August 2011 Fastrack

[StephenB]

If you've not seen it in Fastrack and you've not received an email telling you it's been considered, then it's still on their agenda. Committees don't always get to everything every month, but may table it to subsequent months (especially game-changing items that require significant discussion/thought).

When something leaves the committee and goes to the CRB you get one email, then when it's dispensed by the CRB you get another. Until then...patience.

GA

It was in the fast track meeting minutes thing you posted. Basically said no-go... I kinda figured as much. I get not allowing it as I do see it as a competitive advantage. I was just hoping with some type of penalty (weight) that it would be considered. I do get it, but I also think they will need to allow it at some point. I was hoping sooner rather than later so I didn't have to spend all the money re-plumbing in new lines and valves and such. I know we had another thread on the ABS thing a while back but I can't find it. Back then I even said it was an advantage but argued it was also safer.

I guess in the end I am not looking for an advantage, I just don't want to waist time and money on something that will be allowed within the next few years anyway. I beleive Its already allowed in every other class in SCCA where a car came stock with it, including SCCA PRO.

Stephen

From meeting minutes:

NOT APPROVED BY THE CRB

IMPROVED TOURING
1. #4329 (Charles O'Toole) change head gasket thickness rules
The rules are correct as written.
2. #4432 (David Russell) Allow alternate valve seat material
Not consistent with class philosophy.
ITR
1. #4635 (Stephen Blethen) Allowance of ABS in ITR
Not consistent with current class philosophy.
ITS
1. #4970 (Fred Brett) Reclassify to ITA 99-2000 Civic
This car is classified correctly.
ITA
1. #4226 (Chris Gentry) reclassify scirroco 16v
This car is classified correctly.
2. #5332 (Grant Boshoff) Increase weight