STL cylinder head porting

[Greg Amy]

I'll give you the philosophical argument, you guys can talk technical.

IT head prep is the cornerstone of three categories: Improved Touring, Super Touring (Light), and Limited Prep Production. All were created to try and minimize modifications in a (Sysiphian) goal of minimizing expensive modifications.

Unless and until we are willing to move STL into a realm of prep similar to Super Touring Under (e.g., porting, bigger brakes and tires, sequential gearboxes) and/or full-prep Prod (which is on the wane due to costs) then I suggest porting does not have a place in the class. and as/when we do that, it moves further toward reducing the differentiation of the class from other existing classes.

GA, "The Philosophy Guy"...

[adamjabaay]

I completely agree it should not be in the class....

I DO think it would help some guys more than others. It'd likely help myself a LOT, as I picked an oddball engine (d15 non VTEC, and I picked it on purpose! So dumb)


I was surprised to see the question in fastrack. I'll be writing a reply....

[Greg Amy]

I was surprised to see the question in fastrack. I'll be writing a reply....

Wait...what??? That did not come out of the STAC...

GA, re-reading Fastrack as we speak...

[dickita15]

while i do not disagree with the philosophical argument i am curious what people think about Adam's actual question in who would benefit the most and what effect that would have on competitive balance.

[Greg Amy]

1. #15577 (Club Racing Board) Cylinder Heads
Should STL allow cylinder head porting at a 1% weight penalty, similar to STU? Please send your response through the CRB letter system at crbscca.com.

(Comments deleted. I need to go spend the afternoon in the garage and calm down before I publicly write anything about this.)

[adamjabaay]

Yup...

[Knestis]

Crystal ball says...

Someone on the CRB with an interest in STL, and particularly a make/model of STL car that may be benefiting from new "clarified" headwork allowances in another class, has gone around the STAC to slide a request into the queue? A request that will be decided on pretty much independently by the person who submitted it, given the CRB's inclination to defer to a category "expert" on a technical question like this...?

Dick P. - If this is what it looks like, you all have GOT TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS CONFLICT OF INTEREST SHIT. It's embarrassing. And I was a member back in the bad old "what brand of car is Doug Reed driving?" days of choosing a Showroom Stock ride...

K

[dickita15]

well, Kirk i would rather think that given the recent unpleasantness is SM smart people are thinking about bigger philosophical issues. but as Regan said "trust but verify".

[Greg Amy]

well, Kirk i would rather think that given the recent unpleasantness is SM smart people are thinking about bigger philosophical issues.

Yeah, that's probably what it is.

I'm done; I think it's high time people get the hope and change they're asking for. You want it? You got it, bro!

[adamjabaay]

I feel bad for pointing out something that might have ruined tGAs Saturday. Ha

[Knestis]

well, Kirk i would rather think that given the recent unpleasantness is SM smart people are thinking about bigger philosophical issues. but as Regan said "trust but verify".

I'm not entirely sure I'm following, Dick, but I struggle to come up with any issues bigger than governance for an organization the size of SCCA.

K