCA officials. This didn’t impact safety, equity, or anything else important.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[RussMcB]

There’s tough and there’s dumb. Let the punishment fit the crime. We went a long time without one in FB and the worst we ever got was “hey, you really need to get a fuel sample port on the car.”

I will never understand the mentality of some of these SCCA officials. This didn’t impact safety, equity, or anything else important.

I've installed one in my past (5?) race cars and never had my fuel tested.

Yes I know what that implies. :-)

Sorry for the hijack, Greg. Glad to hear about a full field and tight, fun racing.

[Steve Bamford]

There’s tough and there’s dumb. Let the punishment fit the crime. We went a long time without one in FB and the worst we ever got was “hey, you really need to get a fuel sample port on the car.”

I will never understand the mentality of some of these SCCA officials. This didn’t impact safety, equity, or anything else important.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Why do they need a fuel sample port anyways? What were they testing the fuel for as I don’t believe there is a spec fuel for SCCA Kent FF cars is there? Sorry maybe there is a spec fuel or limit to what you can run, I’m sure someone can advise. I agree the punishment was too harsh & will leave a bitter taste for a new SCCA member/driver.

[Wren]

Why do they need a fuel sample port anyways? What were they testing the fuel for as I don’t believe there is a spec fuel for SCCA Kent FF cars is there? Sorry maybe there is a spec fuel or limit to what you can run, I’m sure someone can advise. I agree the punishment was too harsh & will leave a bitter taste for a new SCCA member/driver.

There are still rules about dielectric constant and fuel contents. I think that fuel testing is great, as you can really make horsepower with some of the banned stuff, a dq or move to the back is definitely the right move if someone is caught with banned fuel, it’s not the right movefor making it marginally less convenient to take the sample.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Steve Bamford]

There are still rules about dielectric constant and fuel contents. I think that fuel testing is great, as you can really make horsepower with some of the banned stuff, a dq or move to the back is definitely the right move if someone is caught with banned fuel, it’s not the right movefor making it marginally less convenient to take the sample.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Thanks Wren. Yes they could have gotten a fuel sample other ways that would have been legit.

[Peter Olivola]

Wonder how that car got an annual tech without the fuel port.

[Wren]

Wonder how that car got an annual tech without the fuel port.

Most likely it had one at some point and it failed (as they tend to) and was subsequently removed. The standard “push to dispense” fuel ports are not high quality pieces.
Alternately, it has been my experience that some tech inspectors spend their time on the important things, i.e. those related to safety.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Westroc]

A few years ago at the runoffs @ R/America there was complaints about "rocket fuel". Hell yes it worked but the fumes while following were sooo... bad you would have been lucky to see the green flag. Your eyes just opened up like waterfalls and it was hard to breathe properly. And Tech well I'm not going there because it's not worth the time. No so far as I remember no one was DQ'd. Did they qualify that way is an open question so I was told.

[Wren]

A few years ago at the runoffs @ R/America there was complaints about "rocket fuel". Hell yes it worked but the fumes while following were sooo... bad you would have been lucky to see the green flag. Your eyes just opened up like waterfalls and it was hard to breathe properly. And Tech well I'm not going there because it's not worth the time. No so far as I remember no one was DQ'd. Did they qualify that way is an open question so I was told.

I find that hard to believe. I think I was at every RA runoffs and they were really diligent and competent about fuel sampling. With the spec fuel, it was too easy not to be. I’m 100% sure our competitors had compliant fuel in their cars.
More likely, someone making up excuses.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[stonebridge20]

A few years ago at the runoffs @ R/America there was complaints about "rocket fuel". Hell yes it worked but the fumes while following were sooo... bad you would have been lucky to see the green flag. Your eyes just opened up like waterfalls and it was hard to breathe properly. And Tech well I'm not going there because it's not worth the time. No so far as I remember no one was DQ'd. Did they qualify that way is an open question so I was told.

There was no Rocket fuel used in the FF field the first two years the Runoffs were held there. After that, I have no clue.
We used rocket fuel in Treadways RF80 at the 04 MidOhio runoffs for one session. Damn near killed ourselves from the fumes and never used it again. We did carry an empty can of it in the trailer and used to drag it out every once in a while and half cover it with a towel just to shake up the hen house.

[Raceworks]

There’s tough and there’s dumb. Let the punishment fit the crime. We went a long time without one in FB and the worst we ever got was “hey, you really need to get a fuel sample port on the car.”

I will never understand the mentality of some of these SCCA officials. This didn’t impact safety, equity, or anything else important.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The fuel port rule is there to avoid spillage when taking a sample from a hot car so that you don't have a fire, so actually it is a safety rule. Since the race officials are the ones that are going to get burned (literally) if something goes wrong I can see them taking it a bit more seriously than drivers do.

Every annual inspection I've had on every car I've owned since the port rule came into effect they look for the port.

Very often when they impound cars in qualifying they'll look for the ports, too. Most of the time if the port is either not present or not compliant they'll quietly let you know you should fix it before the race.

Plus it's not like they keep the rules a secret and spring them on you out of the blue. So I'm having trouble jumping on the "officials are being jerks" bandwagon here.

The rules say a car has to be compliant to the GCR and the FCS, and "compliant" means meeting the letter of the rules. It's a simple yes or no question, there's no shades of meaning because once you get into adjudicating based on subjective opinions you might as well burn the GCR and just wing it.

Actually, the penalty they gave could have been worse. They'd have been just as much within their rights to disqualify the car which would mean the finish wouldn't count towards the Runoffs qualification criteria and they'd assess penalty points to the driver's license.

Now, if these people bought the car with a current annual in the logbook with the idea that the person that owned it before them knew what he was doing then I do feel sorry for them that they had to find out about the fuel port rule this way. I'd also recommend they start going through the car to see what other non-compliant items are in there. Generally anyone to lazy to put a fuel port in has a lot of other "gems" waiting under the hood.

[Wren]

The fuel port rule is there to avoid spillage when taking a sample from a hot car so that you don't have a fire, so actually it is a safety rule. Since the race officials are the ones that are going to get burned (literally) if something goes wrong I can see them taking it a bit more seriously than drivers do.

The race officials are standing off to the side waiting for me to hand them the bottle with the fuel sample. They’re not the ones taking it or standing over the car. It’s not like the fuel ports don’t leak too. They’re just more likely to do it when no one is looking.

Actually, the penalty they gave could have been worse. They'd have been just as much within their rights to disqualify the car which would mean the finish wouldn't count towards the Runoffs qualification criteria and they'd assess penalty points to the driver's license.

Making the penalty more severe would have only increased the level of dumb. Eventually the SCCA is going to have to embrace the concept of customer service. I can’t imagine a response that would be appropriate beyond a log book entry requiring one by the next race.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[billwald]

The kid is That Good! He and his brother have tons of talent. Great family, 1st class cars, and clean, smart drivers. I'm sure they will bounce back strong. SCCA needs more families like them. FRP series would be great for him, but I'd like to see a "local" kid bring the FF runoffs Gold back to Florida.

That's a hard lesson. 2nd to last because of no fuel port. It's a shame because it's also Ford powered and finished 2nd against all those Hondas.