March FasTrack is up

[jhooten]

Yes tech did test fuel, paperwork was done and sent to the chief steward, there our responsibility ended.

The problem with the test port being in the return line is that there is not enough flow with the fuel pump on/engine not running to get a sample. All of the guys with the sample ports in the return line had to start the engine to get a sample. We do not like running engines in/around the tech shed with fuel all over the place. It was suggested the sample ports be relocated to the supply line.

This was at the Febuary race before this fastrack came out.

[924Guy]

I believe, in the past, the only thing that counted was the number of cars to take the race green flag. Cars that qualified and could not make the race grid were not included in the participation numbers. All this does is give a class credit for these entrants.

To "buy" your way into the Runoffs, the driver/car still must enter and run at least one session. This is little different from the previous rule where to "buy" your way into the Runoffs, the driver/car had to run at least one session where the race must be included in the sessions run.

OK, I understand what you're saying... But I have to admit, I have a bit of a philosophical issue with counting DNS's toward Runoffs numbers. Simply put, if they can't even get their car running long enough to take the green - is it appropriate to count such clunkers towards eligibility to The National Race To End All Races??? And I don't accept whining along the line of having one crappy weekend all year... if it's the only weekend you run all season, you can hardly be considered to have much of a serious, National-level effort, can you? If it isn't the only weekend, well then, what do you have to worry about?

But, then, I suppose such thoughts should best be addressed to the CRB, not our little forum here... I guess I'm just not a fan of 1-race motors. If I were, I would probably care more about drag racing...

[seckerich]

I always wonder why Andy even bothers to post here since some of you blast him personally for every move the ITAC as a whole makes. A few of you need to grow up and act like somebody.

[seckerich]

Any comment on this:

GCR
Item 1. Effective 1/1/08: Correct the first Note of section 9.1.12 to read as follows:
Note 1: For the purposes of this section, “entrants” shall be defined as drivers classified in the final official race results of National races as finishers, did-not-finish (DNF), did-not-start (DNS), or disqualified (DQ).

Does this mean a class can have a bunch of DNS entries to make numbers for the RubOffs? Essentially allowing a class to buy their way in?

No--It means that cars that show up and turn a wheel but break before the race are counted. Cash the check--count the entrant. It is a more fair representation of racers that actually show up in a class to run.

[seckerich]

OK, I understand what you're saying... But I have to admit, I have a bit of a philosophical issue with counting DNS's toward Runoffs numbers. Simply put, if they can't even get their car running long enough to take the green - is it appropriate to count such clunkers towards eligibility to The National Race To End All Races??? And I don't accept whining along the line of having one crappy weekend all year... if it's the only weekend you run all season, you can hardly be considered to have much of a serious, National-level effort, can you? If it isn't the only weekend, well then, what do you have to worry about?

But, then, I suppose such thoughts should best be addressed to the CRB, not our little forum here... I guess I'm just not a fan of 1-race motors. If I were, I would probably care more about drag racing...

It will not give points to the driver that did not make the race so you are not helping "clunkers" go to the runoffs. It is only counted towards the National participation numbers to justify dropping classes. It counts people that actually spent the money to go to, and enter the race that have trouble. No free lunch.

[gran racing]

Cash the check--count the entrant.

What happens when a person enters a race, the region cashes the check, the entrant doesn't put wheels on the track and then requests a refund a little while later. That individual and class receives a DNS. In this scenario, can someone absolutely confirm that the class is not receiving credit for that vehicles participation?

[Butch Kummer]

At Atlanta Region events we pull no-shows from the results before the weekend is over - if a car never turned a wheel then it doesn't show up in the official results. But then we automatically issue refunds for the no-shows, so other regions may do this differently if they require a person to actually request the refund.

[lateapex911]

I have a letter in on this for clarification.
IF you can buy an entry, and never actually put a car on the track, yet have it count to the car counts for the Runoffs, we have a big problem Houston.

[gran racing]

That's what I was wondering. I've submitted an entry fee in the past, saw my name in the final official results sheet, a week or two after sent in for my refund, got that a little while later. I would imagine that regions would have turned in their event records before the information was sent to national, but really don't know.

Funny how I want to make the runoffs, sent entry fees to numerous races even on the same weekend, and my class now has the participation numbers to qualify for the Runoffs. :cool: It probably doesn't work like this, but it has me thinking...

[jay05]

Yes tech did test fuel, paperwork was done and sent to the chief steward, there our responsibility ended.

The problem with the test port being in the return line is that there is not enough flow with the fuel pump on/engine not running to get a sample. All of the guys with the sample ports in the return line had to start the engine to get a sample. We do not like running engines in/around the tech shed with fuel all over the place. It was suggested the sample ports be relocated to the supply line.

This was at the Febuary race before this fastrack came out.

Understandable. One of the reasons I put it on the return side is that the pressure would be bled off when removing the cap and installing the valve and hose.

[seckerich]

When we do the audit for a race we remove the no shows from the results. You may see something on my laps but it will not be on the report sent to National office. We have to pay fees and insurance on a per car basis so you can bet we remove them. Only cars that actually take the track for a session are counted and pay. If no wheel is turned they get a refund. I can see that people could pay an entry and run one practice session to boost car counts. Wish I had about 20 of those a race, it would sure help the bottom line.

[Andy Bettencourt]

My understanding in talking with CRB members is to give credit for those who have turned a wheel (and lost ther entry fees). Nothing more, nothing less.

[mbuskuhl]

Yes tech did test fuel, paperwork was done and sent to the chief steward, there our responsibility ended.

The problem with the test port being in the return line is that there is not enough flow with the fuel pump on/engine not running to get a sample. All of the guys with the sample ports in the return line had to start the engine to get a sample. We do not like running engines in/around the tech shed with fuel all over the place. It was suggested the sample ports be relocated to the supply line.

This was at the Febuary race before this fastrack came out.

This all depends on where your pump is and whether it is switched seperately. If you can turn on your pump without starting the motor it shouldn't be an issue, right? On mine for example, since I run an external pump mounted below the cell, if there was to be a test port in the supply line, it would have to be after the pump... which would require the test port to be in the engine compartment.

[jjjanos]

What happens when a person enters a race, the region cashes the check, the entrant doesn't put wheels on the track and then requests a refund a little while later. That individual and class receives a DNS. In this scenario, can someone absolutely confirm that the class is not receiving credit for that vehicles participation?

The National T&S Adminstrator sent out a notice to license holders regarding this. I believe cars listed as DNS in the final results will be those cars only that did turn a wheel but who did not start the race.

So, no I cannot absolutely confirm it. I can say with a 95% confidence interval that, if regions do their result sheets in accordance with the new TPS directive, that we can reject the null hypothesis that cars never turning a wheel will be counted as DNS.

[ddewhurst]

***I have added a traction bar (tri-link) so does this change, adding the word removed, allow me to take out the currently non functional upper links.***

Dick, the answer is yes. But if your third link breaks do you really want to see the results without at least one upper OEM link in place. I can only imagine the damage which WILL occure when you have only two lower links.

This DNS, DNF, DIDN'T TURN A WHEEL is a great example of why ALL requests accecpted or denied should have the requestors name.

With the fule sample port I would guess that the rule writters logic was/is that the rule writters said the sample shall be taken between the OEM fuel tank/the fuel cell & the carb/injector which their logics see as on the path FROM the tank/cell to the carb/injection & not the inverse path.

[raffaelli]

guess that the rule writters logic was/is that the rule writters said the sample shall be taken between the OEM fuel tank/the fuel cell & the carb/injector which their logics see as on the path FROM the tank/cell to the carb/injection & not the inverse path.

I'll agree with that but...that is not what it says.

[Bill Miller]

I am pretty sure there are a lot of A2 Jettas that weigh less than 2600. Maybe the last of the breed when equiped with AC, sunroof, power windows and that big ole knee bar get into 2500 territory.

According to Consumer Automotive Guide the 2door 90-92 version has a curb weight of 2275, 4door 90-92 version 2330.

Chris,

I took the data from Edmunds, which is also where I took the data for the Mazda. For the Jetta, it was the GL model.

Andy,

Because of the way you phrased your initial question Bill. Read it ot loud to yourself. Typicall Miller-stuff, really.

You're the one that's putting inflection on it, it was a simple, straight-forward question. Your initial response was the one that was looking for a fight.

[/quote]
All we are going to do is class the new stuff (requests) whatever legacy stuff remains are adressed by member request. If this car was classed by the current ITAC, it was obviously felt it could make weight. Just because two car look alike on paper doesn't mean they are.[/quote]

So much for an objective process. And whatever happened to just doing what was right? And since Kirk brought it up, where did the requestor ask for the car to be classed?

[jhooten]

This all depends on where your pump is and whether it is switched seperately. If you can turn on your pump without starting the motor it shouldn't be an issue, right? On mine for example, since I run an external pump mounted below the cell, if there was to be a test port in the supply line, it would have to be after the pump... which would require the test port to be in the engine compartment.

You can have it other than in the engine compartment. Mine has a T just after the pump with a hose running to the left rear of the frame where a valve is mounted and a hose is tied to the frame. The exhaust exits in front of the right rear wheel so I am as far away from anything hot as I can be when giving a sample.

And yes if you put the test port between the tank and the pump all you would do is suck air into the line as soon as you turn on the pump.

In my limited experience in the tech shed, with most fuel injected cars there is not much pressure or flow in the return line with the car running at idle and almost none with the pump on and the engine not running. As an example it took nearly ten minutes to get a six ounce sample from an SP MKIV Supra.

Do you really want to be the one that causes every one to stack up in tech waiting for a sample to be collected from your car? I suggest that you test your sample port to see if it works and if you can get a sample without spillage.

[mbuskuhl]

I suggest that you test your sample port to see if it works and if you can get a sample without spillage.

I actually use my test port to drain the cell, so it flows rather efficiently. There is a T on the return line with a hose and cap right before it dumps back into the cell. Unscrew the cap and flip the fuel pump switch, doesn't take long to fill jugs. The reason for not mounting it after the pump and before the engine compartment would put it under the car or in the wheel well area, neither of which place I want to go. I guess it all depends on each fuel injection system and what kind of flow you get on the return. Mine works and as far as I can tell, meets the rule as written.

[shwah]

OK now I am going to have to go and weigh an 8V Jetta or two this year. I have a few friends with 2d and 4d street cars. I will report back when I get a chance to scale them.

RE the fuel port. The way I read this, I just need to be sure I don't spill any fuel when I use my current underhood port. I may add a valve to the banjo fitting I use now, but I am not moving it, or splicing it in somewhere under the car.