Oh joy! I'm so stoked that another round of vintage ignition debate has begun. I had absolutely nothing better to do than spend my off season discussing a moot point... again.
Haha! The best defense is a good offense, huh? Attack and act indignant!First off, I'm glad the digitalphobes have fessed up and acknowledged that this is a rule CHANGE and not a rule CLARIFICATION. This is an important point because changing the rule would require dozens of competitors to reengineer their entire cars over what is truly a non-issue.
Well, Pedro, call it what you want. I didn't see the form or deadline for the Rule Clarification, so I went this route.The fact is simply this ~ the rules in these classes also require a CARBURETOR or MECHANICAL fuel injection. EFI is not allowed! What, for gods sake can a oxygen sensor adjust on a CARBURATED car during the course of a run? Why the unfounded paranoia?
Hmmm, do I really need to answer this? Do you REALLY think sidetracks will throw people off that easily? The O2 can be used to control timing-that part has nothing to do with a CARB or MECHANICAL fuel injection. It could also be used for H2O injection, and probably numerous other functions, if one got creative.
Probably the biggest abuse out there is referencing timing to boost- but you already know that.Even though it's a non-issue, there is a very simple solution to the concerns about possible black magic performed by ignition boxes. Simply add the following to the exiting rule~
Any ignition may be used as long as it doesn't receive electronic feedback and/or change preset ignition parameters during the course of a run.
This is the rule change that I have proposed.
It's very simple, very easy, very painless COMPROMISE that addresses everyone's issue. Compromise... you've heard of that right?
If not, here's the definition -
noun an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions.
"an ability to listen to two sides in a dispute, and devise a compromise acceptable to both"
Thank you for the definition. I'm sure none of us here would have ever considered such a thing! LOL!Now, of course, this doesn't address those who are concerned about the 'purity' or the 'spirit' of the vintage classes, but come on... what is truly vintage about ANY of the cars breaking records in these classes? Maybe we should go back to recapped tires, and milk crates for seats, and ban fire systems, data loggers, and helmets while we're at it. Buddy, I've looked closely at your car, and you have to admit, it's no more 'vintage' than most of the other competitive cars currently running in vintage classes these days.
That may well be true, but it does meet all of the rules-even the ambiguous ignition rule!FACT ~ There is no difference WHAT SO EVER between pre-programming an ignition curve into an ignition box and using an old Sun machine to do the exact same thing on a distributor.
That depends on what parameters are used. Programming a curve that retards the timing at X PSI, or that adds or subtracts timing at X RPM is certainly different.So please, acknowledge the real concern about the wording of existing rule, add a few words to address those fears, and let's all move on and simply go racing.
COMPROMISE... Try it, you'll like it!
Pedro, I've had the opportunity to sit, chat, and drink beer with you. Your a bright guy, a good guy, and I truly think you're wording is a good COMPROMISE, even if it's not my first choice.
Good luck with it! 
You are obviously very passionate about our sport, and that's wonderful! Please just don't let your passion blind you-this is a good clarification of the ignition rule, IMHO, even if it's not best for every car and driver.
