El Mirage

[joea]

so when you go faster than someone else in same class, with less displacement..........

you have  violated the "spirit of the rules"................


I dont care that  you did better than me, I am upset and protesting
the fact that you did better than me with less displacement........and
bolted on stuff that didnt help your performance, and you still beat me.........

the engineering data showed that near peak velocity......when the main
engine was maxed out, the rear of the vehicle became more unstable,
this extra displacement engine applies a 0.27 N-m force to the ground
not only providing additional thrust, but also facilitates rear end stability...thereby allowing a higher terminal velocity....in a safer manner...

are you only going to protest it when the spark plug wire falls off, or will
you when the blown nitro-version is functional and it goes faster....

Joe

[fastesthonda_jim]

GREAT picture, Dean.  And no there isn't a specific rule that I can determine.  It just that it seems to me to be the start of a slippery slope wherein you can "adjust" your class running higher or lower at will.  Now is that wrong?  I dunno.  It just somehow doesn't seem "right" to me.

And joea, what's the beef?  Rick ain't even running in my class ferchrisake.  Perhaps you should protest my protest?  I mean the rule book is filled with smaller engines beating bigger engines.  That's not the point at all.

Rick is a Hell of a racer,creative, innovative, never give up kind of guy.  I mean I've got 45 points on him but with Rick you gotta figure at best that's a dead heat until the fat lady sings.

All in all I'm just not crazy about the precedent here of being able to hang on non-productive displacement just to make a record.

'Nuf said.  I gotta go take my nap.

Knapp

[1212FBGS]

KNAP
You forgot to mention that the carb was wired "wide open throttle". thats why he did not have a throttle cable to it. Now i'm pretty sure that the rule book "REQUIRES" throttle return springs! how could that have passed tech. doesn't all vehicles running over or on a record of over 200mph need 2 tech inspectors to sign off on it. sounds like a safety issue 2 me having a POWERED motor running a wired full open throttle! even elmirage procedures state that "all drivers MUST be off the power immediatly after passing through the timing lights". you know what Jim ..... "F" him! Everyone knows you filed the protest to protect your interest in the championship just like everyone knows rick cheated to come up a class for points. and yes I said cheated cuz everyone knows that motor didnt work and couldnt work and they all saw through the crap and rick was the only one who hurt his own reputation by pulling this stunt. Using joea's engineering data, the motor should have been considered for balast only and not for displacement. It wasn't clever, It wasnt thinking out of the box heck he pulled it before with a weed wacked motor and got away with it, so he did it again. and if the SCTA keeps lettings him they will hurt there credability as a professional organization. I'm the one who should be bitching and filing the protest cuz it was my record he took. But ya know what... "F" him, once i get my drive train sorted out i'll get my record back and next year start picking off some of his records.
Dont wory pal..... Rick was the only one who made himself look foolish, hopefully the SCTA wont add there name to the list.
Kent

[1212FBGS]

Oh i forgot to mention one memorable thing from my earlier ramblings about the Oct El mirage meet...
the lunch truck didn't show up!
Kent

[joea]

so.........let me get this straight.......

engines are now evaluated for legality based on someones
definition of acceptable minimum performance....?

someone like Vesco ran multiple engines, and multiple
combinations of said engines...........one engine hurts 2 out
of three cylinders........and he still sets a record......and that should
be deemed illegal............

Im protesting him, cuz he is gaining points on me with an engine that
should be considered ballast.......

I have seen folks run a 6 cylinder with 2 rods and pistons removed
to run in a lower class........was he cheating....

ya got guys bolting sidecars on streamliners to run on classes that
have been created by the sanctioning body.........changing from four wheelers to two wheelers........to allow more versatility........

Kent I especially appreciate your passion, drawing from many
things to "fuel" the fire.......

Jim I applaud all you guys and your efforts.......


but thats the racket that has been created IMAIO (in my admittedly ignorant opinion)........

Joe

[fastesthonda_jim]

Gosh darn, joea.  You woke me from my nap.

Thanks for the "kind" (humorous?) words.  I guess what is sticking in my craw a bit was... well, let me digress for a moment.  I like running at El Mirage/Bonneville.  And I know the rules are ultimately for my benefit.  However, I'm always concerned that one of the tech guys will not like something I did and therefore won't let me run.  So I ALWAYS get my stuff reviewed weeks before an event, and even signed off, so that I won't have any surprises come race day.

So it was with this in mind that one day I called and asked about a class change for my 1997cc Honda.  I said something like, "Can I use a weed eater motor like Rick did to bump up?"  The response was something like, "No, that was a one time deal.  The motor's got to make a real difference."  That was NOT a quote but is my recollection using my aging neurons.  So to jump a class I went and got a whole new 2.2 liter motor.  Because I HAD to.  And now this....

This is NOT about the points race.  I don't play that kind of game.  Cheatin' of any sort to win?  Not here, pal.  Cripes sake, I was out helping Costella on Friday tune his yellow thing so that he could "beat" me even worse than he had.  I know, I know, he's a bike.  Still I wanted that #1 on my windshield.  Doesn't mean I won't help him.  Or Rick for that matter.  I mean sometimes I wonder... are we playing poker or chess out here?

Uh oh, almost bedtime.  Gotta find my jammies.

Knapp

[Dean Los Angeles]

Speaking of starving . . .  What happened to the lunch truck? I TRUSTED it to be there and ended up starving to death. I was looking at Tom Evans arm and it started to look tasty.

[John Noonan]

Speaking of starving . . .  What happened to the lunch truck? I TRUSTED it to be there and ended up starving to death. I was looking at Tom Evans arm and it started to look tasty.

Amen, I went there and took a few rookies and said to them before we left "don't worry there is a food service provider out on the lakebed"....

[Sumner]

Jim Knapp here,..................

I was talking to Bob this morning and he said what if there is a rule addendum that said, "the vehicle must be able to demonstrate that it can accelerate while being powered by either engine."  It would certainly satisfy me, and Bob BTW.  Of course there would also have to be the safety thing, controllable from the driver's compartment, fuel shutoff, fire system, etc.........................

Jim Knapp

This sounds like a reasonable change to the rules, but before it is considered if at all I think it would be important to talk to people like the Burklands that have legitimate 2 motor cars to see if they can/could comply with such a rule.  I would sure hate to see some of them disqualified in the future by a hastily written rule.

Also as I mentioned in my other post I could see a second motor just being used in high gear where it could actually enhance the performance of a car, but not be able to demonstrate that it could propel the car from a start since it might only run top gear and not be able to get the vehicle moving in the first place.

Like I said Rick's effort might have just been an innovative approach to gain points, but it can start thought processes that might actually result in some faster streamliners.

c ya,

Sum

[KeithTurk]

Joe... I have to agree with you on this  one...  Defining performance isn't the job of the inspector...  Thou if your going to play this game, you have to go all the way and make sure it meets ALL the rules according to hoyle.  Fire systems dual throttle return springs... so on and so forth...

Rick... that was a cool thought... funny ... and done correctly legal as hell.

[1212FBGS]

for years people would strap a turbo on the side of a bike just to get into a blown class, some of them never worked. The SCTA started getting a little picky about it, especially the ones you could clearly see weren't gonna work and started turning them away. They finally added the words " must pressurize the intake system above atmospheric pressure" to the rule book and gained credibility by requiring the systems to work. if a system would be questioned they could simply say prove it with a gage. Now you know that any blown record set, is a real one and the boost was working.
Simple wording for the future rule book could say "all motors considered for displacement must prove functionality". if you cant start it... it don't count. You don't have to drive off with 1 motor, but everything should be there to prove it works. If burklands show up in tech and there is questions about functionality of there equipment and asked to start it... if the ground shaking doesn't convince the tech guys then by god they can grab an exhaust pipe to see if both motors are capable of working. If they ask me to start either my front or rear motor, no problem, they work. So let me ask ya this, if a guy showes up in tech with a motor stuck on the outside of his car, ya ask him to start it up and he says no i cant, it's locked in high gear, the carb is wired full open, the spark plug cap falls off, and there is no way to kick start it....... can he prove functionality?
As of right now I am still proud to tell my friends, family, and associates that i participate in SCTA BNI events. I think we are just as credible as NASCAR or the NHRA. But if we don't police and clean up these grey areas, our records will become suspect and our organization considered an good 'ole boy club. Lets make records we'll be proud of.
Kent

[Sumner]

................

..........Simple wording for the future rule book could say "all motors considered for displacement must prove functionality". if you cant start it... it don't count. You don't have to drive off with 1 motor, but everything should be there to prove it works...............

...... So let me ask ya this, if a guy showes up in tech with a motor stuck on the outside of his car, ya ask him to start it up and he says no i cant, it's locked in high gear, the carb is wired full open, the spark plug cap falls off, and there is no way to kick start it...

.... can he prove functionality?................

..................Kent

I think those are good points and the only thing I would add is that you would have to be able to show (maybe on jackstands) that it can drive a wheel, if that was in question, and that it be able to do this under control of the driver.

c ya,

Sum

[desotoman]

KNAP
You forgot to mention that the carb was wired "wide open throttle". thats why he did not have a throttle cable to it. Now i'm pretty sure that the rule book "REQUIRES" throttle return springs!
Kent

I remember back in the 1980's I was at El Mirage attending a race. One of the cars starts up and it sounds very funny, like the guy was holding the gas pedal to the floor and activating some kind of kill switch on the ignition. As it turned out, my thinking was right. The motor in the car had no butterfly's in the injector and they were using a kill switch to control the rpm.

My questions would be: if there is no throttle cable (wired open) why would you need a return spring?  If there are no butterfly's are you still required to have a return spring? Can you still use a kill switch to control your motor?

Tom G.

[JohnR]

All this discussion is interesting and usefull for future issues, but what about the protest that was filed last week? It will have to be decided based on the existing rules. What should happen to it?

[mtkawboy]

Not trying to stir things up, just curious, how big was the motor added on to the back?