One...more....time...

[Eagle7]

You could always learn to drive a little better.

Hey now, play nice. No need to confuse a good argument with facts.

[CRallo]

Simon - saying you only have to follow the rules if you're to place well is not only a shity attitude, that statement is not as true as you think... I speak from experience lol I came up nine pounds light once at impound after "winning" STU. I was about 40 lbs lighter than the car owner who ran ITA with the car the same weekend... But I still got DQ'd and we had to scramble to add ballast and get the car reweighed while running the car "triple duty"!

Jake - you have such a way with words!

[Simon T.]

Simon - saying you only have to follow the rules if you're to place well is not only a shity attitude, that statement is not as true as you think... I speak from experience lol I came up nine pounds light once at impound after "winning" STU. I was about 40 lbs lighter than the car owner who ran ITA with the car the same weekend... But I still got DQ'd and we had to scramble to add ballast and get the car reweighed while running the car "triple duty"!

Jake - you have such a way with words!

I didn't mean it as "I'll do whatever I want" I was just saying, I won't accidentally be winning ITA or anything. For the time being, especially my first season, I'm not too worried about a small infraction that nobody will notice. If I start being competitive then I'll fix it.

[mossaidis]

Soup and crackers, but served by a hot waitress.

I assume this is your idea of good time? wow... Jake, you need to get out more.

[lateapex911]

Better than grits served by a big fatty chewing gum!

[DavidM]

Nothing is going to be said different this time around than last time.

[Knestis]

Nothing is going to be said different this time around than last time.

Non suscipit cursus...

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Sed semper lacinia turpis, sed pharetra risus molestie sit amet. Nam id facilisis urna. Pellentesque est ligula, rutrum non ornare at, hendrerit nec velit. Maecenas lorem orci, molestie convallis aliquam ac, imperdiet sit amet arcu. Sed tincidunt mi tincidunt sem pretium non sollicitudin dolor lobortis. Donec cursus, risus rutrum dignissim faucibus, enim lectus mollis arcu, sed dictum nibh neque id odio...? Donec at eros sem.

Suspendisse quis arcu ut dolor tempor sodales a et nisl. Curabitur condimentum aliquam egestas. Quisque fringilla sagittis metus, feugiat hendrerit augue semper vitae. Maecenas consectetur leo ornare lectus lobortis a adipiscing odio egestas. Sed eu risus nec nunc auctor tempor. Vestibulum viverra tempor tempor.

Etiam porta rhoncus lorem, at semper erat pellentesque vel. Curabitur in tellus eu diam tristique fermentum. Suspendisse consequat laoreet lacus porttitor convallis. Duis metus velit, rhoncus eu tempus in, rutrum nec nibh. Morbi suscipit nibh in tellus feugiat sed porta velit facilisis.

Sed luctus eleifend erat...!

K

EDITRI - Phasellus pellentesque sapien vel ipsum hendrerit imperdiet...

[JeffYoung]

Fo shizzle.

Non suscipit cursus...

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Sed semper lacinia turpis, sed pharetra risus molestie sit amet. Nam id facilisis urna. Pellentesque est ligula, rutrum non ornare at, hendrerit nec velit. Maecenas lorem orci, molestie convallis aliquam ac, imperdiet sit amet arcu. Sed tincidunt mi tincidunt sem pretium non sollicitudin dolor lobortis. Donec cursus, risus rutrum dignissim faucibus, enim lectus mollis arcu, sed dictum nibh neque id odio...? Donec at eros sem.

Suspendisse quis arcu ut dolor tempor sodales a et nisl. Curabitur condimentum aliquam egestas. Quisque fringilla sagittis metus, feugiat hendrerit augue semper vitae. Maecenas consectetur leo ornare lectus lobortis a adipiscing odio egestas. Sed eu risus nec nunc auctor tempor. Vestibulum viverra tempor tempor.

Etiam porta rhoncus lorem, at semper erat pellentesque vel. Curabitur in tellus eu diam tristique fermentum. Suspendisse consequat laoreet lacus porttitor convallis. Duis metus velit, rhoncus eu tempus in, rutrum nec nibh. Morbi suscipit nibh in tellus feugiat sed porta velit facilisis.

Sed luctus eleifend erat...!

K

EDITRI - Phasellus pellentesque sapien vel ipsum hendrerit imperdiet...

[Z3_GoCar]

Non suscipit cursus...

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Sed semper lacinia turpis, sed pharetra risus molestie sit amet. Nam id facilisis urna. Pellentesque est ligula, rutrum non ornare at, hendrerit nec velit. Maecenas lorem orci, molestie convallis aliquam ac, imperdiet sit amet arcu. Sed tincidunt mi tincidunt sem pretium non sollicitudin dolor lobortis. Donec cursus, risus rutrum dignissim faucibus, enim lectus mollis arcu, sed dictum nibh neque id odio...? Donec at eros sem.

Suspendisse quis arcu ut dolor tempor sodales a et nisl. Curabitur condimentum aliquam egestas. Quisque fringilla sagittis metus, feugiat hendrerit augue semper vitae. Maecenas consectetur leo ornare lectus lobortis a adipiscing odio egestas. Sed eu risus nec nunc auctor tempor. Vestibulum viverra tempor tempor.

Etiam porta rhoncus lorem, at semper erat pellentesque vel. Curabitur in tellus eu diam tristique fermentum. Suspendisse consequat laoreet lacus porttitor convallis. Duis metus velit, rhoncus eu tempus in, rutrum nec nibh. Morbi suscipit nibh in tellus feugiat sed porta velit facilisis.

Sed luctus eleifend erat...!

K

EDITRI - Phasellus pellentesque sapien vel ipsum hendrerit imperdiet...

Vos can narro ut iterum; vero, intereo est iacio.

[DavidM]

I stand corrected.

[Duc]

Now, the ITAC and CRB have MASSIVE support for this on file AND they have the rule already written, so, Jeff, Travis, should people write in AGAIN to support it??

So is the consensus we need to write in again? (Just did a pre-season look and I might need to replace a mount.)

D

[JeffYoung]

We didn't get to Jake's letter on Monday. Issue is still open.

Any and all input will be considered, and appreciated.

Thanks guys.

[lateapex911]

Thanks for the update Jeff. I really appreciate the open line of communication.

[JeffYoung]

We tried to focus on car classification and "non-controversial" rule issues on Monday since Josh was out -- first time in 4 years! He had a lot going on, new house, etc.

Plus, we just didn't make as much progress as we had the last few weeks, primarily because Josh does a very good job of leading and getting us focused on progress instead of (sometimes) endless debate and we meandered a bit in his absence.

[lateapex911]

WOW, he's been on for 4 years? Time flies!

[rlward]

Sorry guys, this all sounds too familiar, like how about wheel sizes; you know, diameter and width changes. I think I have learned to just go with the flow, 'cause the majority on this forum does not want to change anthing that may: 1. cost them money, 2. be an advantage to anyone else, 3. update to current practices of the rest of the racing world. We are, after all, Improved Touring, what other racing is out there that would be worth even looking at their rules? Nah!

However, there will be a rule change if you can't stop the cheating. (ECU) SO my suggestion is for all of you that want changes to cheat by making your change in the mounts or batteries or wheels or what ever. Then when enough racers are cheating, the non-cheating group will want to change the rules 'cause they can't enforce the old rules. simple.

[lateapex911]

Roger, the ECU is a terrible example. I was very involved in the current rule, and it's genesis has nothing to do with cheating.
The first rule that allowed chips in boxes might have had some people claiming that it was due to the difficulty in policing, but really, that's not logical either. If carbed cars had the ability to change mixture and timing, why shouldn't ECU cars have the same rule allowances?

I'll make it simple for you: The existing rule is in place mostly because modern day ECUS are, or will be, overly cumbersome and limiting when it comes to building a race car.
I bet you point to the spherical bearing rule next....

[rlward]

Carb cars can't change mixture or timing on the fly. That's a no brainer.

[gran racing]

You do realize that Jake's car is carbed, right?

The ECU rule is a fantastic example of why the three items you wrote are wrong. LOL

[Bill Miller]

Roger, the ECU is a terrible example. I was very involved in the current rule, and it's genesis has nothing to do with cheating.
The first rule that allowed chips in boxes might have had some people claiming that it was due to the difficulty in policing, but really, that's not logical either. If carbed cars had the ability to change mixture and timing, why shouldn't ECU cars have the same rule allowances?

I'll make it simple for you: The existing rule is in place mostly because modern day ECUS are, or will be, overly cumbersome and limiting when it comes to building a race car.
I bet you point to the spherical bearing rule next....

Jake,

I was around through most of the ECU issue. EFI cars already had the ability to change the resistance values. The way I remember it, the original iteration of the ECU rule was 'stuff whatever you can in the original box w/ the original connections'. That was in response to not being able to police re-flashed chips. The 'stuff it in the original box' thing was a great example of trying to 'legalize' the cheating w/o giving away the farm. The problem was, not all cars had the same size boxes, and you had guys adding vacuum circuits where none existed initially. The current 'use whatever you want' model was a reaction to the fact that the 'stuff it in the original box' version didn't work.

To claim that the open ECU rule was the result of wanting to give EFI folks the same flexibility as the carb'd folks is disingenuous and revisionist history. As far as looking to the future, what ever happened to 'warts and all'? And IT rules written for what may come down the road in the future? That's a new one.