Hawthorne Potest - Que Pasa'

[Tkczecheredflag]

Just curious - how did Shane's protest work out. Looked like tech was short of neccessary stuff and announcements were being made for measuring equipment to make it all happen. Any update on how things turned out.
Tim Klvana
ITC #11

[Greg Amy]

By the time I left after the ninth race (when it began to rain) there was only rumors and innuendo, nothing either reliable or official. The Group 1 Results remained Provisional with a note that official results would not be available for two weeks.

GA

[p99ro]

??????????? I though TECH was soposed to have test equipment to check tech when a protest is made.It seems that equipment needs to be certified and avalable with certified people to perform tech. And I thought parts are sopposed to posses Part #
If not then would that not be a point of not proving that it was a stock Honda Part?

[lateapex911]

Rumours and innuendo it will remain, as final results of the protest will not be available until Topeka does its thing.

(For those that don't know, The Hawthorne car was sent to scrutineering by 5 ITA drivers)

But.............

Gotta tip the hat to two guys on either side of the protest, Shane and Anthony.

A protest is a stressful experience from either of the three sides (the protest writer, the protestee, and the scrutineers), but give credit to Shane who put his head down and drove a solid race, winning, and putting down a flying lap of 1:01.9. Which is the first time an ITA car has recorded a sub 1:02 lap in competition. Wow.

But it gets better. Anthony (who was reportedly helping someone with a car thing and was late to grid) started from the back, ran thru the field, all the way to second. But...get this....he put down a lap of 1:01.6! Wow, again.

As Anthony ran at the front of the ARRC last year, and ultimately finished 2nd, he has to be considered a true contender for the win in Atlanta, and Shane would be well advised to make the trip as well.

Impressive stuff, guys.....anyone know what kind of times ITS turned today?

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[dominojd]

Originally posted by lateapex911:

Impressive stuff, guys.....anyone know what kind of times ITS turned today?



Anthony and Shane would have had the 3rd and 5th fastest race laps respectively.

ITS Leverone 101.424
ITS Driscoll 101.564
ITA Serra 101.6xx
ITS Hendo 101.819
ITA Shane 101.9xx
ITS Stewart 101.982


------------------
Crazy Joe
#7 ITS
Nissan Sentra SE-R

[VTECAcuraGSR]

I am not sure what the outcome will be, but they sure had a lot of SCCA officials around his car all afternoon. Is it just me, but why did they keep asking for tools? Shouldn't SCCA keep a set of tools like a bore gauge in their "tool belt" for protests? It seemed as though they didn't have their "stuff" together!

------------------
Jeremy Billiel

Coming Soon: ITS Acura Integra GSR

[joeg]

Jeremy--This is not NASCAR (or professional)racing...Thank God. It's CLUB racing!

Tech officials are not equipped with a Snap-on truck load of tools.

[Dick Elliott]

You should have said "not very professional" I've never been to a back woods dirt track that didn't have a way to inspect a protest. A sad state of afairs.



Originally posted by joeg:
Jeremy--This is not NASCAR (or professional)racing...Thank God. It's CLUB racing!

Tech officials are not equipped with a Snap-on truck load of tools.

[Tom Blaney]

removed


[This message has been edited by Tom Blaney (edited October 09, 2004).]

[Fiesta#80ITC]

This is why they try to talk people out of a protest all the time

[RSTPerformance]

Yes, it is annoying, but please remember that the SCCA is run with Volunteers...

As drivers we too should be volunteers to make this organization run. It is truly a sad state of affairs when we (drivers) expect volunteers to also supply thousands of dollars worth of tools... Then donate their time, the least we can do is donate a tool we are not using...

If the current system doesn’t work, then maybe the protester also should be required to supply mechanics to do the teardown?

Please don’t think that I do not agree that more scrutinizing should be done… I agree that it should, I just don’t agree that we should expect these volunteers to start supplying tools.

Raymond "Give some people a break, if they can not complete a protest because they don’t have the tools, then it is OUR (drivers) own fault... the volunteers were their to do the job" Blethen

[itbgti]

Raymond,

I thought the "region" owned all the tech tools/equipment....therefore, I think people have a legitimate complaint when our region does not have the tools. No one would expect volunteers to front the cost of equipment (scales, etc)

Note: I understand some protests may require independent third party analysis, depending on the level of complexity...I do not know the details of the above protest, so I cannot comment either way if they should have had these tools present.

[bg43wex]

"When the protest fee is in excess of $800.00 the tech inspector damn well better have the tools that he needs."

Tom the price of the protest is not a profit center for a region it is payment to a competitor incase they are found innocent, less a small fee to the region.

all regions are have the nessasary tools to perform standard compliance checks.

expecting a region to purchase enough hand tools and specialty tools to perform engine tear downs on every type of car that competes is unrealistic.

Again we are gentleman racing self policing. I beleive this means we all chip in to help?

brian m

[Tom Blaney]

removed

[This message has been edited by Tom Blaney (edited October 09, 2004).]

[p99ro]

I raced in a small GO-Kart club. Monies were found to have tech equipment to perform the same tests. They do it to the top three of all classes. Do you know many ways you can cheat a lawn mower engine? Thats stock appering. But a few tools that would cost maybe $1000.00 could do the job. It`s not like we have to buy fire exstishers they don`t seem to work anyway. But to say your going to cc a motor and promise you`ll have the tools. Then show up not doing it. Whats that say GO ahead put in a V8 350 in my car and go. It looks like an engine.
P.S. God bless our voulenters but give them the tools and knowledge to carry it out.
We have Millions of dollar`s of race cars and tools and the Number one sports car club can`t determine other than looking at it with an eye that a part is legal.

[This message has been edited by p99ro (edited October 04, 2004).]

[philstireservice]

The tools were available and offered. They were respectfully turned down.....but ahh ha then there were announcements looking for anyone in the paddock with certain measuring type tools........


sad sad......not handled well at all....

------------------
Phil Phillips Integra GSR #4
www.philstireservice.com
Official Independent Amsoil Dealer for the ECHC
Distributor for FireCharger AFFF fire systems
Hoosier Tire Dealer

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by RSTPerformance:
Yes, it is annoying, but please remember that the SCCA is run with Volunteers...

As drivers we too should be volunteers to make this organization run. It is truly a sad state of affairs when we (drivers) expect volunteers to also supply thousands of dollars worth of tools... Then donate their time, the least we can do is donate a tool we are not using...


Raymond "Give some people a break, if they can not complete a protest because they don’t have the tools, then it is OUR (drivers) own fault... the volunteers were their to do the job" Blethen

Raymond- Trust me....the tools were brought and offered. Measuring tools and the tools to check the calibration of the measuring tools. As were a bevy of stock parts for comparision. But they were rejected, and for a perfectly good reason. Conflict of interest. Would you ask a fox to guard the eggs in the hen house? Of course not.

Now before you point out how ridiculous it would be to think that someone would make up a burette or micrometer that would read incorrectly in an attempt to fool the officials into thinking a perfectly legal car was illegal, I have a story for you.

In the late 80's or early 90's, there was a well documented case of an autocrosser being protested for an illegal final drive in the stock class. He produced a letter from Honda of America showing that dealers were authorized to replace the final drive with a higher one if the customer complained of lack of power in towing situations.

The SCCA officials thought it was odd. Honda NEVER issues such letters, and who tows stuff with a CRX!? Sure enough, the letter was a well crafted forgery.

So, the system is correct in refusing to use measuring devices provided by the protester.

That said, there are no requirements that the host region must supply a teardown tool kit. However, there are requirements that reasonable protests be carried out in a reasonable and agreed upon fashion.

In the end the tool kit was inadequate.

(And while I prefer not to get into the specifics, in my estimation, and as part of the protests design, the tools required were communicated to the officials Friday afternoon, and were common and generic.)



------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[RSTPerformance]

Fair enough opinion... I think it would be easier for someone to Volunteer to be a tech person and just read the gauge wrong...
Raymond "have you helped tech lately?" Blethen
PS: Jake no digs towards you, you do volunteer a lot, just letting others know they should appreciate the work that it done, I wanted to remind everyone these are volunteers.


[This message has been edited by RSTPerformance (edited October 04, 2004).]

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by RSTPerformance:
Fair enough opinion... I think it would be easier for someone to Volunteer to be a tech person and just read the gauge wrong...
Raymond "have you helped tech lately?" Blethen
[This message has been edited by RSTPerformance (edited October 04, 2004).]

Raymond- I understand your point, and it is a good one, but I need to make sure that we understand the actual facts of the situation.

First, it's not my opinion that the protester can not provide any tools, it is part of the SCCA rules and protocol.

Second, anyone involved with submitting the protest was expressly forbidden from anywhere near the area of the teardown. That is to say, no observation, no hanging around, and certainly no "assistance". The persons doing the actual measurement and decision making were, I am told, trained, "certified", and hold either tech or steward grade credentials issued by the SCCA in protest and teardown procedures, measurement techniques and rules interpretation.

In other words, any volunteers should not be allowed to be involved.

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited October 05, 2004).]

[racerdrew43]

Having not been there, I have no right to comment, but I do have a question. What do they do at the Run-Offs? Shouldn't a similar procedure be available for these situations? It seems that the ITA guys had there act together when they posted. On an occassion when I discussed a potential protests with the stewards(they knew who I was talking about before I said anything), they made me very aware of how difficult it would be to carry out the action. They strongly encouraged me to get lots of support from the other entrants in the class. It sounds like the ITA guys had all the peices (parts, specs, cash, and a strong consensus)
Someone did the homework.

[dyoungre]

A few years back, I was crewing at the RunOffs for a top 3 AS car - so we were impounded. We were given an area in which to work, and told to remove multiple parts. The inspectors measured displacement, cam lift, and even valve seats, after we (the crew) did the requested teardown. While in impound, we also were protested. We were further instructed to pull the trans, and they counted gear teeth.
Bottom line, we, the crew, did all tear down with our own tools, and inspectors only did measurements.

------------------
Dave Youngren
NER ITA RX7 #61

[Fiesta#80ITC]

So is the protest over with and was he found in compliance? I would also like to give the region a $200.00 donation to help buy the correct tools and to have them at all the races.

Jeff Leone

[gran racing]

You can’t expect the “crew” to tear the car down if protested by another party in club racing. For me, I am the crew. And I certainly do not have the tools or know how.

I would be interested in learning more about this…of course I’m interested in hearing what the end results are but for right now just generic questions. What happens to the car being protested until the conclusion is made? Does the driver bring it home minus the missing parts?

Is the driver responsible for putting it all back together? If found in compliance, do they get to have someone of their choice install it at an agreed upon price?

In a protest, if there are several items that were included does it only take one item no matter what it is (i.e. washer bottle, horn, ect) to make the protest decision? If the cam, piston, fly wheel, and horn were protested and inspected, would it only take one item such as a missing horn to cause the person being protested to lose the case?

A bond of $XX is paid by the people protesting. If they win obviously they get there money back. Does this also mean that the person found guilty has to pay this amount? Further, do they pay this amount then still have to put it back together?

What does the bond cover? I would imagine it covers the disassembly, checking of parts for compliance and reassembly?

I know…lots of questions here.

------------------
Dave Gran
NER #13
'87 Honda Prelude si
NOW ITB!!!

[JLawton]

Dave,
Sounds like you're very worried about being protested??? Is there somthing we should know?? http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif

"NOW ITB!!!"

Great, another car that's going to whip up on me!! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/mad.gif


------------------
Jeff L
#74 ITB GTi

[itbgti]

Dave,

I will take first stab at it, and anyone out there please correct what I have wrong:

"What happens to the car being protested until the conclusion is made? Does the driver bring it home minus the missing parts?"

I believe they try to get the protest done at the event, if not, the car goes home minus the parts being protested.


"Is the driver responsible for putting it all back together? If found in compliance, do they get to have someone of their choice install it at an agreed upon price?"

The protest 'bond' is the cost it would take for someone to make everything the way it was prior to the protest.


In a protest, if there are several items that were included does it only take one item no matter what it is (i.e. washer bottle, horn, ect) to make the protest decision? If the cam, piston, fly wheel, and horn were protested and inspected, would it only take one item such as a missing horn to cause the person being protested to lose the case?

Yes, but protests must be VERY specific. i.e. Saying someone is cheating, is not a protest, stating that they have a lightened flywheel, here is the stock flywheel weight, etc...is a valid protest

A bond of $XX is paid by the people protesting. If they win obviously they get there money back. Does this also mean that the person found guilty has to pay this amount?

No, there are no financial penalities to the protestee is found guilty.


Further, do they pay this amount then still have to put it back together?

Putting it back together is one of the penalties.


What does the bond cover? I would imagine it covers the disassembly, checking of parts for compliance and reassembly?

The bond only covers the reassembly, or as I stated above, putting the car back to the condition it was in before the protest.

All--did I miss anything?


Regards,
Alan

[gran racing]

Jeff...so you mean I shouldn't instal that turbo unit I've been developing? Sure, blow my plans right open.

But why not take things away from this protest and learn from it? Of course you have to assume I'll be on the other side. I saw that illegal non-OEM 1/100003 lighter light bulb. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

I'm really looking forward to ITB for many reasons especially after talking with Ray and others a few months ago about the group.

Looking forward to seeing you out there next year.

------------------
Dave Gran
NER #13
'87 Honda Prelude si
NOW ITB!!!

[Greg Amy]

Just some minor, possibly semantic, corrections.

First, grab your GCR and read 13.4, "Protests Against Cars."

The protest fee is agreed upon in advance, and should be based on industry standard practices (typically, a Mitchell or manufacturer's flat rate.) The bond is supposed to be set in order to cover the entire expenses of disassembly and reassembly, including standard expected parts such as gaskets.

Depending on the number of items protested (assuming it's greater than one), the bond can be "apportioned" for each process. This apportionment allows the bond to be either forwarded to the protestee (if found legal) or returned to the protester (if found illegal) up to the point of withdrawel. For example, if your throttle body and pistons were protested, and the throttle body was found to be legal, then you get that portion of the bond; if the protester chooses to continue then the games is still on for the pistons.

Now, as to who does the tear-down, traditionally it's done by the protested entrant, driver, and/or crew. However, except where required by Supplementary Regulations (such as at the Runoffs) there is NO REQUIREMENT that it be done at the track and/or by the entrant/driver. Given that the bond is supposed to be sufficient to cover these costs, the entrant can arrange for the vehicle to remain under the auspices of the SOM and be transported to an agreed-upon repair facility for the required disassembly. There it can be disassembled and inspected. The primary reason that it's traditionally done by the entrant is for convenience and financial reasons: if it's found to be legal the entrant keeps the fee, but if it's found illegal the entrant will be forced to pay the repair facility for the work.

Edit for clarification: If the entrant does the work and the car is legal, (s)he keeps the protest bond. If a repair facility does the work but the car is illegal, the entrant has to pay the repair facility for the work.

If the system works as designed, the protested LEGAL entrant will be of no lesser situation than before (and could, potentially, be in a better situation with a check in hand, especially if they were about to tear down anyway). However, if found ILLEGAL, the protested entrant will have a box full of parts, a DQ, and possible further sanctions depending on severity.

Greg


[This message has been edited by grega (edited October 05, 2004).]

[Greg Amy]

Edit: double post (BURP!!)

[This message has been edited by grega (edited October 05, 2004).]

[lateapex911]

What Greg said....

Dave- If you were protested you would have the option of performing the teardown work yourself, or if you feel that isn't in your best interest, you may use the bond to have the work performed by an independant third party. The bonds amount is discussed with both parties. In this most recent case, the amount was derived by Snap -On rates, with enough to cover new parts, etc. The geographic area is also taken into consideration. If you feel that the amount isn't sufficient, you may negotiate, or remind the officials of items that may have been overlooked.

The bond moneys are actually held in escrow until such time that the protest has been decided, and the (I think this is accurate) appeal period has passed. If there is an appeal on the actions of the officials, I am told, it could, in rare cases, affect the final resolution of the bond amount.

In terms of sanctions against the protested driver in the event the car is found to be out of compliance, it depends on the severity of the infraction, and the number of infractions, among other factors. The Stewards set the penalties based on established guidelines. (And yes, there are sanctions for a driver that refuses teardowns)

In a perfect world the bond would return the situation to the exact place it started, but I doubt that it is always the case. In some cases, as Greg mentioned, the protestee makes out as the engine was due for a rebuild anyway. In other cases, such as a rotary, it will really hurt the protestee, as the rotary will never make the same HP until it is significantly broken in. The cost of breaking (we can't go tearing around the neighborhood for hours at 7K rpm, can we?), the motor in is many track sessions, and the resultant expenses in tires, etc. But hopefully, the system averages out ok, most of the time.

In regards to the result of this protest, the final results will not be known for a number of weeks.

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[stevel]

So what exactly was protested? No one has mentioned that yet. I'd like to know since it's been discussed here. I normally don't ask about stuff like this because it's allegations and such but a formal protest was filed and it's being discussed in a public forum now. So, spill the beans.

steve

[Tom Blaney]

remove

[This message has been edited by Tom Blaney (edited October 09, 2004).]

[lateapex911]

I'm not sure how much light to shed on the situation at this point as it is still ongoing.

Five ITA drivers formed a group to look into some specific items on the Hawthore car. It was a logical, and good faith protest. Protest Steward Terry Hanushek (sp?) called it "a well written and proffesional protest".

On Edit: I will say this.....IF the goal was to have Shane disqualified from the event, the protest would have been handled much differently. First, it would have been submitted an hour before the race as the GCR allows, and secondly, there would have been additional items on the list that were easy slam dunk, black and white illegalities. But the protest group chose to ignore those, as they felt that the items, while not really acceptable, were not responsible for the cars performance, and were therefore inappropriate)

It was designed to determine the basic mechanical parameters of the engine, but in an easy to perform manner. The officials were notified in advance, and the tools required were common and basic.

More than that I can't comment on, as the discovery period is ongoing. We expect the final results of the protest phase to be returned in approximately two weeks.

I will let the other guys weigh in with their comments if they so choose, but to go into much more of the specifics at this point is probably unwise.

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited October 07, 2004).]

[ITCCRX]

Tom,
I looked up some result from LRP. It looks like the times seem closer.

August 6-7, 2004
Shane Hawthorne Honda CRXSi 1:02.018*
================================================== =
Date: 6/14/2003 Track: LRP
Tom Blaney 1:04.294
================================================== =
June 17, 2004
Tom Blaney 1:03.605
================================================== =
09 August 2003 Lime Rock Regional (1.53 miles)
Shane Hawthorne 1:03.607 Honda CRX Si/yellow/red
Tom Blaney 1:02.708 Honda CRX Si/white/black
================================================== =
10 August 2002 Lime Rock Park
Tom Blaney 1:03.235
Shane Hawthorn 1:04.525

[Tom Blaney]

removed

[This message has been edited by Tom Blaney (edited October 09, 2004).]

[dominojd]

Is it possible he was running a slug motor like I am now. 120,000 totally stock head and internals. I hope to be gaining 2 sec a lap by next year with a new motor and a little more suspension work. So will I be viewed as doing illegal things because I picked up so much time over the winter? Not trying to pick fights or be a wise ass. Just lookinbg at things from the other side of the coin.

------------------
Crazy Joe
#7 ITS
Nissan Sentra SE-R

[ITSRX7]

The funny thing about this is that if you are driving at 100% of the cars capability, 20+ more HP ain't gonna get you 2 seconds at LRP.

From the outside, this looks like it was handled in a very professional manner from the Protestor's standpoint. Congratulations to all.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
ITS RX-7 & Spec Miata 1.6 (ITA project)
New England Region R188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com (http://www.flatout-motorsports.com)

[Racer Chris]

For many of us, driving at 100% of the car's capability isn't something we accomplish each time we race, due to a lot of circumstances (despite a belief at the time of "there's nothing left in the car"). Many other factors can change, without the engine being altered, that will contribute to being 2 seconds a lap faster at LRP.
The three fast corners require confidence and experience to learn just how fast they can be taken safely. Fresh tires also play a big role, as well as seemingly minor suspension adjustments that improve the handling and feel of the car. Exit speed from the Uphill, Westbend and the Diving turns all help/hurt a lap more than a few HP. If you are braking or lifting before any of these turns, there may be substantial room for improvement.
I realize I'm not running in IT currently but I belive my example is valid. Since 1998 I haven't improved my best time in my 914, until last weekend. The engine peaks within 10 hp of what it did back then and I was able to run consistently and comfortably in the 1:01s during my race Saturday. That is compared to a previous best of 1:03.1 which I have rarely even come close to in the years between. It took that long for me to have the "complete package" and I am now confident I can run even faster without further changes to the car.
My point is that an unexpectedly fast car isn't necessarily the result of the engine being beyond spec.
That said, I will be interested in the outcome of this protest because of all the talk I hear/read about cheating and the need for drivers to control it.
I am pleased that it was a group effort and maybe more guys will look into this as a way to keep others honest. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

------------------
Chris Foley
www.tangerineracing.com (http://www.tangerineracing.com)

[lateapex911]

Good points, of course, Chris.

I know that my car is capable of more, no doubt about it! I just need the neurons between my hands and feet to function better and....

I think what Tom is trying to say is that sure, sudden drops are possible, but not common. You mentioned that your time hasn't dropped in about 6 years or so, and I can tell you that I have seen you at Lime Rock a lot of times in the past 6 years.

The sharp end of the ITA class spends significant time at Lime Rock and behind the wheel as well. Serra rarely misses a test day, has data aq on his car, and if he ever quits racing, I am selling my Hoosier stock fast! And Blaney has been racing in SS, Prod and now IT for eons...(sorry Tom!)

Your time dropped about 1.5 seconds, which is a huge drop at the front of the grid. Shanes drops were greater, netted him a lap record, and he did it while only making occasional appearances at the track. There were other factors as well that led to the decision, of course.

So, the consensus was that we wanted to ask the question....do a little fact finding. Quietly, in ITA, there has been a movement amongst the frontrunners to run legal cars, and when that happens, those who have bent over backwards have an interest to be sure the rest of the guys are clean as well.

Shane seems like a good guy, a "shoe" to be sure, and if the result is that he was within compliance, he should consider this a "badge of honor".

If the process is followed, and the Stewards do thier job correctly, it can work to the protestees favor, earning him the respect of his peers.

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[Tkczecheredflag]

I like Jake's spin, "a badge of courage" and "respect of his peers" on this issue. It will be intersting to hear the final results.

I've known Shane since 1997, when I met him after he read a news piece in our local paper about my racing efforts. He expressed an interest in racing and I had pointed him towards an EMRA TT event. He did well right out of the box in a 1st Gen CRX. I spoke with Shane off and on about his motor through out this season, and he says he's clean, claims he races everytime he gets behind the wheel of a car to hone his skills, whether that be on the street or track, (be careful out there Shane). On the other hand Anthony S is my mentor in this sport and introduced my to racing, and Jake I met through an "in car video" through a friend who possesed the tape. I hold all these racers in the highest regard. They all have been helpful and supportive to me in many ways.

My disappointment regarding this issue is that it appears NYR was unable/uninterested to "properly" respond to the protest with the correct equipment. My understanding is the car should remain in impound until the "proper" inspection with the "correct" equipment is performed, that's also what the bond is about. Once you release the car from impound before the tests are done properly you loose control of the situation, and that's happened. I am also under the impression that issues appearing to have merit regarding the protest, were being ignored or minimized (ie: serial number scratches reading illedgible). If that's the case what's up with that?

I know that private conversations took place regarding this car, and driver(s) encouraged Shane to meet this issue head on, off-line. Serra, similiarly was "privately" being challenged by other drivers concerning his car and privately conducted inspections and dynos for those concerned drivers. Anthony also passed the scruntiny of the ARRC after finishing in second place last year and breaking a track record at "Road A" a track he never ran. I think the group effort reagarding the protest was proper, since these drivers had questions regarding the car. We have to remember this is not an attack on Shane, NYR, or SCCA, only the proper way to conduct business "publically" whan questions need to be asked that can not be answered "privatelly".
I'm not sure what the answer is. I think if we police ourselves in private as "gentlemen racers" we avoid public scrutiny. I do think it is wrong to think "cheater" every time we see a fast car/driver, although I understand the temptation, (we all think we all cheat, right?). At the end of the day it would be my hope that ALL of us learn a little something from this protest.
If our leaders are reading, what should we hope for regarding testing equipment for tech?
My only regret is that this issue has cast a bit of cloud over scrutineers in our great organization after we all received a really nice T-Shirt from NYR. Didn't anyone like the "T"?

Tim Klvana
ITC #11

[gran racing]

Crazy Joe – Well you have some logical answers to how your times would be lowered. But I hear ya. Hopefully I too will be able to lower my times a little bit next year (I better if I have any hopes of getting at all near the front of B!). Let me ask you this - if a driver half kidding asked how you reduced your times, would you have an issue giving them some background on what you did? Last year you ran a bone stock motor with 120K miles, did suspension work, ect. I think if the person can substiante it, it will at least lessen any doubts people have.

My thoughts are that if I am totally legal, I wouldn’t have a problem with someone else taking a look at my car. Unfortunately I don’t have any top secret legal tricks to gain much of a performance advantage. L Basically like what others said was done with Anthony’s at some point in time.

------------------
Dave Gran
NER #13
'87 Honda Prelude si
NOW ITB!!!

[seamus88]

I hope that when this is all said and done that both sides will write a little summary of what happened.I would like to hear about the whole process in detail.I would also like to hear Shane's side of the story.I would like to hear how the other drivers decided what to protest and why. And I would hope that everyone would write a fair and honest report (not bash the other side).I JUST want to know what happened and how the process works. I dont want to embarrass anyone.

Sean Christie
88 ITA

[ITCCRX]

Well I had a ITC Datsun 510 in 1991-92. I raced LRP 4 times in 2 years. I lowered my lap times from a 1:10?? to a record @ the time of 1:06.5. It was a seat time. I won a race overall in the rain. Lapped something like 30 cars. This was a ITB/ITC race and I was a ITC car. The fast ITB cars thought I was cheating!!! LOL. I owned the car Tim is driving (ITC CRX) and have done GT3 racing, and most people think that the "faster guy" is a cheater. That sucks, but that is life.
IT racing is hard. We get DQ'd because of no wiper bottles, no transaxle covers. LOL.
"car meets weight req., but no wiper bottle".
"Must be illegal"!!!

Ed

[Greg Amy]

Time yet again for another one of Greg’s treatises...

Let me start out by expressing my personal support for the 5 guys that got together and protested Shane's car. I support them not because I think Shane is cheating (I don't know the car) or because I don't like Shane (I've never met him). Rather, I support these 5 guys because they recognized a conflict – at least within themselves – and used the existing SCCA system to resolve that conflict.

I encourage anyone watching this thread to take a moment and read another thread that we just went through a few weeks ago. We discussed cheating and ideas to stop it:

http://forum.improvedtouring.com/it/Forum2...TML/000670.html (http://forum.improvedtouring.com/it/Forum2/HTML/000670.html)

In that thread I believe that we all came to the semi-agreement that, short of a sea change within SCCA Club Racing, the only way we can stop cheating is to self-police via the vehicle protest system. This is the way the vehicle legality system is designed to work, and that's what these guys did.

Unfortunately, by design the SCCA self-policing and protest system requires an adversarial relationship, and most people are not interested in creating such an atmosphere. The problem with that mindset is that the adversarial relationship was already there, based on competitors thinking – rightly or wrongly - that Shane was cheating. Thus, the only thing that changed with the filing of the protest was that the previously-latent conflict was brought to the fore.

As I understand it, and as Tim noted, the competitor was contacted 'off line' and offered the opportunity to get the issue out in the open via a dyno session (as Serra and Blaney apparently did), but this opportunity was not taken. Fine, that's his prerogative. However, the result of that missed opportunity was that the conflict was neither addressed nor resolved, leaving only two options: ignore the conflict and hope it goes away, or address it via the protest system.

Is there anyone here that really thinks it would have (or should have) been ignored and hoped it would go away?

I also applaud the manner in which this protest was done. As Jake noted, they were not on a 'windshield washer bottle crusade.' Instead, they made a list of tangible, quantifiable items that would have had a significant affect on the car's performance. They also worked to offer a fair financial bond that would agreeably cover any and all expenses involved in scrutinizing these items. They worked as a group to minimize the financial risk to any particular protesting individual (removing one major barrier to protests), and they did it outright and in the open without trying to hide their intentions or agendas. The competitor was notified in a timely manner (they even tried to let him know the evening before instead of springing it right before the race) and they didn't go bragging about it to all who inquired (hell, it was like pulling teeth to get any info from anyone!!)

Unfortunately, it appears from rumors at the track and discussions on this board that the ScruCrew was not prepared for such a protest. Can anyone really be surprised by this? When was the last time any engine was torn down at a Regional event in the Northeast? Why would/should you expect the scrutineers be prepared for such an event? Where is there a requirement for any region/division to own, always have available, and have the skills to use hundreds of dollars of measuring tools for an engine tear-down? How many of our volunteers are mechanical engineering types that even know how to read a vernier scale? (No offense intended, I'm just pointing out it's not a prerequisite, nor should it be). I have the tools and experience, but I damn sure ain't gonna bring that kind of stuff to the track.

I suggest that this failure is one of the system rather than the individuals or scrutineering teams, because we as a whole first, require overt competitor action (a protest) to generate action on a vehicle; second, do not protest to such an extent as a general guideline; and third, are not prepared to deal with such protests on a daily basis. I think it's wholly unfair to blame this on the scrutineers, because if we started doing more of these protests then they will come prepared for it. But, if we're not willing to do it, why bother bringing hundreds of dollars of setup and measuring tools, leaving them vulnerable to theft and/or damage? Alternatively, if the system itself were active in protesting engines (rather than relying on competitor protest) then the system would require the presence of these tools.

In hindsight, in this case I suggest what we should have done is accept that the tools are unavailable, that the skillsets may not have been available, and that these kind of inspections should have been brought to those that posses the requisite hardware (such as a Honda dealership).

Finally, I am not involved in what happened last weekend nor privy to what inspections may be ongoing, but I strongly doubt that the car was "released" from impound without having all requisite inspections completed or without particular inspections being waived by the protesters. It's quite possible that the inspectors could not produce the required tools and requested/suggested that some items be waived, but I am certain this thing was done "by the book" to the best of everyone's ability. I'll let the guys involved comment at their leisure.

So, in short, I think the only "cloud" over this incident is a realization that we have a flawed vehicle legality system that requires the presence of an adversarial relationship between competitors to function, resulting in an atmosphere that suspects cheating by default, generally refuses to address it due to the social and financial risks involved, and then when addressed is not immediately capable of resolving it. The one good thing about last weekend is that the ice has been broken, and I hope that this will clear the way for more such protests in the future, with the same attitudes of cooperation that these guys offered, so we can go about our way enjoying the racing instead of "wondering" if someone is legal.

This is the way the system is supposed to work. If you don't like it, start writing letters, because without membership input it will never ever change.

Greg Amy

[ITCCRX]

I too, expressing my personal support for the 5 guys that got together and protested. If they protected a part that made the car faster, than that IS the right thing to do.
Missing water bottles etc., do not make a car faster.

Ed

[Tom Blaney]

removed

[This message has been edited by Tom Blaney (edited October 09, 2004).]

[Greg Amy]

<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">...the integrity of the protest was violated by the tech and som who was in charge of the breakdown...</font>

This is EXTREMELY unfortunate, thanks for the clarification.

Ironically, this situation should have been handled by...wait for it...another protest, this time of the processes and the SOM. Because, unless it is dealt with as proscribed by the GCR, it can, and possibly will, happen again. We need to learn from these kinds of situations so that it won't.

Sigh...

[ITCCRX]

Regards to buying the test equipment. I 1991-1992, we tried to get the IT guys to pay $10 fee to buy equipment. Real cost stuff. You can "puff" an engine etc..
Bottom line was only a few guys wanted it.

Hey Tom,
Gone tell us what you guys protected? Spill the beans?

Ed

[Tom Blaney]

removed

[This message has been edited by Tom Blaney (edited October 09, 2004).]

[ITCCRX]

Tom,
Ok. I just thought that buy posting the "items" protested, it may keep other people honest that run IT cars.
So who are the other guys? Waiting for the "Fastrack" is killing me! LOL.
I guess,

a) Cam shaft.

B) Cam timing - maybe offset key(s).

c) Compression.

d) Piston design.

e) Bore and stroke.

f) Maybe suspension - bushing - links?

Ed

[lateapex911]

OK, here's the deal guys.
First, I assure you that I, nor any of the "Five" have any reason to be secretive about any of this.

Second, I will be happy to document it as thoroughly as possible, and I will spare nothing.

But...you gotta understand, this is an ongoing situation. The protest itself won't even be concluded for two weeks, minumum.

I will be happy to answer questions regarding the intent, and the standard protocol, but we, and I implore my fellow five to agree, have to leave the specifics of the actual protest, as well as the actions of the stewards out of it until all actions are wrapped up.

but...you will all hear far more than Fastrack will print....when the time is appropriate.



------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by Tkczecheredflag:
I like Jake's spin, "a badge of courage" and "respect of his peers" on this issue. It will be intersting to hear the final results.

Not a "spin" Tim...




......after we all received a really nice T-Shirt from NYR. Didn't anyone like the "T"?



Geeze....after a weekend like that, and they refused to give me shirt...Grrrrr

Nice write up, Tim.


------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited October 08, 2004).]

[lateapex911]

The results are in. See "Rules and Regs".

I have moved this as I think it is possible to use this as a learning experience on a larger scale.

get a coffee......

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]