Jump to content

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, JDChristianson said:

 We could cut a few pounds on our cars now with 5-7 pound alternators for free.   oh wait, not really free just no points

 

 

I call that one the 'riley rule'.  I didn't see anything about the 50 point IRS swap in the rules, maybe i missed it.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 288
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Why cant we just get rid of points for anything that makes the car more reliable but doesn’t make it any faster.     Lets say my cars vpi is 500pts.  I want to put a better radiator on it to

I think everybody wants everybody to finish.   It's up to the team captain to spend their points on reliability versus speed parts to make that happen.   If a captain chooses speed

Just wanted to add a note to address a few things I have seen come up already.   As the Tech Writer, the fact that the tech desk is not updated at this time is 100% on me, and I apologize fo

Posted Images

4 minutes ago, MoparBoyy said:

 

I call that one the 'riley rule'.  I didn't see anything about the 50 point IRS swap in the rules, maybe i missed it.

Naw.  The Riley rule is the "create a combination that never existed" and somehow avoid all other rules which basically say you can't do it...

 

Manual trans behind the 350 in the 3rd gen.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, wvumtnbkr said:

No you didn't.  You lost time and money.  You can also lose points if you spend the time to make something fit.

 

100% true.

 

Now I need to go and spend a bunch of money on a new radiator and pay someone to install it. 

 

The point system is supposed to save People money, for some of us it backfired. I guess that will always happen with rule changes.

 

I would suggest they keep the 2020 radiator rule for 2021 to give people some time. (They did a great job announcing the dash bar change in 2020, we managed to add one between races)

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I applaud the clarity.  Continuous improvement is a process not an event and this is a step in the right direction.

 

The 2020 rules in effect for the championship mucks things up a bit, but I like the direction.

 

A recommendation however is that the vision and mission are added prominently to the start of the BCCR.  All rules should be interpreted through the lens of that vision and mission.   If there is an interpretation that can go one way or another, the one that best aligns with the vision and mission should be used. 

 

I also wished some more of the fix the value items were added that are currently enforced through tech desk.

Edited by LuckyKid
  • Like 6
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, jkrueger said:

Why cant we just get rid of points for anything that makes the car more reliable but doesn’t make it any faster.  

 

Lets say my cars vpi is 500pts.  I want to put a better radiator on it to help cool the engine better.  I take a 30 pt hit for that and that now costs me 3 laps.  That radiator doesn’t make my car any faster to make up those 3 laps.  

 

We spend thousands of dollars to go to these races and that doesn’t include the cost of building the car.  I want to run the entire weekend and not have to worry about overheating the car, starving the engine of oil, or overheating the engine oil/trans oil/ diff oil.  

 

Better radiators, oil pans and baffles, accusumps, oil coolers, etc only increase the chance that I get a good return for my investment and do nothing in making my car faster. 

 

Jc

I could not agree more and I think a lot of people agree, but some do not. I think a lot of people that do not need reliability items would rather have someone fail and them win then race to the end.  I want to see people, myself included, finish a race and battle to the end.  A customer who finishes a race will race again. A customer who blows up and does not have funds to race again may not race again, will cancel events and might quit al together.

 

I blew up my engine at PIRC. I do not have the time to get another or the money right now to spend on the car as I used all my race funds this year and dipped into personal savings, the wife is not happy about that, but I have to refund drivers that did not drive. I had to sadly email MikeC and cancel my Barber entry and get a refund to refund my drivers from PIRC that did not drive. That is reality is that teams that blow up are bad for Champcar and we should try to encourage that to not happen.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is good to see the change being made with a goal of making it more transparent and removing interpretation even if it comes at the 'expense' of cars getting different points assigned.  The tech desk will still be part of the rule book, but improvements are being made.

 

Let's remember there is a difference between how the rules are written and how the rules actually play out for an individual car.  You can like the intent and options allowed in the rules while disliking how your particular car shakes out. 

 

So most teams took a 20 point hit on radiators, but the '2x rule' has been simplified along the way.   Should radiators be worth that much?  That's an opinion and therefore there's no wrong answer.

 

Anytime there is change it forces established cars to be re-thought.  This re-think costs time and money.  Rules creep and instability within the rules costs money. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, MR2 Biohazard said:

I could not agree more and I think a lot of people agree, but some do not. I think a lot of people that do not need reliability items would rather have someone fail and them win then race to the end.  I want to see people, myself included, finish a race and battle to the end.  A customer who finishes a race will race again. A customer who blows up and does not have funds to race again may not race again, will cancel events and might quit al together.

 

I blew up my engine at PIRC. I do not have the time to get another or the money right now to spend on the car as I used all my race funds this year and dipped into personal savings, the wife is not happy about that, but I have to refund drivers that did not drive. I had to sadly email MikeC and cancel my Barber entry and get a refund to refund my drivers from PIRC that did not drive. That is reality is that teams that blow up are bad for Champcar and we should try to encourage that to not happen.

 

Especially if it costs more money to not have the upgrades, for instance replacing hubs yearly.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, LuckyKid said:

I applaud the clarity.  Continuous improvement is a process not an event and this is a step in the right direction.

 

The 2020 rules in effect for the championship mucks things up a bit, but I like the direction.

 

A recommendation however is that the vision and mission are added prominently to the start of the BCCR.  All rules should be interpreted through the lens of that vision and mission.   If there is an interpretation that can go one way or another, the one that best aligns with the vision and mission should be used. 

 

I also wished some more of the fix the value items were added that are currently enforced through tech desk.

Dood...  I have been saying that to the bod and Mike for YEARS.

 

The statement should be the guiding light!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, MR2 Biohazard said:

I could not agree more and I think a lot of people agree, but some do not. I think a lot of people that do not need reliability items would rather have someone fail and them win then race to the end.  I want to see people, myself included, finish a race and battle to the end.  A customer who finishes a race will race again. A customer who blows up and does not have funds to race again may not race again, will cancel events and might quit al together.

 

I blew up my engine at PIRC. I do not have the time to get another or the money right now to spend on the car as I used all my race funds this year and dipped into personal savings, the wife is not happy about that, but I have to refund drivers that did not drive. I had to sadly email MikeC and cancel my Barber entry and get a refund to refund my drivers from PIRC that did not drive. That is reality is that teams that blow up are bad for Champcar and we should try to encourage that to not happen.

I think everybody wants everybody to finish.

 

It's up to the team captain to spend their points on reliability versus speed parts to make that happen.

 

If a captain chooses speed parts over reliability, that ain't champcar fault.

 

If all reliability items become free so everybody finishes, speed parts need to be increased in value about 2 fold.

 

In other words, you are simply asking for champcar to take the decision of speed versus reliability away from the captain.

 

Edit to give a real world example...  troy, your vpi is what 250?  An oil cooler is like 30pts or something.  An accusump 20 pts...  a radiator is currently 10 pts.  Total of 310 pts with reliability taken care of.

 

So you have 190 points left for go fast bits....  if you chose not to do any of these items, that's on you.  YOU made that choice to use points elsewhere. 

Edited by wvumtnbkr
  • Like 9
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, jkrueger said:

Why cant we just get rid of points for anything that makes the car more reliable but doesn’t make it any faster.  

 

Lets say my cars vpi is 500pts.  I want to put a better radiator on it to help cool the engine better.  I take a 30 pt hit for that and that now costs me 3 laps.  That radiator doesn’t make my car any faster to make up those 3 laps.  

 

We spend thousands of dollars to go to these races and that doesn’t include the cost of building the car.  I want to run the entire weekend and not have to worry about overheating the car, starving the engine of oil, or overheating the engine oil/trans oil/ diff oil.  

 

Better radiators, oil pans and baffles, accusumps, oil coolers, etc only increase the chance that I get a good return for my investment and do nothing in making my car faster. 

 

Jc

This only works if performance and go fast stuff is more points than current.

 

Otherwise, I am 100% on board with this.

 

The 450+ vpi cars are the only ones that c ant realisrically upgrade reliability without laps.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MR2 Biohazard said:

I could not agree more and I think a lot of people agree, but some do not. I think a lot of people that do not need reliability items would rather have someone fail and them win then race to the end.  I want to see people, myself included, finish a race and battle to the end.  A customer who finishes a race will race again. A customer who blows up and does not have funds to race again may not race again, will cancel events and might quit al together.

 

I blew up my engine at PIRC. I do not have the time to get another or the money right now to spend on the car as I used all my race funds this year and dipped into personal savings, the wife is not happy about that, but I have to refund drivers that did not drive. I had to sadly email MikeC and cancel my Barber entry and get a refund to refund my drivers from PIRC that did not drive. That is reality is that teams that blow up are bad for Champcar and we should try to encourage that to not happen.

The only way I see to give all this reliability stuff away is a comprehensive revamp of fixed point adders and Vpi for most cars.  Otherwise it’s just allowing more speed parts and modifications.  Cars that benefit most from the reliability mods would have to see the biggest jump in Vpi, one size does not fit all.     Everyone wants to finish.  Most everyone wants everyone to finish.     

Edited by JDChristianson
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MoparBoyy said:

 

I call that one the 'riley rule'.  I didn't see anything about the 50 point IRS swap in the rules, maybe i missed it.

 

I was surprised to not see this as well... However, it is still in the tech desk. Curious that not everything that generic would make it over.

 

 

31 minutes ago, wvumtnbkr said:

I think everybody wants everybody to finish.

 

It's up to the team captain to spend their points on reliability versus speed parts to make that happen.

 

If a captain chooses speed parts over reliability, that ain't champcar fault....

 

 

That makes some sense, until you look at the fact that not every car needs those cooling upgrades. How is this accounted for?! It also tilts things in the favor of those with more money who can afford to replace engines and trans more often. And rear...

 

This is supposed to be budget oriented, affordable endurance racing, don't put a gun to our heads and make us chose to spend more money or lose.

 

Yes, coolers often can be rigged/fabbed out of heater cores and such... Now I have no defroster and how reliable will it be? What did it cost in time and money vs an off the shelf kit? What if my car didn't come with parts that can be reused?

Edited by Wheelman_99
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Wheelman_99 said:

 

I was surprised to not see this as well... However, it is still in the tech desk. Curious that not everything that generic would make it over.

 

 

That makes some sense, until you look at the fact that not every car needs those cooling upgrades. How is this accounted for?! It also tilts things in the favor of those with more money who can afford to replace engines and trans more often. 

 

This is supposed to be budget oriented, affordable endurance racing, don't put a gun to our heads and make us chose to spend more money or lose.

 

Yes, coolers often can be rigged/fabbed out of heater cores and such... Now I have no defroster and how reliable will it be? What did it cost in time and money vs an off the shelf kit? What if my car didn't come with parts that can be reused?

I think i am not quite understanding your point.

 

Coolers and stuff are available, for points.  Use your points for them.  

 

I'm not talking about repurposing anything.

 

If you chose speed parts over reliability, that is your call.

 

If everything that is reliability is given for free, some of the top teams that are using points for reliability items now have more points to spend on go fast bits.  That's my entire point.

Edited by wvumtnbkr
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

What counts as "reliability" upgrades?  Does it stop just at radiators and fluid coolers?  I'm sure there are plenty of cars that have weak transmissions or rear ends made of glass or axles or hubs or some other component that is compromised in a race track environment that isn't fixed simply by adding a fluid cooler.  Is all that stuff gonna be free too?  Giving away more stuff for free ain't gonna stop those with money from outspending those without.  They'll just find something else to spend it on.  If your car has an inherent weakness, address it with parts, petition for a VPI adjustment, or learn to drive around the problem.  It's endurance racing, not a multi-hour sprint race.  Taking care of your equipment and knowing when you can and can't push is as much a part of strategy as anything else.

 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wanted to add a note to address a few things I have seen come up already.

 

As the Tech Writer, the fact that the tech desk is not updated at this time is 100% on me, and I apologize for that.  I will be working on it moving forward to ensure the articles that were migrated to the BCCR are "retired" - no need for this info to be in two places at once.   There is some timeframe questions to address however - For example, this article is clearly in the 2021 bccr, however it is not in the 2020 version.  I do not think I should retire it until 01Jan2021, as otherwise there is a "gap".  The other option would be to move it to a "2020 lame duck" type folder to cover all issues between now and 31Dec2020.  My preference is just to maintain my list of these articles and retire them in January.

 

 

In regards to not all tech desk articles moving to the BCCR - this was discussed between myself, the BOD, and staff. Due to time constraints it just wasn't possible.  Normally the cycle is from April to Sep 1.  This year, the BOD meeting was in late August, a week before that Sept 1 date.  What I did was choose 10 knowledgebase (KB) articles I thought were the most impactful, and suggest those to be moved to the BCCR.  

 

Moving forward, I am working to add more articles to the KB.  There are hundreds of questions that have been asked and answered that are not public.  I need to group similar ones together, categorize it, and make the questions/answers public.  

 

Additionally, I have a working list of public KB articles that should be moved to the BCCR in 2022, and hopefully with a normal timeline I will be able to get more than 10 done.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Huggy said:

Just wanted to add a note to address a few things I have seen come up already.

 

As the Tech Writer, the fact that the tech desk is not updated at this time is 100% on me, and I apologize for that.  I will be working on it moving forward to ensure the articles that were migrated to the BCCR are "retired" - no need for this info to be in two places at once.   There is some timeframe questions to address however - For example, this article is clearly in the 2021 bccr, however it is not in the 2020 version.  I do not think I should retire it until 01Jan2021, as otherwise there is a "gap".  The other option would be to move it to a "2020 lame duck" type folder to cover all issues between now and 31Dec2020.  My preference is just to maintain my list of these articles and retire them in January.

 

 

In regards to not all tech desk articles moving to the BCCR - this was discussed between myself, the BOD, and staff. Due to time constraints it just wasn't possible.  Normally the cycle is from April to Sep 1.  This year, the BOD meeting was in late August, a week before that Sept 1 date.  What I did was choose 10 knowledgebase (KB) articles I thought were the most impactful, and suggest those to be moved to the BCCR.  

 

Moving forward, I am working to add more articles to the KB.  There are hundreds of questions that have been asked and answered that are not public.  I need to group similar ones together, categorize it, and make the questions/answers public.  

 

Additionally, I have a working list of public KB articles that should be moved to the BCCR in 2022, and hopefully with a normal timeline I will be able to get more than 10 done.

Really appreciate all the effort you are putting into this!  Just having to coordinate with @Bill Strong is enough of a hassle...

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is unofficial, written as the original author of the Radiator Petition.

 

This is what the submitted petition stated:

 

Quote

OE plastic/copper crimped radiators are are wear item. Front running teams are changing these on a periodic basis to avoid potential failure at the crimped joint, costing money over and over again that could be saved in the long run moving to a fully-welded radiator.

 

This is a compromise that can help some teams with either difficult to source or expensive OE parts, as well as allowing some teams to switch to the aluminum parts and save money in the long run.

 

I would have preferred 2x, as some platforms might not be able to fit an aluminum radiator under 1x based on OE part costs, but It also will allow for some pretty fancy AL radiators that might be for different purposes.

 

I knew it was a compromise when I submitted it.  As stated, I would have preferred 2x.  I didn't think 2x would pass the BOD Vote, so I was thinking outside of the box.

 

Additionally, it should be noted (and could be observed from the petitions) that I am/was against allowing use of dealership prices as part of the 2x calculation.  Therefore, my mindset for 1x/2x when writing this was utilizing the "nationally recognized auto parts retail chain".   I did some research, and I found that many cars can make something work for the 1x cost.  Not all can buy a "direct fit", or buy name brand (ie Koyo or CSF), but there are options that work, or can work with a bit of fabrication.  The 2x cost was more universally OK for "direct fit" costs, but again some cars would really get to spend some $. 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The red line version is quite nice for quickly finding the updates.  Clearly some good work improving clarity.  I am a bit puzzled by some font changes such as the radiator points  topic already mentioned and the every increasing range of free stuff.  

Very disappointed that nothing was done to address the lighting.  It appears to remain unchanged with no real clarity on how a car with modern LED headlights with say 4 light emitting bulbs is going to be legal, and if treated as other LED lights is considered a single light source or will it be limited to only two light sources per light unit with no other supplemental lighting, as is the case for traditional two bulb headlights such at fitted to our MINI?  IMHO, it is ridiculous that cars running stock headlights are not permitted a pair of supplemental lights.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Huggy said:

This is unofficial, written as the original author of the Radiator Petition.

 

This is what the submitted petition stated:

 

 

I knew it was a compromise when I submitted it.  As stated, I would have preferred 2x.  I didn't think 2x would pass the BOD Vote, so I was thinking outside of the box.

 

Additionally, it should be noted (and could be observed from the petitions) that I am/was against allowing use of dealership prices as part of the 2x calculation.  Therefore, my mindset for 1x/2x when writing this was utilizing the "nationally recognized auto parts retail chain".   I did some research, and I found that many cars can make something work for the 1x cost.  Not all can buy a "direct fit", or buy name brand (ie Koyo or CSF), but there are options that work, or can work with a bit of fabrication.  The 2x cost was more universally OK for "direct fit" costs, but again some cars would really get to spend some $. 

 

 

 

 

When using the major chains of auto parts they are always cheaper than OEM that's a given. But they are also cheaper in quality. I've bought 3 cheapy rads for my Focus changing it every year the plastic tanks are junk. They are $99 each. I purchased an all aluminum rad for $139 and I'm installing it now. According to the rules the radiator is zero points unless it costs more that oe. I'm $40 over so will had to take the 30 points.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, hotrod said:

When using the major chains of auto parts they are always cheaper than OEM that's a given. But they are also cheaper in quality. I've bought 3 cheapy rads for my Focus changing it every year the plastic tanks are junk. They are $99 each. I purchased an all aluminum rad for $139 and I'm installing it now. According to the rules the radiator is zero points unless it costs more that oe. I'm $40 over so will had to take the 30 points.  

 

https://shop.advanceautoparts.com/c3/radiators/15952?&vehicleIdSearch=147382&beginIndex=0&sortBy=5&_r=0.22720051699078536

 

image.thumb.png.5d0ebd53bc50058d20f89a0cf026bdd9.png

 

Looks to me like you are good to go with your $139 radiator.

 

 

Trust me, I know all about the cheapy plastic tanks.  Even the OEM Nissens dont last consistently on my cars, so I replace annually.  Thank you FCP Euro!

Edited by Huggy
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, turbogrill said:

So why can't they use OEM pricing? You get what you pay for usually.

 

Seems odd that Autozone should be the quality level for a race car part.

 

Keep in mind that when this petition was written the precedent had been established (but not yet written into the bccr) that dealership pricing was allowed in some situations.

 

Dealership pricing is basically saying "radiators are open".  This forum's opinion seems to be pretty mixed on that, with some vehemently against that.   

 

1x dealership cost for my car would be $600, which buys one heck of a radiator.

 

Compromises are going to have good parts and bad parts.. thats the definition of a compromise.   Told You So Shrug GIF

Link to post
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.


×
×
  • Create New...