Administrator
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.)
Last edited by Greg Amy; 12-20-2014 at 09:57 AM.
Senior Member
Yup...
Senior Member
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
Senior Member
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".
dick patullo
ner scca IT7 Rx7
Administrator
Yeah, that's probably what it is.Originally Posted by dickita15
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!
Senior Member
I feel bad for pointing out something that might have ruined tGAs Saturday. Ha
Administrator
tGA picked up parts for his soon-to-be HSR vintage racing car, cut a deal on the engine build for it, picked up an interior for his 914 street car, and spent some time with an HSR/914 buddy at a local micro-brewery, tasting some pretty good beers. He picked up a couple growlers for future spending time with family at Christmas this next week, and picked up some hardware for the street 914 at the Big Orange Race Car company (who also sponsors a NASCAR team). Tonight's plans are to spend the rest of the evening with the wife and some friends. Just can't ruin that...
No matter what, there's always something else...
GA
Senior Member
PHEW!
I'll go back to work now.... keep having fun!
Senior Member
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
Senior Member
sorry if i lost you. in post #8 you suppose that the reason the discussion on porting in STL is happening is nefarious. I have no way to say of you are right or wrong however it is not beyond the realm of possibilities that given that rules that can be enforced is a popular topic as of late it is also possible that people are rethinking what prep rules should be in a bigger picture way.
dick patullo
ner scca IT7 Rx7
Senior Member
So, the individual on the CRB who submitted the request, if his motives are pure, then he should be glad to submit the topic for consideration to the STAC. He didn't. Instead, he went around the exact body charged with making recommendations to the CRB about "what prep rules should be" for that category. If the most confident we - as members - can be that we're not getting railroaded is "not beyond the realm of possibility," then we have a PROBLEM. Still. The same. Exact. Kind. That led to the SM meltdown this fall.
Of course, it occurs to me at this point that I'm taking as given that the BoD and CRB really give a shit about the ad hocs' recommendations; or more accurately, their role in the process rather than SPECIFIC recommendations... If they are just window dressing, someone should tell the idiots that keep volunteering to serve on them. That was certainly the case when the ITAC got bent over a few years ago but I was of the understanding that we were working past that.
K
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks