Hey all...I would have never expected to see Dave's and my BS... oops BR
session in print but.....
Dave has really asked the wrong guy here. I am a listener and commenter at
the Rules Meeting. I vote as the chairman of the Vintage Car Committee.
When there is a rule asked for which would affect that class I normally make
everyone table it until the following year. As chairman I like to discuss a
change with as many competitors as I can. I do this at Bonneville and the
Lakes meets telling each competitor in those classes what is requested and
getting their opinion of it and whether it is good for the classes affected
or not. This is what I bring to the Rules committee meeting. If the rule
request is obviously a "personal agenda" it never gets to the competitors
running in the class; the others at the meeting stop it right there.
I treat my vote as a very important way of helping govern this association.
I listen to each request and also to the other committee chairs before I
vote to bring the request to the Board of Directors(who don't always see it
the total committees way) many checks and balances here folks.
So Dave I won't be bring any of this up....All rule requests must have been
in by 10-01-XX. If some has requested the use of TC this year these
comments would be fuel for a solution but the solution better be in the
request. The person writing the new request may have a problem but we may
not; so a solution is mandatory. One of the great things about this list is
how many board and rules committee members read it but since they choose not
to reply you don't know they are watching and reading.
Nuff said, here's our bench racing in it's entirety
Subject: Re: rws
> Always like bench racing with you as well JD..
> Here is something to consider when you get a minute, have a cold one on me
and
> see if you think as an inspector this would make your life a bunch easier
in the
> long run and probably not change the racing one bit.
>
> I would love to just see the engine rules read..
>
> " In classes other than Vintage and Classic the engine control system
> can adjust any engine operating parameter,other than the throttle
> position, for any reason using any sensor input or any combination of
> them."
>
> That is a rule that is enforceable and easy to inspect. It allows
> engine builder freedom to explore anything and the driver still has
> the 'go' pedal in their control. If you look at it logically we
> already have..
>
> Ignition vs. rpm
> Ignition vs. manifold pressure
> Ignition vs. throttle position
> Ignition vs. nitrous
>
> Fuel vs. rpm
> Fuel vs. manifold pressure
> Fuel vs. throttle position
> Fuel vs. nitrous
>
> Boost vs. rpm
> Boost vs. throttle position
> Boost vs. gear position
>
> gear position vs. rpm
> gear position vs. manifold pressure
> gear position vs. throttle position
>
> torque converter lock up vs. rpm
> torque converter lock up vs. manifold pressure
> torque converter lock up vs. throttle position
>
> nitrous vs. rpm ( both under rpm and over rpm)
> nitrous vs. manifold pressure
> nitrous vs. throttle position
> nitrous vs. gear position
>
> Ignition rev limiter
> Fuel rev limiter
> Boost rev limiter
> nitrous rev limiter
>
> There are only a few possibilities left that are available and i probably
left
> some out as well..
>
> Wouldn't it be simpler and easily enforceable to just state that the
> only thing allowed to operate the steering, brakes and throttle is the
> driver... And just leave the engine open to innovation? I left out the
> transmission as some cars have automatics and ya just leave them in
> drive at times and some cars have no transmissions at all..
>
> The 'new' MSD slew rate rev limiter can be duplicated mechanically
> quite easily if you are willing to put a very heavy flywheel in the
> car by the way. But does SCTA/BNI want cars out there with 300 lb
> flywheels and do they want to start tearing down cars to weigh one in
> the first place. The very heavy flywheel would be a very big safety
> issue from what i can see but would limit engine acceleration rate
> quite well. Much safer to do electronically for sure. If engine
> control vs engine acceleration rate,wheel speeds or tire slip is not
> made legal at some point in the near future it will bring on yet
> another set of rules that are equally hard to police involving
> component weights etc..
>
> In the end the 'genie' is out of the bottle... Like it or not engine
> development and power production is exceeding the rate of rules change
> in order to apply the new found power safely and i would like to think
> safety is the first issue and i suspect asking everyone to detune
> their engines to some level is not going to work.. Them we would need
> a chassis dyno to inspect the cars. Lets all vote for keeping the
> rules simple and easy to interpret as the penalties for guessing wrong
> are way to large to take lightly. Dave
|