Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 80 of 443
  1. #41
    Not an aerodynamicist Wren's Avatar
    Join Date
    02.27.06
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    2,743
    Liked: 151

    Default

    Radon compliance has been beat to death here. You can go to the old threads here if you want to read pointless discussion. There's nothing to gain for me by sharing anything.

    I was only interested in a defnitive answer, no matter how much that answer would have been ignored if it wasn't what certain people wanted to see.

    Mike, my understanding is that the reason for the Radon unsafe seating position is that is as low as you can sit and still see out of the car to drive.

  2. #42
    Contributing Member Peter Gonzalez's Avatar
    Join Date
    08.02.04
    Location
    CT.
    Posts
    50
    Liked: 1

    Default

    Why is it that every time this guy opens his mouth about the Radon, it is something negative. Unsafe seating, can't see ? Has he driven the car?

  3. #43
    Global Moderator Bill Bonow's Avatar
    Join Date
    08.18.02
    Location
    Plainfield, IL
    Posts
    2,663
    Liked: 190

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wren View Post
    my understanding is that the reason for the Radon unsafe seating position is that is as low as you can sit and still see out of the car to drive.
    Maybe Radon offers an optional phone book?
    Bill Bonow
    "Wait, which one is the gas pedal again?"

  4. #44
    Global Moderator Bill Bonow's Avatar
    Join Date
    08.18.02
    Location
    Plainfield, IL
    Posts
    2,663
    Liked: 190

    Default Wren Keith = Moriarty in Kelly's Heroes ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wren View Post
    Radon compliance has been beat to death here. You can go to the old threads here if you want to read pointless discussion. There's nothing to gain for me by sharing anything.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuStsFW4EmQ
    Bill Bonow
    "Wait, which one is the gas pedal again?"

  5. #45
    Heterochromic Papillae starkejt's Avatar
    Join Date
    07.04.07
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    2,540
    Liked: 3

    Default

    He's more like if Honey Boo Boo's mom had another baby that resulted from a drunken 3 way with Dragline from Cool Hand Luke and Lennie Small from Of Mice and Men.

  6. #46
    Not an aerodynamicist Wren's Avatar
    Join Date
    02.27.06
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    2,743
    Liked: 151

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Gonzalez View Post
    Why is it that every time this guy opens his mouth about the Radon, it is something negative. Unsafe seating, can't see ? Has he driven the car?
    I think I have covered this here before but it is because I really dislike Dr. Radon and the everything about how the Radon has been brought in. Dr. Radon started by coming on here and talking **** on pretty much everyone involved in club/pro racing. The arrogance was impressive, unfounded, and annoying. Everything from suspension design, fabrication, tire testing, engineering, and I'm sure I've forgotten a lot of things. Then he started wiping his ass with the GCR, which I believe had its roots in the previously mentioned arrogance. Dr. Radon tried to parse the GCR in a way that was totally unacceptable, even going so far as to discuss how the meaning of words would change based on the existence of a hyphen. Once the COA slapped him down he just ignored the rules. Since he sold his bill of goods to one of the owners of the F2KCS, he didn't have to follow the rules anyways.
    After his car actually hit the track, it really didn't live up expectations (to put it mildly). That certainly did nothing to change his opinion of his car and his relative talents. Since then we have heard proclamations that if he were to design an FA, it would absolutely dominate the field and obsolete everything out there. I assume that is because he knows so much more about small bore formula design that those idiots at Swift or Ralt do? The random claims from Radon fanboys about Firman knocking off his design with a car released a year before the Radon have been equally as entertaining.
    Everything listed above was previously just a mildly amusing side note to racing. It was interesting (and pointless) to argue about it on the internet and an interesting thought exercise on the GCR. It didn't really matter and wouldn't until/unless the Radon began to dominate the F2KCS. Then people might start to pay attention to the Radon-F2KCS relationship and rules exemptions.

    What really motivated me to start being much more blunt regarding Radon was some of the actions taken by Dr. Radon in the last few months. The conspiracy theories regarding Citation and the rules clarification have gotten completely out of control. These theories have been undeniably proven false, yet he clings to them and doesn't hesitate to scream them to the BOD. That makes him and anyone else who repeats them a liar. As far as I know the only 2012 compliant chassis that was made illegal by the rules re-write was the Citation.


    Quote Originally Posted by starkejt View Post
    He's more like if Honey Boo Boo's mom had another baby that resulted from a drunken 3 way with Dragline from Cool Hand Luke and Lennie Small from Of Mice and Men.
    You always say the sweetest things to me. Someone is getting a hug next time I see them.

  7. #47
    Contributing Member jimh3063's Avatar
    Join Date
    06.09.05
    Location
    Easton, Massachusetts
    Posts
    580
    Liked: 10

    Default Compliance review

    Wren:
    You obviously must have felt you had the proof you needed to make sure the SCCA knew the car was illegal or you would not have asked for a compliance review. I am asking that you save me and a lot of others who are truly interested, the time of going through every friggin post about the Radon on this board. You have all your doc in one place. It would take you 10 minutes to post it. Why won't you? If I were so sure that I was right and had the proof documented in one place, I'd post it. It would stop this thing dead in it's tracks.

    Based on what I read, you have photos, drawings and a slew of other info proving your point. I am at a total loss why you would not want to post it. You've said that you're goal in asking for the compliance review was really to get the SCCA to take a closer look at the rules as they applied to the Radon as of Sept 2012. You've mentioned that you knew the F2000 series would not change their mind based on the compliance review results. Your goals was to prove that the car should not be run in the series as it was not compliant as of Sept 2012. Everyone knows this was your goal. It is the worst kept secret of 2012. You yourself have told us this so I guess it's not really a secret any more. I am at a total at a loss why with everything out in the open you would not post the data you submitted in requesting a compliance review for public viewing.

    Help me understand the logic of not posting it with everything that has gone on.
    Again. I'd post it all for the group to see if I had the data to prove my point.

    Jimmy
    Jimmy Hanrahan
    jimh3063@yahoo.com

  8. #48
    Grand Pooh Bah Purple Frog's Avatar
    Join Date
    04.03.01
    Location
    Havana, Fl, USA
    Posts
    10,745
    Liked: 3694

    Default

    Wren,
    Watch where you are going with statements like this:


    Since he sold his bill of goods to one of the owners of the F2KCS, he didn't have to follow the rules anyways.

    The Radon as entered in the F2kCS, came into our series with homolagation papers, SCCA Club logbooks, a history of already running in club events, and a file of "self protests" to explain certain aspects of the car. None of these items had been signed off by anyone related to the F2kCS, but by SCCA Club officials.
    Reviewing the documents we found nothing that said it was not an SCCA Club legal car.

    What rules did those owners not have to follow?


  9. #49
    Heterochromic Papillae starkejt's Avatar
    Join Date
    07.04.07
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    2,540
    Liked: 3

    Default

    Maybe he doesn't post it for the same reason he doesn't post his last 5 tax returns and a photo of his genitals next to a scale. Because he feels it's private and doesn't want to.

  10. #50
    Contributing Member Jnovak's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.08.07
    Location
    Dearborn, Michigan
    Posts
    3,787
    Liked: 896

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wren View Post
    Jim,

    You and several others were scammed into spending over $100k on cars that were neither compliant nor competitive. That's a shame, but it is what it is. That is far too much money and there is far too much water under the bridge for anyone to have their mind changed now. Even if I had ended up with a COA approved document undeniably proving the non-compliance of the Radon, I would not expect anything to change. In spite of Dr. Radon's claims to the contrary, I would not expect him to accept the COA ruling. I would also not expect anything to change in the F2KCS either with regard to the rules for which that the Radon is allowed exceptions. A Radon investor owns the series and he gets to make the rules and determine their enforcement. That is certainly his choice.
    I think this may have been our last chance to know for a certainty whether or not the Radon was compliant to the 2012 GCR. I'll admit that I was curious. Oh well, most of us had our minds made up anyways. I can't imagine what positive things would come from posting the compliance request.

    Thanks for the kind words.

    I have no idea if the radon is illegal. However, if a Radon ever shows up at an SCCA Club race then any competitor or entrant can protest the car.

    Wren, of course you could have requested a compliance review of your car. It does cost $300 as I remember but is it worth the piece of mind? Maybe, maybe not and I have actually use system several times.

    Thanks ... Jay Novak

  11. #51
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    08.18.02
    Location
    Indy, IN
    Posts
    6,237
    Liked: 1780

    Default

    From what I can see, Wrens review request was rejected because of the fact that the examples given were not from his own car, which is a requirement for a "compliance review". Had he written it up and presented it with drawing of a supposed design proposal for his own car, my guess is that it would have then been addressed and gone through the process.

  12. #52
    Not an aerodynamicist Wren's Avatar
    Join Date
    02.27.06
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    2,743
    Liked: 151

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jimh3063 View Post
    Wren:
    You obviously must have felt you had the proof you needed to make sure the SCCA knew the car was illegal or you would not have asked for a compliance review. I am asking that you save me and a lot of others who are truly interested, the time of going through every friggin post about the Radon on this board. You have all your doc in one place. It would take you 10 minutes to post it. Why won't you? If I were so sure that I was right and had the proof documented in one place, I'd post it. It would stop this thing dead in it's tracks.
    Of course I felt that I had the proof. While I have not hesitated to express my opinion that the Radon was not legal, I have always understood that what I said was nothing more than an opinion from someone who doesn't make official rulings. The ruling from the COA would have been an official ruling that stated definitively whether the Radon was compliant in the areas I asked about. While I am sure that a non-compliant ruling would have been argued on here, it would not have changed the facts of the cars compliance on the features I mentioned.
    Posting what I sent the SCCA would only cause another pointless, unproductive internet argument. Even this thread seems headed downhill fast. There is no point to the argument. Everyone's mind is made up. It would stop nothing in it's tracks, it would only spawn a 10 page thread that the moderators end up shutting down.

    You've said that you're goal in asking for the compliance review was really to get the SCCA to take a closer look at the rules as they applied to the Radon as of Sept 2012.
    I actually never said that. My motivation was curiousity and to produce a final, definitive word on the features I believe to be illegal.
    You've mentioned that you knew the F2000 series would not change their mind based on the compliance review results.
    I certainly don't think they would have. Again, that is nothing but an opinion from someone who doesn't get a say.
    Your goals was to prove that the car should not be run in the series as it was not compliant as of Sept 2012. Everyone knows this was your goal. It is the worst kept secret of 2012.
    You've now assigned two motivations to why I sent in this compliance review and neither are correct.
    I am absolutely not interested in saying whether or not the Radon should be run in the F2KCS series. I have a ton of respect for the F2KCS and I believe that it is by far the best open wheel racing out there, at any level. I cannot wait to begin participating in their events. I don't even believe that the Radon should be excluded from the F2KCS. There are 7 of those cars already built and the owners bought them in good faith that they were legal. To see those people not have a place to run would be disappointing. None of that means that I think the car should be allowed either. The people who have shown an impressive ability to run a series are the ones to make that decision.

    You yourself have told us this so I guess it's not really a secret any more.
    [/quote]
    I didn't and I don't understand why you insist on making things up.

    I am at a total at a loss why with everything out in the open you would not post the data you submitted in requesting a compliance review for public viewing.

    Help me understand the logic of not posting it with everything that has gone on.
    Again. I'd post it all for the group to see if I had the data to prove my point.

    Jimmy
    I have already explained this. But, here it is one last time:

    Posting the compliance review here would not produce anything positive. The only possible result would be another stupid internet argument. I was only interested in a final answer.

    I will also give you another reason: I don't have to.

    Quote Originally Posted by Purple Frog View Post
    Wren,
    Watch where you are going with statements like this:

    Since he sold his bill of goods to one of the owners of the F2KCS, he didn't have to follow the rules anyways.

    The Radon as entered in the F2kCS, came into our series with homolagation papers, SCCA Club logbooks, a history of already running in club events, and a file of "self protests" to explain certain aspects of the car. None of these items had been signed off by anyone related to the F2kCS, but by SCCA Club officials.
    Reviewing the documents we found nothing that said it was not an SCCA Club legal car.

    What rules did those owners not have to follow?
    Back in August you stated that you had not seen the compliance review information from Radon:

    http://www.apexspeed.com/forums/showpost.php?p=357624&postcount=81

    So I guess I'm confused. Have you reviewed their compliance reviews as you claimed in this thread or not?

    Homologation is not a ruling on legality and you know that. Having logbooks is meaningless for legality as well. Running a club event does not evaluate the legality of the car either, unless a competitor protests a car. Protesting a competitors car is less acceptable than nude bathing in a public fountain, so that wasn't going to happen. But, I don't really believe that the car was entered in many club events before it entered F2KCS races. I know that it was entered in a drivers school, where legality is not assessed (at least it wasn't at my driver's schools). What other club events was it entered in before an F2KCS race? Nothing you named off is any endorsement on the part of the SCCA that make it a legal car or a non-compliant car.

    If you really want to know a few places that I believe the Radon not to be legal, then I guess you could review January's fastrack. In private, you have agreed with one of those points and acknowledged that another was "pushing it," which is what brought it to my attention. Based on what I have been told, none of those things have been reviewed for compliance.

    Simple question: if the COA had ruled on my request and provided definitive proof that the Radon was non-compliant with the 2012 GCR, would it have been allowed to compete in the F2KCS? I don't know and I don't really care, I'm just curious. I don't even know what I think about it. The cars are out there and it would be a shame for them not to have somewhere to run their cars.

    Quote Originally Posted by starkejt View Post
    Maybe he doesn't post it for the same reason he doesn't post his last 5 tax returns and a photo of his genitals next to a scale. Because he feels it's private and doesn't want to.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jnovak View Post
    I have no idea if the radon is illegal. However, if a Radon ever shows up at an SCCA Club race then any competitor or entrant can protest the car.

    Wren, of course you could have requested a compliance review of your car. It does cost $300 as I remember but is it worth the piece of mind? Maybe, maybe not and I have actually use system several times.

    Thanks ... Jay Novak
    Jay,

    Because of the 2013 changes to the FF/FC rules that make the rules outlawing the Radon more clear, I do not believe there are any questions that the Radon will not be compliant with the 2013 GCR. I was invited to come to Watkin's Glen to review and protest the Radon a few months ago. I was booking travel to go when I realized that the likely result would be a dicktuck and no show on their part and I would be stuck with non-refundable airline tickets. Instead I decided to go this route. As this compliance review was not heard all the way through and there are no remaining opportunities to protest the Radon under the 2012 GCR, we may never know the answer.

  13. #53
    Grand Pooh Bah Purple Frog's Avatar
    Join Date
    04.03.01
    Location
    Havana, Fl, USA
    Posts
    10,745
    Liked: 3694

    Default

    Wren,
    I said they had a file of "self protests". I chose not to read them, unless there was a protest filed where they might come into play. By not reading them, I would not slip up and "leak" them.

    You must admit that your actions appear to many of us to be just a private vendetta. With the rule change that goes into effect Jan1, it was obvious to all that the Radon would fail in some areas. So why go through the excercise to prove it illegal in 2012?
    Beating a dead horse? Or is it some schoolyard satisfaction that you can parade around saying "I told you so." ?



  14. #54
    Contributing Member tstarke4's Avatar
    Join Date
    04.09.10
    Location
    Rockville, Virginia
    Posts
    123
    Liked: 0

    Default

    I would like to wish everyone on this thread a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Count your blessings.

  15. #55
    Contributing Member jimh3063's Avatar
    Join Date
    06.09.05
    Location
    Easton, Massachusetts
    Posts
    580
    Liked: 10

    Default Showing up at an SCCA event

    Jay
    For the record, I have shown up at 3 SCCA races last year. I also have had my SCCA required annual inspection by a National SCCA Tech inspector. In the spirit of full disclosure, I'd be happy to scan my log book in.

    Jimmy
    Jimmy Hanrahan
    jimh3063@yahoo.com

  16. #56
    Contributing Member tstarke4's Avatar
    Join Date
    04.09.10
    Location
    Rockville, Virginia
    Posts
    123
    Liked: 0

    Default

    post-purchase cognitive dissonance

  17. #57
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    08.18.02
    Location
    Indy, IN
    Posts
    6,237
    Liked: 1780

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Purple Frog View Post
    Wren,
    With the rule change that goes into effect Jan1, it was obvious to all that the Radon would fail in some areas. So why go through the exercise to prove it illegal in 2012?
    Beating a dead horse? Or is it some schoolyard satisfaction that you can parade around saying "I told you so." ?
    With one side saying that the car was legal under the old rules, and that there was some sort of conspiracy, and another side saying that it was not legal, and that there was no conspiracy, it would have been nice to find out one way or the other and lay the matter to rest.

  18. #58
    Not an aerodynamicist Wren's Avatar
    Join Date
    02.27.06
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    2,743
    Liked: 151

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Purple Frog View Post
    Wren,
    I said they had a file of "self protests". I chose not to read them, unless there was a protest filed where they might come into play. By not reading them, I would not slip up and "leak" them.
    Ok, so when you wrote this:
    The Radon as entered in the F2kCS, came into our series with homolagation papers, SCCA Club logbooks, a history of already running in club events, and a file of "self protests" to explain certain aspects of the car. None of these items had been signed off by anyone related to the F2kCS, but by SCCA Club officials.
    Reviewing the documents we found nothing that said it was not an SCCA Club legal car.

    I thought you were implying that you had reviewed the documents you just listed. Is this what you really meant(changes in bold italics):

    The Radon as entered in the F2kCS, came into our series with homolagation papers, SCCA Club logbooks, a history of already running in club events, and claimed that they had a file of "self protests" to explain certain aspects of the car. None of these items had been signed off by anyone related to the F2kCS, but by SCCA Club officials.
    We reviewed only the documents that did not concern legality, so we found nothing that said it was not an SCCA club legal car.

    By your own admission, you found parts of the car questionable. Why not review the documents to see if they would answer your questions?

    As far as anyone ever filing a protest? You have to be kidding. Obviously, I was quite vocal from the beginning about the Radon legality. I was free to do this since I was not participating in the F2KCS. Since I was one of the more vocal people, I ended up hearing from a surprising numberof F2KCS participants. To a person they were unhappy with several parts of the Radon. But, their sense of self-preservation made them keep their mouth shut. All of them expressed concern that any sort of protest or making noise about the Radon would have a negative effect on their efforts in the F2KCS. No one was going to protest the car.
    To be honest, I have some concerns as well that some of the negativity surrounding me will trickle down to Brandon. There have been some problems over the last couple of years with people not understanding that he and I are two very different people. I can assure you that Brandon would strongly prefer for me to STFU.



    You must admit that your actions appear to many of us to be just a private vendetta.
    I have made no secretof my distaste for Dr. Radon. His continued insistence on lying about others to convince his customers that he did not sell them a car taht was never compliant has been quite frustrating.
    With the rule change that goes into effect Jan1, it was obvious to all that the Radon would fail in some areas.
    Of course. But, if the COA had ruled the Radon illegal at least we wouldn't have had to listen to the bitching and whining from people saying that the new rules made the Radon illegal.
    So why go through the excercise to prove it illegal in 2012?
    I do not particularly care that Hanrahan wants to know my motivation, but it bothers me a little bit more that you are questioning them. You are the tech inspector for the F2KCS, so if something happens that clarifies parts of the GCR, why do you care where the information comes from or whether it was asked for by a nice person or if it was asked for by me?

    Beating a dead horse? Or is it some schoolyard satisfaction that you can parade around saying "I told you so." ?
    You are forgetting that this would have been a confidential ruling. The COA violated the GCR and my trust when they published the information about me asking for a ruling. I spent a lot of Friday on the phone with SCCA headquarters and the COA. I am very unhappy with them. They have admitted that they should have never published this in fastrack. They have their reasons for publishing it, their reasons are just stupid.

    I have received multiple invitations to review the compliance of the Radon, do you have a problem with me taking them up on that?

    Who exactly was I going to say, "I told you so" to?

    But, if you really must know, there were answers from this compliance review that I needed to move forward on my car. Is that an acceptable reason to you?

    Quote Originally Posted by jimh3063 View Post
    Jay
    For the record, I have shown up at 3 SCCA races last year. I also have had my SCCA required annual inspection by a National SCCA Tech inspector. In the spirit of full disclosure, I'd be happy to scan my log book in.
    You seem to be implying that your attendance at SCCA races has any reflection on the legality of the car. That is quite dishonest. You know well that attendance at those races and having an annual inspection is no evaluation of compliance. I have had plenty of annual inspections done. It is absolutely not a compliance review. What exactly do you think that a scan of your logbook proves?

    You clearly know that there will be no compliance evaluation at SCCA national races. After all, you are so confident that your car will not be evaluated for compliance that you are willing to head from New England to the Florida nationals this year with a car that you know to be non-compliant.

    http://www.apexspeed.com/forums/show...9&postcount=40
    Last edited by Wren; 12.22.12 at 9:40 PM.

  19. #59
    Contributing Member Jnovak's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.08.07
    Location
    Dearborn, Michigan
    Posts
    3,787
    Liked: 896

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jimh3063 View Post
    Jay
    For the record, I have shown up at 3 SCCA races last year. I also have had my SCCA required annual inspection by a National SCCA Tech inspector. In the spirit of full disclosure, I'd be happy to scan my log book in.

    Jimmy
    Thanks for the update Jimmy. I had heard about the Radon being at a few club races. I know about the system for "compliance review" as I have done it 3 times. The system works but only for the year of the review. After that the rules can change and I have had that experience.

    The main point of my post was that a system exists to prove that cars are legal or not and if you think a car is not legal you should use it. I have personally been protested several times and "luckily" we were legal each time.

    Thanks ... Jay Novak

  20. #60
    Contributing Member Peter Gonzalez's Avatar
    Join Date
    08.02.04
    Location
    CT.
    Posts
    50
    Liked: 1

    Default

    You know, it wasn't Nathan idea to design an Indy light car. What happen was when Gil de Ferran saw pictures of the Radon and was kind of blown a way. After seeing it in person, I think he convince and ask Nathan to help with the project.
    Funny how two different guys saw two things.
    The truth is that if any of us out here in Apex land would would have design a car like the Radon I think we would be proud of it. And enjoy talking about it. I guess there are some people out there that were threaten by this deal.
    It would have been great to have taken the fight to track instead of all this BS about, O we are due for a change in the rules, not very sporting if you ask me.
    PS.
    Not sure if the other guy has seen even seen the car.

  21. #61
    Heterochromic Papillae starkejt's Avatar
    Join Date
    07.04.07
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    2,540
    Liked: 3

    Default

    I can assure you that no one felt threatened by the Radon, not even when yours was on fire. For the rules change conspiracy to hold water, the new rules would have to make the Van Diemens illegal. What Wren and others claim is that the Radon was illegal before the rules rewrite, and thus the rewrite has nothing to do with its compliance. Personally, I don't care if it's legal or not, as it's just another car with cool pieces on it that isn't as good as the boring, old, agricultural-looking-but-fast VD. I just find the conspiracy nonsense from the Radon camp to be absurd and delusional. Imagine if I stood up and asserted that Kate Upton won't go out with me because she's intimidated by my masculine beauty. Pretty similar to claiming they won't let the Radon race because it's too fast.

  22. #62
    Administrator dc's Avatar
    Join Date
    11.24.00
    Location
    Chicagoland, Illinois
    Posts
    5,526
    Liked: 1413

    Default

    Boys, I'm beyond tired of this bickering, sucker-punching and political BS deriving from what has been brought down to a personal level of attacks. Wren has been given a 10-day "time-out" from the forums for the multiple attacks on Nathan, and will be permanently expelled from ApexSpeed for the next indulgence that even remotely appears to be insulting to anyone else. I'm tired of getting PMs and e-mails from people who not only have a lesser view of ApexSpeed because of it, but also refuse to post and contribute to the community due to these childish rantings.

    If civil discussions can't take place on these subjects, then they won't at all. I'm instructing all moderators and admins here to paint with a broad brush and close things down immediately at the hint of anyone taking things to a personal level.


    From this point on, we will be taking a serious stance on ad hominem attacks in the forums, for any reason. We have no problem with emotional and spirited arguments, but when the only way to argue against someone's point is to attack them personally or some other superficial reason, the offending user will be given a 10-day temporary posting ban on the forums. I don't care who it is that is guilty of the indiscretion, they will get a mandatory 10-day cooling off period without warning. Don't be the first example to everyone else.

    We need to work together to fix the problems that we all see with the system, not fight against ourselves. Nothing good is accomplished by personal attacks and flame wars. And we won't tolerate it here on ApexSpeed.


    I do not want to lose members of this community for any reason. But we will not hesitate to react if this type of antagonistic behavior continues.




    Happy Holidays,



  23. #63
    Member
    Join Date
    09.22.11
    Location
    Baltimore
    Posts
    10
    Liked: 0

    Default A message through me from Foschi

    Foschi wants to make sure everyone here has a Merry Christmas.

    Foschi is happy to see losers finally lose. It's a Christmas miracle.

    Wren is his Christmas hero.

    Foschi wants to know where all the money went
    that was collected for all Radons went, did Madoff have a hand in this too?

    Don't kill the messenger.

    Nick. (Really)

  24. #64
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    06.02.02
    Location
    St Charles, Mo
    Posts
    546
    Liked: 159

    Default thank you doug!

    Thank you Doug! This kind of thing is why the ff underground became a joke.

    Jerry

  25. #65
    Administrator dc's Avatar
    Join Date
    11.24.00
    Location
    Chicagoland, Illinois
    Posts
    5,526
    Liked: 1413

    Default

    Foshi would do well by not asking people to carry his messages. He can be responsible for them getting banned, too.

  26. #66
    Contributing Member DaveW's Avatar
    Join Date
    06.25.01
    Location
    Bath, OH
    Posts
    6,015
    Liked: 3026

    Default Thank you!

    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Carter View Post
    Boys, I'm beyond tired of this bickering, sucker-punching and political BS deriving from what has been brought down to a personal level of attacks....

    I do not want to lose members of this community for any reason. But we will not hesitate to react if this type of antagonistic behavior continues.

    Happy Holidays,


    As I said, thank you. I was trying to think of a civilized way to calm this mess down, but couldn't come up with a way of doing it that wouldn't just stir it up more.

    So, thank you, and have happy holidays and a great 2013!
    Dave Weitzenhof

  27. #67
    Contributing Member jimh3063's Avatar
    Join Date
    06.09.05
    Location
    Easton, Massachusetts
    Posts
    580
    Liked: 10

    Default Heading to Fla

    Wren:
    As far as me heading to Fla from New England, I live in Jupiter Fla half the year. I head down the day after Xmas. you live in Alabama. If you had to wake up, open your front door and be dick deep in snow, you would understand my reasons.

    Jimmy
    Jimmy Hanrahan
    jimh3063@yahoo.com

  28. #68
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    10.31.07
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,517
    Liked: 1407

    Default

    Not that it matters, but I thought that Wren and others conducted themselves quite well considering the heated nature of the topic.

    Those vocal on this thread are simply speaking for a larger group of people (on both sides) that don't care to get involved.

    Asking a stupid question....why not just impound a Radon and get it over with? If I were a Radon owner, a competitor, or a sanctioning body I would simply to put the whole mess to bed. Seems a easy way to solve it once and for all so those involved can move on to bigger and better things...like Honda/Mazda FC engines, FTRs, and intrusion panels.

    So again....why not just self-impound or series-imposed impound a Radon? Serious question.

  29. #69
    Contributing Member Jnovak's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.08.07
    Location
    Dearborn, Michigan
    Posts
    3,787
    Liked: 896

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reidhazelton View Post
    Not that it matters, but I thought that Wren and others conducted themselves quite well considering the heated nature of the topic.

    Those vocal on this thread are simply speaking for a larger group of people (on both sides) that don't care to get involved.

    Asking a stupid question....why not just impound a Radon and get it over with? If I were a Radon owner, a competitor, or a sanctioning body I would simply to put the whole mess to bed. Seems a easy way to solve it once and for all so those involved can move on to bigger and better things...like Honda/Mazda FC engines, FTRs, and intrusion panels.

    So again....why not just self-impound or series-imposed impound a Radon? Serious question.
    That actully used to be fairly common where the SOM would request a Stewards action and look at a specific car. This usually happens after other competitors look at a car and have a friendly discussion with the Chief Steward. I have had that happen to me once but with no repercussions as we were deemed OK.

    I think the Radon will clearly not be legal under the 2013 rules if the rules are at all like the posted rules. Their best bet imo is to get in front of the issues by fixing the car. I think the Radon can be fixed without too much trouble.

    Thanks ... Jay Novak

  30. #70
    Contributing Member jimh3063's Avatar
    Join Date
    06.09.05
    Location
    Easton, Massachusetts
    Posts
    580
    Liked: 10

    Default Radon made legal for 2013 rules

    Jay:
    I've looked into what has to be done to make it (My Radon) legal for the 2013 rules. It's a completely new frame and a lot of new bodywork. That was the first thing I looked at as I would much rather race the argue. Other than sex, racing is the thing I enjoy the most. I've had the builder and one other company look at it. Both told me the same thing. One of the issues with the chassis is that to do away with the panels, the cockpit would have to be made a lot skinnier. That negates the main reason I even bought the car in the first place. I'm not a small guy (My fault not Wren's), have wide shoulders and a crushed lower most disk. I've owned two Van Diemen's. I'm not comfortable in them. My knees and elbows get banged up and my back hurts. Since the Radon allows me to sit so low and at a much more laid back angle, it doesn't put as much pressure on my disk when I tighten up my belts. The VD and sedans for that matter push my back down at an angle that it really aggravates my disk.

    I'm a Club racer and not really a Pro person. I race for the fun of it. I don't posess the skill required to ever go further than I have now. I'm sure Alonso is not looking for me in his mirror if you know what I mean. I enjoy the people and the thrill of racing. That's why I do it. I wasn't even planning to race in the F2KCS in 2013. Now it is the only place I can run my car.

    Jimmy
    Jimmy Hanrahan
    jimh3063@yahoo.com

  31. #71
    Senior Member KevinFirlein's Avatar
    Join Date
    05.20.02
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    1,360
    Liked: 14

    Default

    didnt SCCA offer a 'bail out' to the owners of existing Radon owners that would have grandfsthered all the currently existing cars in eo the 2013 GCR ? Didnt Nathan turn this offer down ? I could care less as Ive raced against the car since it came out and have multiple friends that have them. Anyone that knows me will flatly tell you I dont siffer in silence, if I had a problem racing against the Radon in the F2kCS I would be screaming bloody murder even with Bob owning a car.

    My understanding of the situation was the car owners were not happy they were not contacted about the deal offered to Radon and contacted SCCA themselves. Perhaps thats a reason to find out once and for all if the car is GCR 2012 compliant. If its not you surely cant grandfather in an already non compliant car into new rules making it even further non compliant.

    Non of this is the fault of the owners of the cars. as Jimmy pointed out he bought a car that suited him the best. He did it I am sure figuring he wasnt being sold a car that possibly wasnt legal for the class it was intended for. Neither did any of the other owners. yes the GCR can be hard to read. You have to flip between FC and FF sections as well as the general rule section when building a car. If you choose to push everything to the limit you might well cross a line somewhere. I guess we will find out soon enough.
    Kevin Firlein Autosport,Inc.
    Runoffs 1 Gold 3 Silver 3 bronze, 8 Divisional , 6 Regional Champs , 3x Drivers of the year awards

  32. #72
    Contributing Member Jnovak's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.08.07
    Location
    Dearborn, Michigan
    Posts
    3,787
    Liked: 896

    Default

    Grandfathering the 1st run of Radons would be a viable solution imo. This makes sense to me.

    Thanks ... Jay Novak

  33. #73
    Contributing Member jimh3063's Avatar
    Join Date
    06.09.05
    Location
    Easton, Massachusetts
    Posts
    580
    Liked: 10

    Default Grandfathering

    Gents:
    I was told unequivocally that an offer was never made to grandfather in the existing cars. I would be a happy camper if that was the case. I'm a Radon customer for the reasons I mentioned prior. I'm not an owner, investor, relative and have any connection other than being a customer with Radon. I just want to race my car.

    Jimmy
    Jimmy Hanrahan
    jimh3063@yahoo.com

  34. #74
    Contributing Member
    Join Date
    12.11.03
    Location
    lighthouse point, fl
    Posts
    1,243
    Liked: 215

    Default

    Once again more activity and interest in the off season than about racing whatever happened to show up, drive, go home. Oh thats right they invented the internet and bench racing,

  35. #75
    Senior Member KevinFirlein's Avatar
    Join Date
    05.20.02
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    1,360
    Liked: 14

    Default

    any word on the Radon CRB inspection that was scheduled for this weekend to judge the car based of last years rules ? Yes this was always going on in the background and the reason the 2012 rules were important. Now that Sebring has started no point in keeping the secret that should have been out in the open the entire time anyways.
    Kevin Firlein Autosport,Inc.
    Runoffs 1 Gold 3 Silver 3 bronze, 8 Divisional , 6 Regional Champs , 3x Drivers of the year awards

  36. #76
    Classifieds Super License racerdad2's Avatar
    Join Date
    09.20.11
    Location
    Mn
    Posts
    2,756
    Liked: 202

    Default

    Wow ! Just read this entire thread... my head hurts Seriously, I have no dog in this hunt & I want to know if the Radon is legal... How tuff can it be ? VERY, I assume
    "An analog man living in a digital world"

  37. #77
    Not an aerodynamicist Wren's Avatar
    Join Date
    02.27.06
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    2,743
    Liked: 151

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinFirlein View Post
    any word on the Radon CRB inspection that was scheduled for this weekend to judge the car based of last years rules ? Yes this was always going on in the background and the reason the 2012 rules were important. Now that Sebring has started no point in keeping the secret that should have been out in the open the entire time anyways.
    When I was participating in this thread I had no idea that there was an inspection at Sebring. I only found out afterwards. I had no reason not to take people at their word. I knew for a fact that Radon had been offered to grandfather cars in, but that was common knowledge.

    It does help explain why some of the Radon guys in this thread kept asking for what I thought was illegal. It also helps put in perspective the reasons the COA gave for publishing what they did regarding my request.

    Quote Originally Posted by racerdad2 View Post
    Wow ! Just read this entire thread... my head hurts Seriously, I have no dog in this hunt & I want to know if the Radon is legal... How tuff can it be ? VERY, I assume
    People will make some pretty strong accusations about you for that curiousity.

  38. #78
    Contributing Member Jnovak's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.08.07
    Location
    Dearborn, Michigan
    Posts
    3,787
    Liked: 896

    Default

    Enquiring minds want to know.

    Jay Novak

  39. #79
    Senior Member BURKY's Avatar
    Join Date
    04.04.05
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,650
    Liked: 444

    Default

    So, i take it they were looking at Jim hanerhan Radon?

  40. #80
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    08.18.02
    Location
    Indy, IN
    Posts
    6,237
    Liked: 1780

    Default

    So. Any news on how the inspection went?

Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




About Us
Since 2000, ApexSpeed.com has been the go-to place for amateur road racing enthusiasts, bringing together a friendly community of racers, fans, and industry professionals. We're all about creating a space where people can connect, share knowledge, and exchange parts and vehicles, with a focus on specific race cars, classes, series, and events. Our community includes all major purpose-built road racing classes, like the Sports Car Club of America (SCCA) and various pro series across North America and beyond. At ApexSpeed, we're passionate about amateur motorsports and are dedicated to helping our community have fun and grow while creating lasting memories on and off the track.
Social