Sorry I mean Burkdol's Liner,
Jonathan
Keith Turk wrote:
> I think Jon ment Jim Burkdol.... or at least I hope he did... Seem to
> remember the Burklands Noise as it went by.... Very Twin Hemi....
>
> Keith
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jonathan Amo" <webmaster@landracing.com>
> To: "Mike Manghelli" <mmanghel@hughes.net>
> Cc: "Dave Dahlgren" <ddahlgren@snet.net>; " Land-speed Racers"
> <land-speed@autox.team.net>; " Dan Warner" <dwarner@electrorent.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 05, 2001 8:24 PM
> Subject: Re: Rotary Factor - Rule Change
>
> > I beleive the Burklands had thier liner power by a rotary at WOS.
> >
> > Jonathan
> >
> >
> > Mike Manghelli wrote:
> >
> > > Dave and List,
> > >
> > > Ok, I have been working on the yard for two days moving rocks (Keith are
> fake
> > > rocks lighter than the real ones?) and return to find 195 emails. Most
> of
> > > which are on the rotary factor rule change.
> > >
> > > Dave keeps asking why there is no comments to his thread from the SCTA
> board
> > > members, Rules committee members and the folks on the LSR list. Let me
> set
> > > some things straight. First, I have been Emailing Dave (not via the
> list) to
> > > try and resolve this. Second, Other than my other volunteer, Dan
> Warner, I am
> > > the only SCTA board member that is involved with the rules on this list.
> > > Third, I think most folks on the list have given you an answer, they are
> not
> > > that interested.
> > >
> > > Now let's explore a few things. When the SCTA made the factor of 3 for
> > > rotaries it was made based on performance of the rotary and other racing
> > > organizations factors at the time. At that time the rotaries were
> competitive
> > > with this factor, they held several records at both Bonneville and El
> Mirage.
> > > Obviously, the small block Chevy and foreign mulitvalve engines have
> come a
> > > long way since this factor was created and rotary development has not.
> If it
> > > had, we may not be having this discussion. So we come to today.
> Rotaries are
> > > now at a disadvantage, should we change the factor. Let's consider a
> few
> > > things.
> > >
> > > (this is an excerpt from an earlier Email)
> > > Currently:
> > > So the SCTA uses a factor of 3 and gets
> > > 10 982 X 3 = 2946cc F class
> > > 12 1146 X 3 = 3438cc E class
> > > 13 1308 X 3 = 3924cc E class
> > >
> > > You want 2.1?
> > >
> > > 10 982 X 2.1 = 2062cc F class
> > > 12 1146 X 2.1 = 2406cc F class
> > > 13 1308 X 2.1 = 2746cc F class
> > >
> > > So all rotary engines will run in the "F" class under your proposal?
> > >
> > > The E/BMS record at Bonneville is 260.809 (ref pg. 78 2000 rule book)
> set by
> > > a blown rotary engined car. What do you propose we do with this record?
> > > Note it is faster than the AA record in this class. If we move it to "F"
> I
> > > think the record will stand for a long, long, long time. Or do we
> "handy
> > > cap" blown rotary cars one class? Obviously the blown rotaries can make
> > > plenty of HP!.... Not sure where to go now....
> > > (end of excerpt)
> > >
> > > Let's look at a few Facts:
> > > 1. When the SCTA/BNI rules committee makes rules changes that affect
> > > specific records, those cars are either reclassified or loose records.
> e.g.
> > > when blown cars ran against unblown cars with a 2 X handicap. When the
> > > records were split out if a blown car had taken the record away from
> unblown,
> > > the record was returned to the unblown car. (what do we do with the
> E/BMS
> > > record at Bonnneville?)
> > > 2. The committee looks at the big picture:
> > > a. How many records does this affect?
> > > b. How many people are running these motors?
> > > c. Are the people running this at a disadvantage? How much....
> (The
> > > E/BMS record says NO)
> > > d. etc... The rules committee spent 2 complete Sundays
> discussing
> > > this and other recommendations.
> > > 3. This was presented to the Rules committee by Dan Warner at the
> first
> > > meeting in October. The rules committee recommended to the board that
> the
> > > factor not be changed at this time.
> > > 4. The SCTA board voted on recommendations from the rules committee at
> the
> > > December board meeting. This must be done to get the rule book out in a
> > > timely manner. I (your elected SCTA President) failed to accomplish
> voting on
> > > all of the recommendations at the December board meeting. Because of
> this the
> > > rule book will be late this year (mid March), but it was needed to
> resolve
> > > some other issues that effect several hundreds of competitors. The
> final
> > > rules recommendations will be finished tonight (Friday, 5 January 01).
> We
> > > will not reopen this issue since it was voted on by the board at the
> December
> > > meeting. The board voted to accept the rules committee recommendation
> and not
> > > change the factor.
> > >
> > > What can you do now?
> > > 1. Write a letter to the Technical committee (Steve Batchelor)
> requesting
> > > the change for 2002. Include your technical dissertation on why the
> factor
> > > should be changed. Include all of the other racing organizations that
> allow
> > > rotaries with their factors. Include recommendations for existing
> records.
> > > Stick to the facts, leave the sarcasm out.
> > > 2. Best way to get everyone to take notice is to have 10 rotary
> powered cars
> > > show up. Tom Bryant said it best, "rotaries should have their own
> class" and
> > > not be factored. Best way to accomplish this is to have participation!
> ( I
> > > have not seen a rotary powered car for several years at either venue)
> > >
> > > I know this is long, I hope it will help. I want to say one last thing,
> THANK
> > > YOU Dan Warner for all the time and energy that you put into our rules
> > > process.
> > >
> > > Mike Manghelli
> > > SCTA President
> > > (BTW even though you all think I do not read my Email, I do and my be a
> > > lurker, but I do respond every now and then when appropriate)
|