Jump to content

2017 Board of Directors Meeting - Daytona International Speedway


Recommended Posts

  • Administrators

Update - Video

 

 

 

Update - Minutes and video added to the website. https://chumpcar.com/bod.php

 

 

 

Friday, March 31 at 3 PM - 5 PM

Boardwalk Club, Daytona International Speedway - infield building along Lake Loyd

https://www.google.com/maps/dir//29.1855647,-81.0683749/@29.1842295,-81.0727863,17z/data=!3m1!4b1

 

 

The 2017 ChumpCar World Series Board of Directors meeting will take place in the Boardwalk Club at the Daytona International Speedway. Club members are invited to attend. The event will be broadcast on Facebook Live via the ChumpCar World Series Facebook Page. There will be a question and answer period for online visitors via Facebook.

 

The event will be broadcast live via Facebook live -

https://www.facebook.com/ChumpCarWorldSeries/

 

The purpose of this email is to give all members a chance to read the petitions that your fellow members submitted over the past few months. If you are not interested in these, delete this right now. If you are the slightest bit curious as to what suggestions your fellow racers are making, read this document. 
http://files.constantcontact.com/00477aab001/c14658d6-8265-4494-b70f-5ffec3eb2721.pdf


There are nine petitions to look at.

If you have comments on any or all of the petitions listed, submit your comments to board@chumpcar.com by Saturday March 25th, 2017. The board will review your comments and bring them into the discussion at Daytona.

If you have any questions you can contact me here. michael.chisek@chumpcar.com

We're looking forward to seeing you all in Florida!

All the best -
The ChumpStaff

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/10/2017 at 2:47 PM, Crank Yankers Racing said:

I remember back in the day there would be BoD meetings at other tracks. Is it going to be a norm that it's at Daytona on an annual basis?

 

We held one at Charlotte last year. I suspect we'll continue to move it around the schedule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if this is the right place to post my feedback on the new rules proposals.  If there is somewhere else, please let me know.

 

Rule proposal 1.

I like the concept, but I think 10 points per gallon overage is more reasonable than 50 points.
 
Proposal 2.
Some valid points about safety, but honestly, I've seen less spillage from guys using funnels over a fuel cell than guys who use a tube. And switching to limiting 1" tube will only add cost and slow down the flow of fuel and pit stop time causing teams to rush.
The only point in his 3 point suggestion list that is reasonable is point 3. Fueling must be completed while standing outside the vehicle
 
Proposal 3
No comment
 
Proposal 4
splitting hairs, so I don't think a change is necessary.  If a change were implemented, a point of clarification on when a pass has been deemed complete (when the passing car's front wheel has reached the front wheel of the car being passed) should be added.
 
Proposal 5
Proposed change seems reasonable except that it would reduce rear visibility having non factory lamination added.
 
Proposal 6
I love this idea.  Except for the Weight to HP option.  There are other leagues that already do this so I guess you could just copy their rules, but if Chump were to try and figure out a calculation for doing this, it could turn into a cluster and wouldn't account for the cheaty bits inside the motor that people don't report.
Suggestion 2 or 3 would be awesome.  I'd love to see engine swap cars moved to their own class.
 
Proposal 7
Change seems reasonable except as in my comment above, a 10 point hit seems more in line with the potential impact on race results.
 
Proposal 8
No comment.  If this makes a difference in a race, then we're near Nascar precision.
 
Proposal 9
seems like adding rules just to make the rule book longer, but seems like a reasonable suggestion for the <10% of cars out there that might benefit.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, lenbo211 said:

Not sure if this is the right place to post my feedback on the new rules proposals.  If there is somewhere else, please let me know.

If you have comments on any or all of the petitions listed, submit your comments to board@chumpcar.com by Saturday March 25th, 2017.  The board will review your comments and bring them into the discussion at Daytona. 

Edited by enginerd
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, enginerd said:

If you have comments on any or all of the petitions listed, submit your comments to board@chumpcar.com by Saturday March 25th, 2017.  The board will review your comments and bring them into the discussion at Daytona. 

I sent it there as well.  I figured there might be a board on the forum where people are weighing in publicly.  Often when I have a thought on a proposed rule change, someone else who has a different perspective or more information does a good job of correcting my lack of knowledge.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On ‎3‎/‎15‎/‎2017 at 2:57 PM, lenbo211 said:

Not sure if this is the right place to post my feedback on the new rules proposals.  If there is somewhere else, please let me know.

 

Rule proposal 1.

I like the concept, but I think 10 points per gallon overage is more reasonable than 50 points.
 
Proposal 2.
Some valid points about safety, but honestly, I've seen less spillage from guys using funnels over a fuel cell than guys who use a tube. And switching to limiting 1" tube will only add cost and slow down the flow of fuel and pit stop time causing teams to rush.
The only point in his 3 point suggestion list that is reasonable is point 3. Fueling must be completed while standing outside the vehicle
 
Proposal 3
No comment
 
Proposal 4
splitting hairs, so I don't think a change is necessary.  If a change were implemented, a point of clarification on when a pass has been deemed complete (when the passing car's front wheel has reached the front wheel of the car being passed) should be added.
 
Proposal 5
Proposed change seems reasonable except that it would reduce rear visibility having non factory lamination added.
 
Proposal 6
I love this idea.  Except for the Weight to HP option.  There are other leagues that already do this so I guess you could just copy their rules, but if Chump were to try and figure out a calculation for doing this, it could turn into a cluster and wouldn't account for the cheaty bits inside the motor that people don't report.
Suggestion 2 or 3 would be awesome.  I'd love to see engine swap cars moved to their own class.
 
Proposal 7
Change seems reasonable except as in my comment above, a 10 point hit seems more in line with the potential impact on race results.
 
Proposal 8
No comment.  If this makes a difference in a race, then we're near Nascar precision.
 
Proposal 9
seems like adding rules just to make the rule book longer, but seems like a reasonable suggestion for the <10% of cars out there that might benefit.

If you can purchase fuel you have now just made chump a V8 racing only series. Your 4 & 6 cylinders will have no chance.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, scottyk said:

If you can purchase fuel you have now just made chump a V8 racing only series. Your 4 & 6 cylinders will have no chance.

 

An easier solution is to adopt something like a lemons policy.  "up to 24 gallon cell for all cars".  How you choose to use it is up to you.  :)  A lot of the other drama works itself out because of the limit. Could just as well be 20, whatever.  Limits high horsepower shenanigans, allows low powered cars that swap, a hand up.

 

At least that's what I heard was the story.  I don't follow Lemons but if that's the scenario it made sense.  :)  I'm sure it's equally flawed in some way.

Edited by Ham Sammich
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Ham Sammich said:

An easier solution is to adopt something like a lemons policy.  "up to 24 gallon cell for all cars".  How you choose to use it is up to you.  :)

 

At least that's what I heard was the story.  I don't follow Lemons but if that's the scenario it made sense.  :)  I'm sure it's equally flawed in some way.

You would end up with some (read: all who install the new fuel cells) small, light cars doing double stints without refueling. Driver change only.. in and out of pit lane in just 2 minutes. And then all the cars with thirsty engines who were previously complaining about not having enough fuel, would now ask for even more fuel, so that they, too, could double stint. Never ending cycle of "gimme gimme gimme" in racing, eh?

Edited by enginerd
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, enginerd said:

You would end up with some (read: all who install the new fuel cells) small, light cars doing double stints without refueling. Driver change only.. in and out of pit lane in just 2 minutes. And then all the cars with thirsty engines who were previously complaining about not having enough fuel, would now ask for even more fuel, so that they, too, could double stint.

 

I suppose with our stint limits could you make back the time if you're car was 5-10 seconds faster a lap?

 

I guess we have Lemons data to look at.  I know there are a lot of folks here that play with those folks and would know the particulars.  I got no dog in this fight.  Chump don't come here no more.  :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ham Sammich said:

I suppose with our stint limits could you make back the time if you're car was 5-10 seconds faster a lap?

 

I guess we have Lemons data to look at.  I know there are a lot of folks here that play with those folks and would know the particulars.  I got no dog in this fight.  Chump don't come here no more.  :P

I wouldn't look at Lemons as a benchmark for performance balancing and close racing.... They do pit stops in the paddock FFS, if you have a paddock spot close to pit lane... Huuuge advantage. Lemons is just a completely different ball game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, enginerd said:

I wouldn't look at Lemons as a benchmark for performance balancing and close racing.... They do pit stops in the paddock FFS, if you have a paddock spot close to pit lane... Huuuge advantage. Lemons is just a completely different ball game.

 

Like I mentioned, I have no idea.  Never run with them, don't follow it.  just was aware of the one fuel concept.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, enginerd said:

I wouldn't look at Lemons as a benchmark for performance balancing and close racing.... They do pit stops in the paddock FFS, if you have a paddock spot close to pit lane... Huuuge advantage. Lemons is just a completely different ball game.

Do they still do this?

 

The last 6 Lemons races I did, they used pit lane. 

 

The fastest Lemons cars are capable of winning chump races as of 2 years ago.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am curious to hear the feedback from the meeting.  I'm OK with 22 gallon cells, for a price - say $100.  To me the speed creep/rules creep/older car/carbureted car issue could be addressed with the oft hated on idea of "bonus laps" for those UNDER $500.  Use the same formula as the penalty laps and let the "old, non-competitive, slow cars" have a few laps and see if that gets more folks out and adds to the variety of competitive cars (as opposed to spending more money to do a swap/develop a BMW/etc).

 

Let the flames begin....  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, scottyk said:

If you can purchase fuel you have now just made chump a V8 racing only series. Your 4 & 6 cylinders will have no chance.

 

I still don't understand this immediate knee-jerk reaction.

 

Until someone puts the numbers together on what V8 cars are competitive VS their current TCV VS race finishing results then it's pure opinion. 

 

Speaking purely from the pony car camp, you'd be hard pressed to build anything with a V8 to be competitive with the top 15% of the field and not be in the mid to upper $400 TCV range and that is under 2017 rules, I was right at $500 last year.

 

Edited by pintodave
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, pintodave said:

 

I still don't understand this immediate knee-jerk reaction.

 

Until someone puts the numbers together on what V8 cars are competitive VS their current TCV VS race finishing results then it's pure opinion. 

 

Speaking purely from the pony car camp, you'd be hard pressed to build anything with a V8 to be competitive with the top 15% of the field and not be in the mid to upper $400 TCV range and that is under 2017 rules, I was right at $500 last year.

 

Smaller displacement cars will not stand a chance.  Didn't we see this last year from McQueen? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, craig71188 said:

I am curious to hear the feedback from the meeting.  I'm OK with 22 gallon cells, for a price - say $100.  To me the speed creep/rules creep/older car/carbureted car issue could be addressed with the oft hated on idea of "bonus laps" for those UNDER $500.  Use the same formula as the penalty laps and let the "old, non-competitive, slow cars" have a few laps and see if that gets more folks out and adds to the variety of competitive cars (as opposed to spending more money to do a swap/develop a BMW/etc).

 

Let the flames begin....  

Ok here is a case for you:  Honda Civic, JDM motor, coilovers, LSD trans, and now a 22 gallon cell and with plenty of points to spare.  They will pit 2 times for fuel and be wicked fast. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, scottyk said:

Smaller displacement cars will not stand a chance.  Didn't we see this last year from McQueen? 

 

Wasn't that the swapped car that was most likely over 500 pts anyways? 

1 minute ago, Team Infiniti said:

You did not race some events recently, this is not all about the d class, stupid fast 4cyl (v8 fast) cars are stacked on the podium, giving them more fuel WILL tilt things inappropriately.

 

 

And what is their current TCV? Not asking a rhetorical question. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...