Landracing Forum
East Coast Timing Association => ECTA General Chat => Topic started by: KeithTurk on November 01, 2004, 08:51:00 AM
-
Well for all practical purposes we have a clean sheet of paper... it's our intention to continue doing whats been successful in the past and to add a few things like the club concept of providing volunteers.. we are very interested in your thoughts... please take a minute and share them.
Keith
-
Good luck to you and Joe on your challange in the upgrading the ECTA. It's a big task and will require many hours to make it work. The volunteers are a big part of it. Without them the SCTA would not survive. The people become family and all are equal. They will find where they fit in best to support the venture. John Beckett was the ECTA pioneer and put in time on both coasts to start it up. We helped every way we could and will do the same for the new ECTA.
Glen
-
Thanks Glen... we appreciate what the SCTA has done in the past... I bet I mentioned the SCTA name as many times this weekend as I did the ECTA.... Simply stated as a 50+ year old organization you have been through all the trials and tribulations in this sport... Not looking at how you have evolved would be stupid.
John structured most of what we do with the goal of a seamless transition between racing at Maxton and Bonneville... that will be our goal as well...
The biggest reason for us to do this was to give it to the volunteers that have made the place happen... Without them John couldn't have survived... and now the goal is to figure out how to best support them and Not burn them out...
Keith
-
It is a given that the SCTA is a old and very sucessful association. Everything about it has been developed over years of great meets. The ECTA has a somewhat different history and that should be reflected in your orgagization. The only thing I would like to see changed at El Mirage would be to make it eaiser for a nonmember to make his or her first runs. As it is now I don't like paying $120 guest entry to let someone get a ride in my car. But then how do you reward the members for putting on the meet? Glad i don't make decisions, just show up and run. RF
-
Rich your absolutely right when you say we have our own flavor... it is what makes our venue unique... that of course will continue.
I need to mention that Joe has been made the president... I'm just out gathering up idea's.
-
and keith.it goes without saying that you have my support as always and i'm glad we are moving towards a system that lends itself to uniformity with the other lsr venues. thanks to john of course and thanks to you and joe.if i can help.you have my #'s.and i am glad we are growing and moving towards the positive direction we need to go and giving concern towards our volunteers that make it happen...let me know if/when/where i can help.
regards
dad
-
and i for one am tickled pink that certifying displacement and class adhereance and spot fuel checks!...impound is what it should be..dan warner.your my hero! without passion or prejudice so we have a honest level playing feild . i'm glad that a vehicle should be able to go from the salt to maxton or maxton to the salt and the vehicle pass tech at both places..............if playing football it's not that the rules are changed from atlanta to pittsburg.it's all nfl.........or lsr,right?
dad land
-
I would like to see cars/bikes run only in the class for which they are eligible. No more taking one bike and running 8 different classes with no configuration change.
Like the SCTA/USFRA class rules.
JimS
lsr 504.506
-
Scott,
What do you think scott?
Yes and Yes on both issues, including body changes without mods.
You are the king at it scott so that means no more class jumping from a 1350 MPS/F to S/BG 3000cc and everything in between.
Jon
-
One quick post on this subject-a c-motored car cannot run for a record in "B". In cars at least the engine has to fit in that class break. Is it differant in Motorcycles?
rht
-
Richard,
At ecta events a C motored car can run all the way up to AA and every class in between, I think even a streamliner.
Jon
-
(Harry Lindsey, Dublin, Ireland 1978) "you better beat him now before he starts going bloody fast"
How much credibility is there for the A record if the C record is faster? If an entrant takes the minimum allowances for the class, do they stand any less tall than someone who has taken the maximum allowance if they are faster? I would suggest that the slow one would be doing the most jumping.
Using Bonneville/SCTA as an example, how many years will it take to fill all of the available classes with entrants speeds at the rate they are going?
<small>[ December 02, 2004, 04:17 PM: Message edited by: JackD ]</small>
-
Page 17 of the 2004 states what the rules are for engine classifications. There is no philosophy. The word "thru" gives the top and bottom of the displacement of each engine class with the exception of AA. If you wish to see a change, you have the option of submitting a rules change form. Until the time of a change, the rules concerning engine class sizes will continue to follow what is stated in the rule book.
-
Added reply-Sorry to have responed on the ECTA decision question, questioning SCTA rules on engine classes on this ECTA thread.
All of us realize they a similar but different organizations which share many rules. Without getting nick-picky, what's is good for one may not be good for the other since the venues and time in exsistance are different. J.D.
-
Originally posted by jimmy six:
what's is good for one may not be good for the other since the venues and time in exsistance are different. J.D.
Thanks for saying it. It seems MANY can't grasp that for some reason.
TD
-
It's about credibility. If you establish "rules" and then ignore them, the "records" are no more than timing slips.
If you want to compete with me, build your bike to the specifications of the SCTA rulebook FOR THAT CLASS, and I'll see you Bonneville.
-
I pioneered 1650 MPS/PBG in '01 and MPS/PBF in '02 at Bonneville. Soft records, to be sure; I'm just getting started. I love having peers to measure my progress against. It motivates me to keep coming back.
I also ran at Maxton in '02. Those records have been superceded as well, but who knows what size/configuration they were? At least I know that I met the specifications for the classes I set records in.
By all means, bring it on! See you on the Salt!
-
1. As I understand it, someone "gaming the system" through class jumping at Bonneville could get multiple listings in the record book. As I understand it, it used to be legal to do so, but no longer is. Perhaps old records acquired thru class jumping should be differentiated.
2. Pushrod classes have relatively more coverage in the national M/C press. Fans like competition. LSR is a competition; 1650 MPS/PBG&F have been real competitive since Sam pioneered the class. I recommend one of those XRTT fairings with a CdA of 2.71 for your Sportster, bearing in mind the Drag Force (Fd) moment on that shape much above 200mph may tend to lift the front wheel.
3. The most important record is the next one.
-
Originally posted by Sam Dakin:
I also ran at Maxton in '02. Those records have been superceded as well, but who knows what size/configuration they were? At least I know that I met the specifications for the classes I set records in.
Sam, are you saying you don't believe that the the XLlist team(which you're a member of) or Tom Metty, or Don Thigpen, or Sidney Conn were legal to run in the 1650 class? Especially the last two as they were in your class specifically. Come on, you only ran in the mid 120mph range with a 1650cc blown partially streamlined bike didn't you? I'm not downing your speed, just being realistic here. I'm sure Scott has some old sportsters(maybe even a Kmodel) that will exceed that. I think the 1650 blown faired class should be in the 200+mph range shouldn't it?
TD
-
Originally posted by Jim Snyder:
I would like to see cars/bikes run only in the class for which they are eligible. No more taking one bike and running 8 different classes with no configuration change.
Like the SCTA/USFRA class rules.
JimS
lsr 504.506
APS/PBF-1650/4 Whiplash May-03 163.773
APS/PBG-2000/4 Whiplash Jun-03 162.490
????
TD
-
You know as well as I do that's easier said then done Scott. I think the idea is great if it worked, but there are things that would pose safety, space and manpower factors. Such as a front brake not being needed for SCTA.. that doesn't fly real well for those that are coming to ECTA for the first time with plans on running well over 200mph and being able to do that in 5 runs before noon their first day there.
Maybe adopting the SCTA rules outright would be fine if an extra page of "reccomendations" or "additional needed safety items" was added?
But then agian, this also means that you will need to start towing your vehicles to starting and from shutdown. This will also include alot of additional space to allow for these trailers around tech, impound and the pits in general.. let alone the line being formed down the access road due to not being able to fit many of these tow vehicles and trailers in the staging lanes at one time.
It also means a tremendous amount of additional volunteers will be needed to help out in the items mentioned above as well as for EVERY vehicle that qualifies for a record. Then they will have to go back and run again to get that record also.
Or is everyone saying they want to adopt just the part of the SCTA rules THEY care about?
Big differences!
TD
-
Sami said "Scott spelled challenge wrong. Is he spell jumping again?"
If I understand the question correctly, top speed within the limits of the class is the answer.
All the various configurations of Bonneville entries have had their press day in the sun over the years. If you notice that pink motorcycles are getting a lot of ink it's probably because you own one or want to. The best competition I have seen was when the 50cc Production class was so hotly contested with 4 or so entries swapping the record every day.
You don't have to go 250mph to set a record at Bonneville, but you do have to be the fastest within the limits of the rules. If you choose not to take full advantage of the class and still go faster than your opponent, the only thing that sticks is you went faster.
-
At the risk of putting my head in the line of fire:
I fail to see that the issue of whether or not competitors can run up in motor size is the ?religious? issue that some seem to think it is. I also fail to see how allowing running up in class ?dilutes? the records in any way. If someone builds a bike (substitute ?car? for ?bike? hereinafter if you wish) with a 999cc motor and wants to run in a class where bikes with motors up to 1200cc are eligible, I say bless him. Even though he might instead, or as well, compete against bikes of smaller size, bless him. And to the guy who is offended by that, I say go take full advantage of allowable engine size and build a 1200 and kick his butt.
How does that dilute the class record? Nonsense. Remember, the class breaks are themselves arbitrary. There?s simply is no fundamental logic to allowing a 1000.1 cc motor run against 1200 cc motors, but not letting a 999.9 cc motor run in the same class, except one that is for the sole purpose of being exclusionary. Now that may be ok, but admit what you are doing. You?re excluding a competitor for the purpose of excluding a competitor, not to protect the sanctity of the record books. Let?s all just admit that it reduces competition, not improves and sanctifies it somehow.
Now, all that is not to say that the more restrictive rule is itself bad. It seems to me that the SCTA way, which is effectively to limit the class to ?motors bigger than x and smaller than y? is fine for them. But it is not fundamentally better or worse than the current ECTA version, which boils down to defining the class as ?motors not bigger than x.?
Personally, I could go either way. However, I think that right now in the life of the ECTA, allowing running up in class is the better answer for several reasons (which since I already wrote a book, I will spare you for now), but that?s just one man?s opinion.
My main point here is this is not an issue of credibility or dilution of records or any of the other incendiary words that people in this thread have used. So let's not hide behind those notions.
(OFF MY SOAPBOX.)
-
I guess I agree with Mark.
I think that the issue of credibility of an ECTA record should hinge on two factors; . . . Engine size and a body that conforms to the class standard.
Although on the engine size issue I could see a compromise. First establish a set of minimum class record standards. (maybe 90% of El Mirage records/minimums) Allow someone to run in any engine class if their engine is legal in that class OR a smaller class. Example is someone that is building a car for K/FL. Allow them to run in any Lakester engine class (AA through K) but require that they break the minimum to set a record. If a 500cc engine can break a legitimate minimum for a 2000cc (G) class they should be allowed to have that well earned record. One other requirement would be the restriction that you cannot attempt to set a record in a class for a larger engine UNLESS YOU HOLD THE RECORD FOR YOUR ENGINE CLASS. So in the example of the K/FL the car must first set a record in K/FL before trying to 'move up'.
In the fuel classes let fuel be ?optional? so gas cars could run in them.
For Blown classes let blowers by ?Optional?.
But there is more to consider under this ?total? accepting of the SCTA rules at Maxton. There are classes at Maxton that do not exist at Bonneville. LX and KX Karts, L engine class (250cc) for cars, Super Street, Pure Street, Circle Track.
Circle Track is a very good example. The NASCAR Dodge top time car at the October meet at Maxton is not a legal car for Bonneville. It would not be allowed in Competition coupe because the body panels are overly modified for that category (converted from 4 door to 2 door and the contour has been somewhat altered beyond what is allowed.)
Other considerations are things like the tire rules. The rules for maximum speeds allowed with certain speed rated tires varies between the Bonneville and Maxton rules. C Clip rear hubs are allowed up to 150mph at Maxton but not at BNI. Full roll cages are required in all cars at Bonneville but only 4 point bars are required above 125mph and full cages above 150 at Maxton. I could go on but you get the point.
In the mean time I am working on my J/GC and looking forward to running with the ECTA and maybe (with a little luck)Bonneville.
Art
-
Mark,
I totally agree with you.
I think allowing class jumping only serves to set minimum standards for that class. I don't see the harm in that. Theoretically a larger engine should be able to run faster then a smaller engine in a similar configured body so you're not taking anything away from the vehicle that is in that class as it?s base class. I don?t understand the point in limiting how far up a vehicle can run. You absolutely have to limit the bottom of the spectrum to keep it fair but running up is still fair. Why do we want to restrict how many records a person can make in how many classes? That has nothing to do with credibility. CC-ing engines & having Tech & Impound thoroughly inspect & classify a vehicle will create credibility to records. Are we somehow trying to reserve classes for someone who may never come?
I think in regards to ECTA class jumping is an issue/consideration for two reasons.
1) The ability to class jump effects the outcome of the point?s race. (Convenient that we're trying to restrict jumping now that many of our points competitors are running out of open classes while some others are wide open. (i.e. small cc/pushrod bikes))
2) Money. Class changing generates income. ECTA is still relatively new and growing and every penny still counts.
Personally I?d rather see the points race go away then to change the class jumping.
We?re Land Speed Racing, which means going fast. If you can go fast in multiple classes then go for it. Your record and personal accomplishment are your reward. Give the vehicle that made the most records in a given year and/or the fastest runs a plaque or trophy. Why do we have to reward people for learning how to play the points game which only serves to reward you for playing a game not for running the fastest.
Just my opinion
Deb #1301
Twin Jugs Racing
-
Originally posted by DahMurf:
Personally I?d rather see the points race go away then to change the class jumping.
We?re Land Speed Racing, which means going fast. If you can go fast in multiple classes then go for it. Your record and personal accomplishment are your reward. Give the vehicle that made the most records in a given year and/or the fastest runs a plaque or trophy. Why do we have to reward people for learning how to play the points game which only serves to reward you for playing a game not for running the fastest.
Ahhh . . . the points system. That?s another whole can of worms ? albeit related to the class division discussion. I agree with Deb, and I swear we did not rehearse this. ;)
I think the points system has a bunch of flaws. That does not mean it is not an ok thing. Everyone knows what the rules are, and anyone can choose to aim toward it or not. But it is not an even playing field. The very construct of the points system awards faster vehicles. That?s ok, but slower guys who are as talented and dedicated and having as much or more fun need not apply. Guys who build vehicles that put on spectacular performances for what they are, but who can only afford to compete at one or two meets only, need not apply. Guys running in the most competitive classes where the records are already stratospheric need not apply. Etc., etc.
I just think we need collectively to figure out what we want to reward. I really have no big issue with the current points race, but I view it as a sideshow, not THE game. The game is doing the best you can with your vehicle and your budget in a class or classes you choose to run in. I think the points race would be better if it were designed to reward truly excellent performance, not just going fast and exploiting the points structure and the class structure. I have thought about this some and just am at a loss to come up with such a system that does not unduly favor the wrong things.
As a possible alternative, I just raise the question whether the same ten trophies might not better serve the community of racers if they went to categories like ?Fastest Bike of the Season,? ?Fastest Car of the Season,? ?Best Sportsman,? ?Most Innovative Design,? ?Best Prepared Vehicle,? etc. If you don?t like these, make up your own categories. Some are objective; some are going to be by definition subjective. But I really don?t think subjectivity of any award is any more offensive than the arbitrary points system that is in my view rewarding the wrong things.
Please understand, I am not opposed to a season point race. I chose to play ?the sideshow? this season and ended up in fifth place, which is pretty good, I think, on a bike that was severely handicapped by only going a bit over 100 mph in a points system that awards points largely based on speed. I just wonder if from the organization?s point of view (and that, in my view, means the racers as a whole) if the same resources (i.e., money for trophies) could be better allocated.
Sorry I have more questions than answers.
Mark
<small>[ December 07, 2004, 05:52 PM: Message edited by: Mark ]</small>
-
Originally posted by LittleLiner:
In the fuel classes let fuel be ?optional? so gas cars could run in them.
For Blown classes let blowers by ?Optional?.
I agree with most of what Art said.
Two comments:
I think fuel is "optional" in fuel classes. You can run anything you want, from pump gas to moonshine, including track gas -- just don't get your tank sealed -- and it is fully "optional.".
I am not sure why blowers should be optional. I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth, but I think Art, Deb, and I and perhaps others were making a case for allowing running up in motor class, but adhering to the structural class differentiations. I see blowers as a fundamental design thing, just like pushrods vs. non pushrods, or areodynamics (S or PS) vs. no aerodymanics. I ceretainly don't have a strong feeling about it, but I think requiring blowers in blown classes is more consistent with that notion.
Mark
-
Originally posted by scott guthrie:
Consider the below examples, for smiles. . . .
Smiles, hell. All the metaphysics made my head hurt.
Mark
-
First off, I get a little long winded, but I'm stuck in a hotel in Lincoln, NE and figured it was alright to chime in.
When in Rome...or El Mirage or Bonneville
If a vehicle fits within the limits of a class, should it not be allowed to run that class?
Because smaller doesn't always mean slower, should we keep the fast kid in his place?
Why is it wrong to grow a sport and a sanctioning body thru financial strength so that it can continue to evolve without always struggling?
When in Rome...or Bonneville, we do what is required for that event and it's classes. The mecca of LSR has evolved over many, many years and is in it's majesty today, but it didn't get there overnight.
The ECTA is also evolving and who knows what it may look like in 5 years.
I know that I am very new to LSR (and loving it) so my knowledge of the grand history of Land Speed Racing is miniscule compared to all of you. My knowledge of running a sanctioning body is not new. I have had the honor of being the AMA/Prostar US Drag Racing series Race Director for a season and I know first hand what it takes to operate a sanctioned event and can tell you with all sincerity that the ECTA must evolve. Whether it allows class jumping or not, it must first garner enough racers to support it's growth.
As I have been told so many times that Maxton is not Bonneville nor El Mirage and that my records at Maxton apply to Maxton's 1 mile event only.
Since it is volunteer driven to man all the necessary positions to operate an event(impound, start line, fuel checks and technical inspections) and volunteers are scarce, then the positions are what they are until such time as the organization can grow to a more fuller organization. You can put all the rules you want to in place, but if they can't be enforced or cost you your revenue to grow, what good did they do at the time.
Let's not put constraints on our dreams for a unified sanctioning bodies rules by trying to cookie cut rule books.
Anyway, that was just my $.02
Thanks for opportunity.
Guy
<small>[ December 07, 2004, 08:05 PM: Message edited by: 2fast4u2c ]</small>
-
Well, that's more common sense this afternoon than I have seen together over many years. Guy will remember IDBA that retired records every few years to re-sell the class to someone. They are gone now. A suggestion to keep the points from running away might include:
1. The points be issued to a member rider in one class per meet and they must declare their class designation at registration before running. They may set additional records for recognition, however, no additional points would be awarded at that meet.
2. No points would be awarded in an open class without a minimum or in a class where the engine size below you is faster.
3. Use whatever points number you consider appropriate, however, if you use bonus points for setting a record they would be limited to a class where you took a record away from someone else. Individual recognition by entry category should be a trophy sponsored by the appropriate business. For example, Carl Morrow, should buy the pushrod trophy not just because I told him to. You will find that many businesses would be happy to put their name along side a category winner.
-
Everyone makes complete sense for what they are individually talking about. I think the fact comes down to something Jimmy said though, TIME IN EXISTENCE. SCTA was not where they are now, when they started. It's the same reason a child doesn't come out of the womb walking and looking for a job. It needs to grow, and I think everyone is helping it by speaking their peice(ok, maybe not everyone, maybe not me), either way it's all good if we can still race while we grow. JB started it off and grew it the right way so ECTA can continue to learn from SCTA without having to exactly emulate it's very large footsteps, while just a fraction of it's age and size.
TD
-
Originally posted by Todd Dross:
Everyone makes complete sense for what they are individually talking about. I think the fact comes down to something Jimmy said though, TIME IN EXISTENCE. SCTA was not where they are now, when they started.
Right. . . and? I'm not sure what your point is. Should it be changed? Left alone? Follow SCTA? Not follow SCTA? I'm confused.
Mark
-
Originally posted by Mark:
Originally posted by Todd Dross:
Everyone makes complete sense for what they are individually talking about. I think the fact comes down to something Jimmy said though, TIME IN EXISTENCE. SCTA was not where they are now, when they started.
Right. . . and? I'm not sure what your point is. Should it be changed? Left alone? Follow SCTA? Not follow SCTA? I'm confused.
Mark [/b]
Many don't see the point Mark and I didn't mean to confuse you. To answer your question, I think ECTA should progress with it's longevity being the main objective. But what I think ECTA should be is not important. Me helping one small step at a time by working to make ECTA what I want it to be is important, and that's what I'm doing.
TD
-
Todd... I understand you care about Maxton and your efforts are always applauded...
We are Land Speed Racers... Not just Maxton racers... yes MOST Of us Race only at Maxton... but that experience should be on line with the experience everywhere...
Some folks don't think we need the credibility that comes from playing by the rules... but we do... it's Very important for us to extend our growth.
Collectively the members voted to outlaw vehicle class jumping next year and stick to Motor only changes... I think that is the easiest to support... it still means you can "SET" a record in motor sizes and fuel ( and my understanding blown using a non blown motor) above your class.
Plenty of records are avalible... But a record has to have merit... and a record set with a Camaro in a streamliner class just gets lost in the shuffle...
No Matter what.. whoever has won the points race has played by the rules inposed that year... Scottie for example figures and plays by the rules better then anyone... and he deserves the championships he's won... trust me I've raced him pretty hard, it takes effort to beat him...
-
OK..If the class "upgrading" is not allowed....How many entries are we goin to have in the 2000cc and up non pushrod classes???
Dave
-
Originally posted by DaveO:
OK..If the class "upgrading" is not allowed....How many entries are we goin to have in the 2000cc and up non pushrod classes???
Dave
Dave, the restrictions(for bikes) are going to be in the Frame class. Everything else will remain as it's been for now. It takes four things to enter a bike into a class.
1- Frame Class
2- Engine Class (meaning Type of engine)
3- Engine Displacement Class
4- Engine Stroke(misnamed Engine Cycle)
What it appears is going to happen is that you will be bound to your base frame class(lowest frame class designator your bike qualifies for), but you will still be able to move up in Engine Type and Engine Displacement(to answer your question). Hope that helps explain the way I understand it(and yes, this is simply my understanding of it, nothing more. and strictly the bike side of it).
TD
-
Originally posted by Keith Turk:
Some folks don't think we need the credibility that comes from playing by the rules... but we do... it's Very important for us to extend our growth.
. . . .
No Matter what.. whoever has won the points race has played by the rules inposed that year... Scottie for example figures and plays by the rules better then anyone... and he deserves the championships he's won... trust me I've raced him pretty hard, it takes effort to beat him...
I don't think anybody said we don't need credibility. Certainly I did not. My point was that I just don't think bracketing motor sizes (as opposed to just having an upper limit, as is proposed) does not, IMHO, go to credibility of the record.
On the point about the championship points, also, I agree with you, Keith. Cheers to Scott and all the other points leaders this year and past years. I said above, I don't necessarily think the points championship as constructed is a bad thing -- I said, everyone knows the rules and can choose to compete or not. I was not advocating a position, but trying to open minds and induce healthy debate as to whether a differently designed points constuct could reward things we value more.
Mark
-
Hey, somebody finally got me going here. . .
One of my goals for the next year is sort of "adjective-related". I'm ging the other way, though -- won't fill in all the details (you'll have to wait to see if I can pull it off), but I'm hoping to REDUCE the number of adjectives it takes to describe the configuration of my entry.
That Nailhead Buick includes some decription of "from Canada" and maybe "painted black". Better still is the way that each describer is in slightly smaller type font than the previous line, 'til at the bottom you darn near need your good glasses to read what they're saying.
As for production bikes - well, doesn't Triumph have that 2,300cc 3-cylinder scooter on the market now? Something like 11-gazillion foot-pounds of torque, and a motor only slightly (physically) smaller than the one in my big snowplow truck?
-
Originally posted by Mark:
I was not advocating a position, but trying to open minds and induce healthy debate as to whether a differently designed points constuct could reward things we value more.
I would really like to see the ECTA rethink the points system. I would like to see the ECTA define what they are trying to accomplish, what they are trying to reward, and then how best to fairly do it.
For example:
Are they trying to generate revenue by encouraging attendance at every meet and multiple class changes per meet?
Are they trying to reward the racers that continually show up, run reliably and continually improving?
Lets face it, the points race is given a more ?prestigious? award at the ECTA and up until this year you didn't even have to go to impound to collect your points. If I remember correctly, the point?s winner gets a trophy, their vehicle picture on the shirts for the following year, on the rulebook & on the web site and the others in the top 5 or 10 get a plaque. When you make a record you get a paper certificate. I think if you?re going to be given a more ?prestigious? award, you should be scrutinized at least as much as you are for a record if not more.
Limiting class jumping will help make it a little fairer but that's not all it's going to take.
Here?s some thoughts I?ve seen thrown around on the subject, maybe we can brainstorm a decent proposal:
- Minimum speeds for points only (alleviates the advantage of open classes)
- Getting points for running in base class only (will show/reward actual improvement not just the ability to find a ?soft record/minimum? to run on)
- Coming up with a way to award points based on a percentage to somehow tie in the CC/characteristics of the actual engine or class entered to the speed achieved to make it a little fairer for the little guy.
Deb
-
I believe you forgot one other option there Deb...
Get rid of the points system totally, and simply race for speeds.
TD
-
Originally posted by Todd Dross:
Get rid of the points system totally, and simply race for speeds.
True that is an option but I personally feel it has the potential to reduce the number of entrants/class changes ultimately reducing the ECTA income. We know there are members that only race for points because their vehicle's may not be competitive enough to achieve new records. On one side it may encourage racers to enhance their vehicles to become more competitive thus raising the level and quality of racing but on the other side the organization may loose racers.
Deb
-
1. On class jumping...it is quite amusing the lengths folks want to go to protect their class from being invaded by machines of, obvious, lesser capability.
2. On rules and "seamless transition"...the IHRA does not write their rules with concerns about copying what the NHRA does, the AHDRA does not copy how the AMRA or AMA/Prostar runs their show when considering rule changes and enforcements.
Even though, pay attention 'cause here's the kicker, they race at the same tracks. Imagine that.
dad wrote:
"..............if playing football it's not that the rules are changed from atlanta to pittsburg.it's all nfl.........or lsr,right?"
wrong...it's all football...did the AFL or WFL copy the NFL rules?
right...it's all LSR but it's not all SCTA
How can one suggest a "seamless transition" from a venue with unlimited shutdown area and rules that do not require brakes to a venue with limited shutdown area. Do we need to hire more ambulances?
3. On credibility...respect is earned not given.
4. On points...to hell with 'em
If what the ECTA is doing is so wrong maybe somebody should tell them folks down in Texas they got it TOTALLY screwed up.
Maybe we just won't call them Land Speed Racers.
whatayathink?
PB
2801
-
all good points of veiw. that said:"i'm glad to have a place to run on the east coast!" but however the rules end up...it is a fair level playing field with certification and displacement checks.fuel checks ,etc.
that's an addition that adds credibility (IMO).points i do not have an opinion on as they hold no interest to me personally. but i love the speed and this sport!
and yes, i love running out west on the salt!and plan on being there at every opprotunity. and plan on running on the dry lakes some day.and maybe on another continent one day! it's all lsr to me!but i'm glad to have a place this side of the salt to run.
dad land
-
So, should a 50cc moped jump to the 3000cc class and grab a soft record? If my kharma is too slow to out run my dogma, can I use a turbo to boost my ego?
<small>[ December 09, 2004, 04:23 PM: Message edited by: k.h. ]</small>
-
Originally posted by k.h.:
So, should a 50cc moped jump to the 3000cc class and grab a soft record? If my kharma is too slow to out run my dogma, can I use a turbo to boost my ego?
Hell yes if he can beat the 3000cc machine that made that soft record.
If you have a 2000-3000cc(or 100cc for that matter) machine that has allowed a 50cc moped to beat you.. then you need to worry more about your effort then who's running where.
TD
-
Don't get me wrong, I've painted my class on my bike. I have not obtained the speed to up the current record in my class, but have stayed(and will continue stay) in that class until I do.
TD
-
So, a 50cc moped can class jumps to open records, too, all the way up the engine size chain through 3000cc & Unlimited?
-
Originally posted by k.h.:
So, a 50cc moped can class jumps to open records, too, all the way up the engine size chain through 3000cc & Unlimited?
Yup. By the tone of your voice you say that like it is a bad thing. ;)
Mark
-
Bad thing? No. Absurd? Maybe. The way the system works? Yes. We are a nation of hot rodders. One man's hot rod is another man's boat anchor. I miss the smell of castor oil in the pits, but use Mobil 1 myself.
<small>[ December 09, 2004, 09:48 PM: Message edited by: k.h. ]</small>
-
Reflecting on some excellent points that Deb and others have made reminds me of something someone, who I repect highly and value their views, once said during a discussion I was a part of regarding much of this same subject matter. Thanks SG.
Paraphrasing..."We are racers, this is true, but this is also business and we must remember to keep that perspective."
Anything we do to discourage racers from coming to our events will only hurt the organization. Anything we can do to ENCOURAGE racers to come to our events will only help our organization. If that means finding a way to have a points program that is fair to all, I am all for that. If it means allowing racers to run in multiple classes and at the same time generate revenue for the organization, I am all for that as well. Please remember, it takes dollars (as well as other things) to make an event happen. The fewer racers we have the more dollar burden we each must carry. That could mean entry fees as high as...well...as high as the SCTA. Or worse, not having a place on the East Coast to race at all.
PB
2801
-
Points Race - if points were to be awarded for performance improvement (I like that) and all were equal across the board for slow folks and fast folks how about the number of points being awarded being equal to the new speed divided by the old speed.
I know there would be other factors as well, but, I was just trying to come up with an easy way to calculate points that would be exactly fair to all, regardless of how fast you go. The above calculation reflects a "percentage of improvement" regardless of speed.
Also, I am particularly fond of the idea of awards for things like Best Engineered, Most Improved, etc. Now there's an award one could receive for just showing up.
I would like to go ahead and nominate The Stuart Brothers with their 100+mph go-cart now for "Most Insane".LOL
PB
2801
-
British site doctordanger.com has a section on sprint racing & drag racing. Last year's Thundersprint Classic in Cheshire brought out 75,000 paying fans @ 8 GBP each. That's a million dollar+ gate. Includes RWYB (run what ya brung) classes for the masses.
Re: cash purses v. amateur racing: No one really has oversight, but, for example, I believe the SCTA is now a 501 C 3 "tax exempt" non-profit, which would limit their activities to amateur events with awards, but no monetary prizes. The question would be: Once you take a cash prize at BUB (in the LSR sport), are you still an amateur at BNI? Sure, professional race drivers come from other racing forms & participate. Nits to pick, true enough, but when the IRS audits a 501 C 3 non-profit, it's got to be amateur.
If Mohammed can't go to the FIM mountain . . . perhaps enjoining the AMA to act for the FIM in this country will accommodate the needs of some US LSR. FIM records at Nardo, Italy, in the big prototype "test bowl" are common. The FIM certified records at the Laredo Proving Grounds for Honda in '85 & 86. Maybe the answer is AMA LSR records, and a place to see them, keep track of them, publish them, whatever. Just like SCTA offers, only for all the other venues. But I would not want to be the "dart board" attempting homogenizing the rules. And if you want fans, get closer to them. All the LSR venues are arguably "remote."
-
Another bout of mental flatulance: How about a governing body which establishes an outline for "one way records" to accommodate Maxton & Goliad, maybe one way runs at some venue at Bonneville, and whatever other venue that might need a one way format. Say this org creates it's own national rule & record book for one way runs, available to participants and fans alike, satisfying a rider's vanity for being listed "in the record book," duly noted as a one way run. Add wind conditions if you like. Entrants pay a nominal fee for record recording and org underwriting (just like FIM, only much less money). This would cover exitisting non-salt venues under one umbrella without trying to satisfy FIM requirements, which don't help cars anyway. A representative of the org could be in attendance to certify time slips done at Maxton/Goliad/wherever for national records. I propose this as the least expensive route to a homogenized national record format outside Bonneville without detracting from it.
-
I suppose just because a course is run in one direction doesn't mean a record would have to be a one pass deal. Many U.S. drag racing organizations, for example, require "backup" runs within a given E.T. or M.P.H. percentage to establish a record.
PB
-
Originally posted by k.h.:
No one really has oversight, but, for example, I believe the SCTA is now a 501 C 3 "tax exempt" non-profit, which would limit their activities to amateur events with awards, but no monetary prizes.
I don't know one way or the other for sure, but I would be stunned to find that the SCTA is 501(c)(3) qualified. They note on their website that they are not run for profit, but that is very different from being a tax exempt not-for-profit enterprise. The IRS has historically jealously guarded that status from what they consider hobby enterprises, which land speed racing would be. Does anyone know for sure if SCTA is a 501(c)(3)?
Mark
-
If 501(c)3 happened, it was within the last year or so.
Paul's back up run idea is good, and simple.
This would not be to compete with any existing organization. Just a sanctioning body doing just that: sanctioning events, NOT promoting events, just setting rules for competition, verifying and keeping track of records. Keep things as simple as possible.
-
Originally posted by k.h.:
Parturiunt montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. (The mountains are in labor giving birth to a mouse)
And to think I thought it meant
Nascar participants look ridiculous mounting a moose.
TD
PS - I like the backup run idea alot!
-
"FIM Rules--
081.10.1 For Short Distance Courses:
A straight course between two points not having a gradient of more than 1% be used. It must be covered once in each direction with a maximum time interval of two hours between each run."
I don't know how they do it at Elvington(England) and Lelystad (Holland). Does it really matter? If a Bonneville course has run for records has been X long one time and Y another time, or back-up runs have been run for records, then a record sanctioning body for miles such as Goliad and Maxton should be able to create requirements that fit the nominal layouts with accommodation for safety. Every racer will be on equal footing per the regs.
Better traction on tarmac clearly makes for higher speeds than salt. LSR records in one venue (salt or pavement) may encourage racers in the the other venue to work harder to be the actual "fastest" in any given class that has a corresponding class. Competition breeds innovation. It's the American way.
-
The British have made official speed record runs under the rules of the Auto Cycle Union (affiliated to the FIM) for bikes and three wheelers and Motor Sports Association (affiliated to the FIA) for cars and thrust powered special vehicles.
This has neant at Elvington Airfield (1.9 miles total length) two way runs - within 2 hours and wind speed for FIM and 1 hour for FIA. Timing traps have been 1/4 mile long. 500 metres, kilo and mile.
The motorcycle records that the FIM list set in the UK are now mainly for the standing starts, but 'flyers' have been achieved in the past. Team Maximum Impulse with rider Richard Brown of the controls of the Gillette Mach 3 challenger have a one way 'flyer' timed for a full 1/4 mile (402 metre) averaging 241.15 mph and with chute he was able to stop.
The car records of the FIA that are listed include a few set at Elvington - usually for the smaller capacity class cars or again for standing start attempts.
The new ECTA management may wish to become guardians of World Short Land Speed course records that suit the mile run into a speed timed section of 132 feet. By all means have back up runs but more importantly have good clocks and the right person at the 'controls' to get the times exact.
Here in the UK we have many airfields that could be used in that way and around Europe and in the Scandanavian countries there will be many similar facilities (thanks to NATO and USAF). There are even some roads too ...... I am told South Africa can close highways to accommodate records but their MSA prefer to run to FIA/FIM operations.
More people are taking to 'run what you brung' style speed events in the UK - just to avoid losing their driving licenses by travelling a bit too fast on the highway - but many will need to upgrade safety features before being 'sanctioned' to run in an event.
Malcolm, Derby, England
-
A year of leading , not following.
CONGRATULATIONS !! 8)
780
-
"Stability breeds perfection." :wink:
-
OK, this is the last time I get sucked into posting a response to Franklin under his new name.
DW