Salt Cat

[debgeo]

Well put Stan

[RichFox]

I agree with Stan to a point. While I feel the head should be legal for XO, the board ruled against it. That is their job. And they did it. I may feel they were mistaken, but that is still the ruling and that is that. Not rolling the records over into XXO, once again in my opinion, is not mistaken. It's wrong. Should not have happened.

[TonyS]

Doug and Frank are my neighbors and I watched the progress on the head over several months.  I'd go over to Frank's shop and see him black faced from drilling (by hand) and grinding on the stock Buick head.  I enjoyed seeing the wheels turn in his cranium as he was focused on getting the max out of a 1930's or 40's design. He filled his drilled ports with pipe and epoxy, all this on his workbench.  I'm sure all of you have seen the Burt Munroe story, same kind of spirit in Doug and Frank.  Small on budget, big on passion!  If the official records go away, that's unfortunate, but I'm proud to say these two knuckleheads are my friends. Hopefully some day I can run at the Salt Flats, and I surely know who will be my two mentors.

Tony S  Columbus,MT
  

[saltcatracing]

Thanks for your comments Tony - you truly saw the progress and the tools we had to use...given our shop budget.  At least we now have a covered shop - wasn't that way 40+ years ago when Doug and I started building our 1st race car.  No matter what, we truly are PROUD of what the old Buick did - certain things in life are memorable...building the "Henry 16 Port Head" is one of those moments. The last thing named Henry - was our yearling orphan mule.  He kicks A*ss as well!

[Peter Jack]

Nice job on the head Saltcatracing. The last time I saw that system used was on a Brabham Formula 3 car with a BMC engine back in the sixties. Then they hung half a Weber carb on it because the rules only allowed a single barrel carb. It made power then and I think you've proved it still does.

Pete

[1212FBGS]

the problem is not with your elected board.... the problem is with the appointed board and the back door old guard.... they want to run the thing their way and to hell with what the appointed volunteer committees have to recommend.... Its pretty painful.... They allow the volunteers to field all the phone calls, questions, problems and do all the work then back stab their decisions instead of supporting them..... Not a good way to keep a working relationship with your volunteers and competitors.... No the SCTA is not stifling innovation or the spirit of hot-rodding, just fairness.... Now i will say this... the old effers that are the problem are the most dedicated bunch who have helped build this sport we love, to what you now enjoy..... I just wish they would see fairness instead of enjoyment out of punishing competitors who happen to support the organization... But in the end, you have a fast hot rod and can bring her back out for another chance... and you should!
Kent

[desotoman]

The problem is with the wording in the rule book, in this case it is just to vague. When a rule is amended, the new wording might make perfect sense to the person who wrote it, but not make any sense to a person who just bought a rule book and is reading it for the first time. I think this is a problem we really need to address, and this is a perfect example of how confusing it can be. Not pointing fingers at anyone, JMO and observation.

Tom G.

[John Noonan]

Two words.

"Raw Deal"  hope you had proper lubrication before it got inserted... ...if a record is certified and the vehicle has the proper paperwork they deserve the record I feel however I am not the one making the decision.  If you leave with the hat/record I feel you should keep it.

Sorry to the officials who had to make the decision to take away the records your team had set, I am sure it was not easy for them???

Good luck either way 

J


PS. Count the question marks..


J

[tedgram]

If they can't let your records stand. I think they should make a new class for ingenious modifications to stock heads. Fantastic Hot Roding guys!

[mkilger]

they should give you your money back salt cat at least, what a bunch of BS.

[ol38y]

I just read thru this whole thread and all I can say is WOW! I'm just wondering how far up the ladder you have to go looking for the final answer? The final answer here really stinks. IMHO

[Billy @ AHG]

I have a good friend who is heavily involved with the USFRA, He told me several weeks ago, long before this hit the fan,  that the USFRA is all about the racer, the SCTA is all about the money, Ya think?

[Stan Back]

Woulda had the same result at a USFRA meet.

(And did.)

[thundersalt]

The part that confuses me is that Salt Cat inquired about the modifications with Dan and was given the ok. Then they went through certification ( 3 times). If Dan made a mistake as a Representative of SCTA the board should stand behind Dan's decision to certify the records.

My 2 cents from the peanut gallery.

[nrhs sales]

That is the way i think too thundersalt but I guess the board feels differently. Just seems like a raw deal to me the way this was handled especially if they could just say "the car is not legal for this class so lets move the record to the class we feel it is legal for."  that seems like a win, win for everybody.  Instead the way it was handled totally screws salt cat and gives the SCTA a big black eye the way I see it.  Both sides lose in my opinion.