Trend in Rule Petitions

[gundy]

I am about half way through the petitions and I keep seeing the same words. 

Make this rule change so we can get racers from other series.  The one on adjustable shocks is good, "Adjustable shocks are not going to make a team win or lose a race, but can be a barrier to entry for new teams." 

I'll bet the person proposing this will go out and buy adjustable shock if this passes, WHY? it will make them faster. I am tired of us giving everything away for free. 

In the entitlement society we now live in, once you give something you pay hell trying to get it back. 

If we really need new members that bad give them a 2 race waver on the items not in complience, let them run in the appropriate class with some notation on the entry list . 

If after a time if the results show that the change did not give them an advantage then put the change in a petition.

 

[Bill Strong]

You need to make up your mind... You said my car was too slow, so I got adjustable Koni's for the Opel GT, and now you say I will be too fast! 
 

[Hugh Jass]

20 minutes ago, Bill Strong said:

You need to make up your mind... You said my car was too slow, so I got adjustable Koni's for the Opel GT, and now you say I will be too fast! 
 

 

I don't think anyone is worried about YOU being too fast. 

[Hillar K]

2 hours ago, gundy said:

 

If we really need new members that bad give them a 2 race waver on the items not in complience, let them run in the appropriate class with some notation on the entry list 

 

That was what I believe was the original intent of EC. Try it for 2 races, if you like it modify the car to fit the rules. 

Then people started building EC cars because they didn’t want to comply to the rules. 

Edited April 6 by Hillar K
Hit post too soon

[gundy]

2 hours ago, Bill Strong said:

You need to make up your mind... You said my car was too slow, so I got adjustable Koni's for the Opel GT, and now you say I will be too fast! 
 

Bill none of this talk about being to fast pertains to your Opel or you unless you revive the Northstar AW11 MR2.

 

[Bill Strong]

13 hours ago, gundy said:

Bill none of this talk about being to fast pertains to your Opel or you unless you revive the Northstar AW11 MR2.

 

I only have the engine in the basement, the chassis are long gone. However, it would fit into a much lighter Spyder.

[mender]

18 hours ago, gundy said:

I am about half way through the petitions and I keep seeing the same words. 

Make this rule change so we can get racers from other series.  The one on adjustable shocks is good, "Adjustable shocks are not going to make a team win or lose a race, but can be a barrier to entry for new teams." 

I'll bet the person proposing this will go out and buy adjustable shock if this passes, WHY? it will make them faster. I am tired of us giving everything away for free. 

When I built my Fiero ten years ago it had Koni reds the first year. Rule change and over the winter they came out for KYBs and Bilstein AK series shocks. The car went faster with the cheaper shocks but I lost the ability to play with settings. 

 

The Fiero is getting the Konis back but will be sent out for revalving once I finalize spring rates. I like playing with shock settings, usually don't gain much other than liking how the car behaves.

 

Bottom line is that just about any change can go either way, it's more about the builder than the rules.

[Team Infiniti]

1 hour ago, mender said:

Bottom line is that just about any change can go either way, it's more about the builder than the rules.

And when a good builder properly uses the available equipment (and lax rules) in his favor, you get a problem.

[mender]

9 hours ago, Team Infiniti said:

And when a good builder properly uses the available equipment (and lax rules) in his favor, you get a problem.

Here, let me shorten that for you:

"And when a good builder properly uses the available equipment (and lax rules) in his favor, you get a  = problem."

[Team Tbird]

Building a good car is NOT the problem. Never has been. 
 

It is the mediocre builders that are the majority, do not like being beaten on the track. These individuals deflect blame away from themselves and blame perceived issues to implement rule changes in their favor. 
 

Reading the petitions it is not changing. 
 

1 hour ago, mender said:

Here, let me shorten that for you:

"And when a good builder properly uses the available equipment (and lax rules) in his favor, you get a  = problem."

 

10 hours ago, Team Infiniti said:

And when a good builder properly uses the available equipment (and lax rules) in his favor, you get a problem.

 

[Follow On Mission]

On 4/6/2023 at 6:17 PM, Hillar K said:

That was what I believe was the original intent of EC. Try it for 2 races, if you like it modify the car to fit the rules. 

Then people started building EC cars because they didn’t want to comply to the rules. 

EDIT: AJ posting on the corporate account. 

Hillar, or decision to race EC was purely a financial one. Our Quadrajet powered 350ci SBC put us at a 150VPI. “Updating” to a 24 year old 5.3 Vortec moves us to EC. The last thing we ever want to do  is affect another teams fun. We are where the rules put us, and don’t mind. Any deep desire for trophies / wins is well behind anyone that will ever be in our cars (Combat Vets). Simply, we are here to experience racing and enjoy the community. (Yes, we would like to be in D-class, and that may happen,  but not this year.) 

Edited April 9 by Follow On Mission

[jim161c]

8 hours ago, Follow On Mission said:

EDIT: AJ posting on the corporate account. 

Hillar, or decision to race EC was purely a financial one. Our Quadrajet powered 350ci SBC put us at a 150VPI. “Updating” to a 24 year old 5.3 Vortec moves us to EC. The last thing we ever want to do  is affect another teams fun. We are where the rules put us, and don’t mind. Any deep desire for trophies / wins is well behind anyone that will ever be in our cars (Combat Vets). Simply, we are hear to experience racing and enjoy the community. (Yes, we would like to be in D-class, and that may happen,  but not this year.) 

325 hp is 325hp no matter how old the platform. the swap calc. basis added vpi on hp.

[Wheelman_99 - C Rallo]

14 hours ago, Team Tbird said:

Building a good car is NOT the problem. Never has been. 
 

It is the mediocre builders that are the majority, do not like being beaten on the track. These individuals deflect blame away from themselves and blame perceived issues to implement rule changes in their favor. 
 

Reading the petitions it is not changing. 
 

 

 

That's a bit harsh... Especially since many of the petitions are from some very good builders. Furthermore, most of these petitions are not about helping only one car and many are not selfishly motivated.

 

 

On 4/7/2023 at 11:19 AM, mender said:

When I built my Fiero ten years ago it had Koni reds the first year. Rule change and over the winter they came out for KYBs and Bilstein AK series shocks. The car went faster with the cheaper shocks but I lost the ability to play with settings. 

 

The Fiero is getting the Konis back but will be sent out for revalving once I finalize spring rates. I like playing with shock settings, usually don't gain much other than liking how the car behaves.

 

Bottom line is that just about any change can go either way, it's more about the builder than the rules.

 

A Fiero is a great example of why we need to adjust fuel capacities and an example of VPI not having fuel capacity properly baked in as many claim.

 

There are many cars out there with no shot to go far enough or fast enough to truly and consistently be competitive.

 

 

14 hours ago, Follow On Mission said:

EDIT: AJ posting on the corporate account. 

Hillar, or decision to race EC was purely a financial one. Our Quadrajet powered 350ci SBC put us at a 150VPI. “Updating” to a 24 year old 5.3 Vortec moves us to EC. The last thing we ever want to do  is affect another teams fun. We are where the rules put us, and don’t mind. Any deep desire for trophies / wins is well behind anyone that will ever be in our cars (Combat Vets). Simply, we are hear to experience racing and enjoy the community. (Yes, we would like to be in D-class, and that may happen,  but not this year.) 

 

What vehicle.

 

5 hours ago, jim161c said:

325 hp is 325hp no matter how old the platform. the swap calc. basis added vpi on hp.

The invisible elephant in the room is that the swap formula ends up relying heavily on power to swap weight. Some cars can make good swaps and some are stuck with working with what they have.

[Team Tbird]

“That’s a bit harsh”?  I don’t think so. Reading the petitions and seeing how many are pointed at one particular team and make is “harsh”. This behavior is a cancer in this series. Do I believe the C3 needs points? Yes. I believe the current administration will make the call. 

I will agree there are a few good recommendations. To deny or justify the blatant attack towards one particular team is not only harsh but comically arrogant. 
 

The real question is why is there not the same aggression towards the make that has a lot more wins than the C3? Or is it just harsh with your interpretation? 

 

7 hours ago, Wheelman_99 - C Rallo said:

That's a bit harsh... Especially since many of the petitions are from some very good builders. Furthermore, most of these petitions are not about helping only one car and many are not selfishly motivated.

 

Perhaps an explanation why this post is not “harsh” but my post is?

 

On 1/9/2023 at 8:43 PM, Wheelman_99 - C Rallo said:

Save fuel? that car carries 26 gallons! 

Champ needs a rule to reign fuel capacity in odd ball cars like that. It isn't the only reason they are winning by the margins they are, but it is one of them. The series has control over that and a few more. Write in some petitions guys. Throw paper at impound too, let's make sure we're all legal and therefore making adjustments with good data

 

 

Edited April 9 by Team Tbird

[Follow On Mission]

6 hours ago, Wheelman_99 - C Rallo said:

The invisible elephant in the room is that the swap formula ends up relying heavily on power to swap weight. Some cars can make good swaps and some are stuck with working with what they have.

Wheelman, that's where we are. The car was built in 1977 during full-swing of the "SAE Net" HP era. Moving in a powerplant from the "Advertised HP" era doesn't work in most situations (there are outliers, however).  Not complaining, it's just the fact, and we understand the calculator can't cover all situations. 

 

On why we did it, for $500, even if the motor needs a complete rebuild, with the Vortec you get aluminum heads a roller valve-train that is probably fine, powdered metal "fractured" rods, six bolt main caps, and much... much better sealing / oil control. One thought I've had (if the D-class teams "unofficially" approve of the car), I'd like to petition this particular swap be given the vpi points for the above mentioned advantages of the 5.3 over the 350, instead of using the swap calculator's 1700 point add. I think it will be a good companion race car for the 1st Gen Mustangs. (The Mustangs were the inspiration to build this car). Just a thought, and won't petition next year without prior approval from the other D-class teams. 

[Team Tbird]

An LS swap no matter the model will never happen with the current administration. A 4.8 would be a very good swap for this series. The 4.8 is cheap, plentiful and easy to get running. Unfortunately an LS swap of any kind scare the devil out of the fellow non domestic teams. 
 

There are a lot of teams that, for one reason or another chose to run EC. Whether it is cost, inexperience or convenience it fits their situation. Unfortunately there are a few individuals that just cannot understand or refuse to except this. You do what is best for you and your team and ignore those individuals that want to run you off. 

 

Thank you for your service. Look forward to meeting you soon. Best of luck.

 

38 minutes ago, Follow On Mission said:

Wheelman, that's where we are. The car was built in 1977 during full-swing of the "SAE Net" HP era. Moving in a powerplant from the "Advertised HP" era doesn't work in most situations (there are outliers, however).  Not complaining, it's just the fact, and we understand the calculator can't cover all situations. 

 

On why we did it, for $500, even if the motor needs a complete rebuild, with the Vortec you get aluminum heads a roller valve-train that is probably fine, powdered metal "fractured" rods, six bolt main caps, and much... much better sealing / oil control. One thought I've had (if the D-class teams "unofficially" approve of the car), I'd like to petition this particular swap be given the vpi points for the above mentioned advantages of the 5.3 over the 350, instead of using the swap calculator's 1700 point add. I think it will be a good companion race car for the 1st Gen Mustangs. (The Mustangs were the inspiration to build this car). Just a thought, and won't petition next year without prior approval from the other D-class teams. 

 

Edited April 9 by Team Tbird

[Follow On Mission]

20 minutes ago, Team Tbird said:

An LS swap no matter the model will never happen with the current administration. A 4.8 would be a very good swap for this series. The 4.8 is cheap, plentiful and easy to get running. Unfortunately an LS swap of any kind scare the devil out of the fellow non domestic teams. 
 

There are a lot of teams that, for one reason or another chose to run EC. Whether it is cost, inexperience or convenience it fits their situation. Unfortunately there are a few individuals that just cannot understand or refuse to except this. You do what is best for you and your team and ignore those individuals that want to run you off. 

 

Thank you for your service. Look forward to meeting you soon. Best of luck.

 

 

Thanks T-bird!

[MMiskoe]

Overall when I provided feedback, my most common response was "this is rules creep".

 

Lots of requests for free or lower points items because "it will make it cheaper/better/safer".

[Team Tbird]

Well said. And I agree with you. To a point. 

 

  Oil pans, accumulators, radiators and related parts are an expense initially. If implemented properly it will improve longevity in a motor even with the higher price of initial payout. One can agree or not. But there is a reason these parts were developed. These parts are proven. 

  The individuals that object to the aforementioned parts usually have cars with better oil pans that are engineered for spirited driving. If these items become zero points they lose their advantage. 
 

  The real question is why is aftermarket tuning Zero points? This one item has more potential for improved power increases than anything that is available for Zero points. An oil pan has no performance advantage. It soul purpose is the control oil around the pickup to prevent starvation of oil to the motor. Yet this item is 20 points. Go figure. And tuning is a hell of a lot more expensive than a good road race oil pan. 
 

  These items have been used as the “speed creep” excuse along with a few other items since the series inception. Meanwhile Brakes, Tuning, certain make suspension pieces, and tires which have the most influence of speed creep are free. 
 

  There comes a time when someone needs to question these discrepancies. 
 

7 hours ago, MMiskoe said:

Overall when I provided feedback, my most common response was "this is rules creep".

 

Lots of requests for free or lower points items because "it will make it cheaper/better/safer".

 

[Team Infiniti]

22 hours ago, Team Tbird said:

An LS swap no matter the model will never happen with the current administration. A 4.8 would be a very good swap for this series. The 4.8 is cheap, plentiful and easy to get running. Unfortunately an LS swap of any kind scare the devil out of the fellow non domestic teams. 
 

There are a lot of teams that, for one reason or another chose to run EC. Whether it is cost, inexperience or convenience it fits their situation. Unfortunately there are a few individuals that just cannot understand or refuse to except this. You do what is best for you and your team and ignore those individuals that want to run you off. 

 

Thank you for your service. Look forward to meeting you soon. Best of luck.

 

 

My sister team is currently running a 4.8 LS based engine automatic ford ranger, it just finished daytona,  I also personally know a 5.3 (or 2) camaro/firebird in the works, all class D

[MattGent]

22 hours ago, Team Tbird said:

An LS swap no matter the model will never happen with the current administration. A 4.8 would be a very good swap for this series. The 4.8 is cheap, plentiful and easy to get running. Unfortunately an LS swap of any kind scare the devil out of the fellow non domestic teams. 

I don't see "LS" anywhere in the swap rules. Just rated HP and swap weight / SPV.  Pick a lower hp engine or a car with a higher swap weight. 

[Team Tbird]

Agreed there is not an LS prohibited rule. Current rules make an LS swap difficult. My post was a bit implied. I stand corrected. The post was addressed towards Follow on Mission. 
 

This series has not been kind towards some V8 teams in the past. BoP has been administered unequally to certain makes. This fact cannot be disputed. If an LS does win it will be neutered quickly. And you know it. Especially if it is domestic.
 

Why is a certain make with a V8 not administered BoP after a win but another V8 with one win is? 
 

Perhaps you can shed some light on this?

 

36 minutes ago, Team Infiniti said:

My sister team is currently running a 4.8 LS based engine automatic ford ranger, it just finished daytona,  I also personally know a 5.3 (or 2) camaro/firebird in the works, all class D

 

[Team Infiniti]

2 minutes ago, Team Tbird said:

Why is a certain make with a V8 not administered BoP after a win but another V8 with one win is? 

c3 chassis just received a 100pt bump...

[Follow On Mission]

31 minutes ago, MattGent said:

I don't see "LS" anywhere in the swap rules. Just rated HP and swap weight / SPV.  Pick a lower hp engine or a car with a higher swap weight. 

Matt, it's the method of "Rating" the HP numbers. Our car was manufactured during "SAE Net", a period where the domestic manufacturers were trying for the lowest number (insurance etc.)This was measured at the wheel with all accessories plugging away. The "LS" (any LS aficionado will laugh at us calling our 5.3 an LS) is from the period of "more better", or "Advertised" horsepower, taken at the crank stripped of any accessories.  Even if the motors produced the same power in reality, the published numbers will vary by a 100 or so. 

We're not complaining about the swap calculator.. or the rules. Neither can cover all situations. We care about the Spirit of ChampCar, an area where we are utterly compliant.

[Team Tbird]

Was not talking about the C3. We all knew that was coming. 
 

34 minutes ago, Team Infiniti said:

c3 chassis just received a 100pt bump...