The Real STU (Super Turbo Über) Bitch thread

[Greg Amy]

Joe, a well-thought-out response, and I completely agree with you in concept.

But the devil is in the details. The hangup is converting such a general idea and making it a " realistic, workable, every day solution". You know that we do not have the resources - and certainly not the motivation - within the Club to design, develop, install, support, and maintain such a solution. The STAC is 5 guys that meet for 2-3 hours once a month, and the CRB spends about as much time - probably less - discussing Super Touring concerns. SCCA's Technical Support group is one or two guys taking on all technical details of the Club for all classes (and they're currently one short). No one within this structure - all volunteers, except for Technical - on either committee/board is going to spend an inordinate amount of time and money to do all that work just for this one category. We're just simply not going to do that.

However, if your company, or any other one you know, is willing to take on that responsibility, I would be very interested in having them send to us a RFQ with very-general overview of what you propose, how you would implement and support it (both on a competitor and scrutineering side) and a general idea of how much it would cost all parties involved. If it appears to be an idea that the SCCA/CRB would like to pursue, then we could get into the specifics. And you'd have a lock on the market.

But to expect a volunteer club organization to take on that kind of time and money investment and to build an infrastructure to support is very, very unrealistic; that is truly not a "realistic, workable, every day solution".

I am certainly not going to invest any of my time and money into it, as I have nothing to gain, financially or personally.

So, find someone who does. Is that you?

- GA

[jmac36]

Joe, a well-thought-out response, and I completely agree with you in concept.

But the devil is in the details. The hangup is converting such a general idea and making it a " realistic, workable, every day solution". You know that we do not have the resources - and certainly not the motivation - within the Club to design, develop, install, support, and maintain such a solution. The STAC is 5 guys that meet for 2-3 hours once a month, and the CRB spends about as much time - probably less - discussing Super Touring concerns. SCCA's Technical Support group is one or two guys taking on all technical details of the Club for all classes (and they're currently one short). No one within this structure - all volunteers, except for Technical - on either committee/board is going to spend an inordinate amount of time and money to do all that work just for this one category. We're just simply not going to do that.

However, if your company, or any other one you know, is willing to take on that responsibility, I would be very interested in having them send to us a RFQ with very-general overview of what you propose, how you would implement and support it (both on a competitor and scrutineering side) and a general idea of how much it would cost all parties involved. If it appears to be an idea that the SCCA/CRB would like to pursue, then we could get into the specifics. And you'd have a lock on the market.

But to expect a volunteer club organization to take on that kind of time and money investment and to build an infrastructure to support is very, very unrealistic; that is truly not a "realistic, workable, every day solution".

I am certainly not going to invest any of my time and money into it, as I have nothing to gain, financially or personally.

So, find someone who does. Is that you?

- GA

Greg, I guess you and I were not communicating on this very well before when we spoke at the runoffs about boost regulation. Perhaps that's my fault for not making myself clear, and part of my outrage on this forum when I hear the " it can't be done " argument. If so, on both counts, my bad.

To your challenge; this is almost a no brainier, hardware and software wise. IF, and really only if, you and Chris, along with the other STAC members would at least listen to a proposal, and I can get a general consensious form most of my competitors about implementing this, and maintaining it, we would be happy to.

I would need your assurance that if we were to present to you the hardware/ software to do this, that you guys would be willing to work with us to get the board to put it to use, so we can all go about leveling what we all understand is a rather uneven playing field.

I don't pretend to have all the answers, Greg, never have. But as an engineer, I get a bit POed when somebody around me tells me something can't be done, or we do it this way cause that's the way we always have. Guess it's a character flaw on my part, but it has served me well over the years.

[Greg Amy]

Joe, can't promise nothin', but if you take some time to put together a general proposal on what you have in mind, Chris and I will pass it through the STAC and the CRB to see if there's interest. At that point you could do some deeper investigations on costs and how to implement and we go from there.

Just keep in mind when I state something like "it can't be done" I'm speaking not from an engineering perspective (I'm a MechE by education, IT guy by profession) I'm speaking about what can be reasonably done within the resources and culture of the organization (I'm also a MBA by education).

"Hit us with your best shot" and it'll get a fair audience.

- GA

[jmac36]

Joe, can't promise nothin', but if you take some time to put together a general proposal on what you have in mind, Chris and I will pass it through the STAC and the CRB to see if there's interest. At that point you could do some deeper investigations on costs and how to implement and we go from there.

Just keep in mind when I state something like "it can't be done" I'm speaking not from an engineering perspective (I'm a MechE by education, IT guy by profession) I'm speaking about what can be reasonably done within the resources and culture of the organization (I'm also a MBA by education).

"Hit us with your best shot" and it'll get a fair audience.

- GA

Greg, I'll be more than happy to do it. If it gets some support, and the CRB thinks its interesting, we will go from there.

BTW, I appreciate and understand why you and Chris were taking this stand. And I also understand we are a volunteer organization, having been a club member most of my life, and having been around it since I was born.

But we, as a club, need to look around and understand that we are no longer the only game in town. And, in my opinion, on issues like this, where there is some pretty deep discontent, we need to try to look for better answers. Least we run ALL of our competitors off to places where they don't say "can't be done".

thanks

[Flyinglizard]

I wasnt kidding with the radiator cap thing. It looks as tho it can work, MOL. Look around the net..

Also my "Harry's lap timer" has the OBD port interrface and records the data.

[Z3_GoCar]

While I respect our Tech folks, I don't think they're on the level of professional FIA tech crews, and if this can get around FIA tech, then how will local tech crews catch a TIR bypass:

http://jalopnik.com/5977371/racing-i...nce-armstrongs

That's why the turbo cars need to be in their own seperate class. Atmo cars are the majority at this point, not the turbo's so the problems still young enough to nip in the bud. If the solution is a year off, then so be it, at least the issue is being addressed.

[Greg Amy]

That's fine James: if you really believe there needs to be a separate class, then please send your request to the CRB. I will not do it, as I do not believe it's the right answer.

But please do keep in mind that if the normally-aspirated cars are requesting a separate class from the turbo cars, it is the N/A cars that will be the spin-off class, not the turbo cars. The turbos (and those that wish to continue competing against the turbos) will stay within the existing STU class. The spin-off class - STNA? - will have to convince the membership and the CRB that first, a new class is warranted, and second, that this new class will bring the numbers for it be considered for National/Majors participation.

Or we can continue to move forward to do our best to level the playing field among the existing STU cars. Which is what we'll continue to do, barring any conflicting directives from the CRB.

- GA