April Fastrack

***The ITC record is a low 2:58 in a Datsun 510 with an illegal 5 speed in it.***

& the car is going H Production this year...
 
Well I have seen your question answered many times here, The group seems to agree something needs to be done but the system currently has no fix. I also have seen people even through your crappy attitude try to address your concerns by indicating something is being worked on. I have seen you contine to try to make people look bad for doing a good job. All of this is gonna take time to undo some of the past mistakes. You don't seem to want to believe that anybody but you has the answer to the problem. Take a chill I have confidence that something is being done here and it looks positive.
 
Here is a followup to the Road Atlanta ITB/ITC discussion that was sent to me this morning:


Darin,
FYI: The ITC qualifying and race track record at Road America was set
june 24, 2004 at an SCCA regional. ITC qualifying record 2:58.483 ITC
Race record 2:57.680. Car#64
The ITB record was set by a Rabbit GTI a few years back and i cannot
remember the guys name or when it was set or the exact times. He was the
former area 5 director though. There are two records here a quailfying
record and a race record.
Click to expand...

Again, accept it as you will...

------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
DJ_AV1.jpg
 
No fix Joe? I'm sorry, I guess I completely missed the whole point of PCAs. Oh yeah, and most people w/ integrity sack it up and admit they were wrong, when they obviously step on their crank. And, I don't have to try and make Darin look bad, he does just fine on his own. As evidenced by his use of unsubstantiated, anonymous information.

Andy, I understand what you're saying, but it's not an adjustment, it's a correction. That's been done in the past (pre-PCAs even). It was even done past the 1-year time limit, and was listed in E&O.

There's a tool in place, that you, and a lot of others worked hard to get implemented. From what I read, it sounds like you guys are being told how you can use it, and that you can't use it to its fullest extent. That just doesn't make any sense. If downward weight corrections were never intended, why wasn't that reflected in the language?

Darin,

If that 510 had an illegal tranny in it at the time of setting the lap record, why wasn't it DQ'd? But I'm even more confused as to why you'd even put this information out there, w/o verifying it. If it came from someone that reads this board (which is probably a safe bet), why wouldn't you ask them to post it? If I were in your position, I'd want to verify information that was given to me, before I associated myself w/ it, and put it out for general consumption.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
 
Did I miss the CRB changing to basic premise of IT that no guarantee of competitiveness is expressed or implied? Sure PCA's are available now as a means to address gross errors in classification but my understanding is by no means were they meant to try and create parity throughout a class. If we are going to start opening the door to PCA adjustments to cars based on an inability to compete for a win then you're going to have a long line. Or is there something more to this than a singular complaint about one car being uncompetitive?

------------------
~Matt Rowe
ITA Shelby Charger
MARRS #96
 
Originally posted by Bill Miller:
If I were in your position, I'd want to verify information that was given to me, before I associated myself w/ it, and put it out for general consumption.
Click to expand...

Who said the information was from someone from whom I haven't verified it??? The person isn't "ananomous" to me... I know exactly who they are, how credible they are, and I have full faith in it...

Again, you are speaking of that which you don't know... The only thing I didn't verify was going to the site to double check that what I posted was accurate, but again, I know the person well and trust him to be accurate... Always has been in the past...

You might want to look in the mirror as far as accusing someone of posting information that may be suspect... because some of the stuff you are posting here is flat wrong...

Once again, you have NO idea why the events have occurred the way they have, and until you do, your information is simply your opinion... yet you keep posting it like it's fact...

The facts are that we are working on a plan, and until such time as that plan is in place, you will continue to see things being "not recommended", or otherwise rejected in Fastrack... I've tried to tell you, as with the GTI, that this DOES NOT mean they are not the subject of some changes... it just means that they aren't getting changed at this time. This is NO different than the other models you mentioned previously that were rejected, only to be approved a couple of cycles later...

Take some advice from Joe... CALM down, be patient, and let us do the work we are trying to do... You don't have a stake in this anyhow, so it's pointless for you to try to stir up the sh!t, especially in the negative, abusive way to seem to like to do it...

As for me making myself look bad, it depends on who you talk to I guess...


------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
DJ_AV1.jpg


[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited March 04, 2005).]
 
Originally posted by Bill Miller:
No fix Joe? I'm sorry, I guess I completely missed the whole point of PCAs.
Click to expand...
This doesn't shock me that you miss the point Bill. You are so colored by your dislike of Darin personally that you can't see there are good things going on here.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> Oh yeah, and most people w/ integrity sack it up and admit they were wrong, when they obviously step on their crank. And, I don't have to try and make Darin look bad, he does just fine on his own.</font>
Click to expand...
Bill, I am not trying to take sides here but the only one that ends up looking bad my friend is you. I watched you for a year now get almost to the point of stalking. You go out of your way to find a single word that you think is out of place and you pounce on it. I am starting to think a 12 step program may be in order here. I have seen several of these guys agree that the car in question needs help. I have to agree with Matt here that there still is no gaurantee of being competitive for any model.
How about you give it a break and let the process work for a bit here. Darin,Andy,or even George are not your enemy and they are trying to help make a positive future for the catagory. I have know Darin for years and I have had the pleasure of meeting Andy in person and I am positive these guys are all listening.
 
Originally posted by gsbaker:
Why don't you guys hold off for a few days, until some people get back to their offices in Topeka. This FasTrack is completely counter to what we have heard...
Click to expand...
Update?
 
Wayne,

I've asked for an update myself, a couple of times. I am guessing that no comment thusfar means that no resolution has been finalized. Must still be in the works...

It is not like Gregg hasn't visited this site or thread...so I am sure that he'll update us as soon as possible.

Keep hammering away Gregg!!!

I wrote two letters months ago, got an e-mail response/acknowledgement on both. Not one mention in any fastrack since I wrote the first one.
 
From what I hear from my friends who "know people", stuff is in the works, but it takes time. Nobody is going to tell us we can't wear the system, so it seems like the best thing to do is lay low and let it sort itself out. It does sound like it's going to take awhile, but it also seems like it shouldn't be a concern.

I think, in this case, writing more letters probably isn't the way to go...

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
 
Why do so many posts to the IT forum ultimately degenerate into an online argument between the same 2 individuals? Should there be a separate forum just for these two to jaw at each other? Then those that get some sort vicarious pleasure out of it could stand in their favorite's corner and whisper encouraging words.

And the rest of could have meaningful discussions about life altering issues like $6 racing gas and the value of spec tires in IT7.

------------------
Spec RX7 #11
Scottsdale AZ
 
Originally posted by lateapex911:
...I think, in this case, writing more letters probably isn't the way to go...
Click to expand...

I think I would tend to agree with Jake on this point.

I think risk management would FREAK if they got word that an official told someone that they couldn't use a piece of safety equipment with engineering data behind it, like that collected by Gregg and friends. I have a hard time picturing a bigger "Sue Me" banner being waved, should someone get hurt under those circumstances.

H&N systems are not required so specific rules defining some as "okay" and others as "not okay" is a very shaky situation, in the absence of evidence that any particular design actually makes you LESS safe.

I CAN picture the failure mode, of one grid guy getting a bee in his bonnet, but I think that (a) even THEY will understand not to do something silly, or (B) we can maintain a low enough profile that it doesn't become an issue. I'm going to ask forgiveness rather than getting on someone's radar scope by making a stink trying to force permission at this point.

Interesting that I'm in a similar boat with my fire system. They're not required for IT but mine is technically not installed legally because it doesn't have nozzles in two locations. The manufacturer specifically says NOT to do that, so it all goes into the cockpit in my installation. I'm anticipating questions there...

...but I'm USED to it. I have the documentation from Willans telling me that, contrary to what the SCCA tech people see as common wisdom, I SHOULD have the shoulder harnesses mounted to the (illegal) bar between the rear downtubes of the cage.

Someone will undoubtedly comment on the pattern here.
smile.gif


K

[This message has been edited by Knestis (edited March 04, 2005).]
 
Originally posted by Banzai240:
Who said the information was from someone from whom I haven't verified it??? The person isn't "ananomous" to me... I know exactly who they are, how credible they are, and I have full faith in it...

Again, you are speaking of that which you don't know... The only thing I didn't verify was going to the site to double check that what I posted was accurate, but again, I know the person well and trust him to be accurate... Always has been in the past...
Click to expand...


Well Darin, seems that's some mis-placed faith, as the original information wasn't accurate. Again though, I'm curious as to why this person wouldn't post the information on their own.

You might want to look in the mirror as far as accusing someone of posting information that may be suspect... because some of the stuff you are posting here is flat wrong...
Click to expand...

Please cite it, and if it's incorrect, I'll be the first one to admit my mistake.

Once again, you have NO idea why the events have occurred the way they have, and until you do, your information is simply your opinion... yet you keep posting it like it's fact...

The facts are that we are working on a plan, and until such time as that plan is in place, you will continue to see things being "not recommended", or otherwise rejected in Fastrack... I've tried to tell you, as with the GTI, that this DOES NOT mean they are not the subject of some changes... it just means that they aren't getting changed at this time. This is NO different than the other models you mentioned previously that were rejected, only to be approved a couple of cycles later...
Click to expand...

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">I think the Fastrack was clear that this car is NOT a candidate for ITC as far as the ITAC/CRB is concerned...</font>
Click to expand...


Well Darin, which is it, a note in FasTrack is a clear indication, or it's only a 'maybe'? Like I said, I may not like it if it gets a 'not recommended' response, but I like it even less if it gets no response at all. The first thing I did when I didn't see it addressed, was to call Topeka and speak w/ John Bauer in an effort to find out if it was a typo/mistake/ommission. I was told that it was not addressed, and was not on a future agenda to be discussed.

In a previous post, you suggested that I ask you (or other ITAC members). I don't know Darin, but I think going through the 'official' channels, rather than asking one of the ITAC members to 'speak out of turn', is the correct approach. Or maybe what you're saying, is that John (or Jeremy) are not credible or accurate sources of information in these matters.

You don't have a stake in this anyhow, so it's pointless for you to try to stir up the sh!t, especially in the negative, abusive way to seem to like to do it...
Click to expand...
You're right Darin, I don't have a direct stake in this, as I don't race one of the cars. That also means that I'm not out to get something for my car. This just happens to be a car that I know a lot about, and have a lot of experience with. What I am out to get, is an open, equitable, objective process. The way I see it, that's something that's good for all of IT.

I'd also like to go back to an earlier comment you made. You said I was operating under the assumption that the current situation in ITC was equitable. Your comment indicates that you don't think that's the case. Care to expand on that?

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
 
Originally posted by Joe Harlan:

This doesn't shock me that you miss the point Bill. You are so colored by your dislike of Darin personally that you can't see there are good things going on here.
Click to expand...

Joe,

I never said they're weren't good things going on. But I'm not surprised that you try and change the subject. You state that there's no fix available, and when I show you that you're wrong, you avoid the issue and change the subject. I submit that your friendship w/ Darin has clouded your objectivity.



------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
 
As a previous poster pointed out... these threads get tiresome when they degrade to this back and forth BS...

I'm ending my part in this thread here with the following comments....

The GTI is NOT an ITC car and the request to move it was denied in Fastrack). The second part of the request is still tabled because making some in-class adjustments is something that is being discussed... John and Jeremy are doing a great job with a thankless task, but they aren't always privey to the the discussions taking place within the ITAC... As far as the ITAC is concerned, the GTI weight issue is still tabled, pending further discussions...

Take that as you will... I've told you what's going on, you can choose to believe it or not...


------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
DJ_AV1.jpg
 
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> You state that there's no fix available, and when I show you that you're wrong, </font>
Click to expand...

Bill you may have offered a fix that I didn't/don't see but it was clouded with the venom you tend to spit when your not getting your way. You of all people know that I will put even my friends in their place when they deserve it. You have been around long enough to know that.
I think it has been explained enough times to you what is likely going on with this car. You continue to twist words to make something out of nothing so I will go back to ignoring you like everybosy else cause this gets no where. Goodluck cause it is to bad you have to have such an attitude cause I think you could help the VW camp in a big way with you knowledge of the product.
 
Originally posted by Joe Harlan:
Goodluck cause it is to bad you have to have such an attitude cause I think you could help the VW camp in a big way with you knowledge of the product.
Click to expand...

Well Joe, it's become painfully obvious that product knowledge and hard data don't mean anything when it's counter to someone's opinion.

As far as the ITAC is concerned, the GTI weight issue is still tabled, pending further discussions...

Take that as you will... I've told you what's going on, you can choose to believe it or not...
Click to expand...


Fair enough Darin, I'll take that at face value. You know, you could have avoided 90% of this discussion, had that been published in FasTrack. Every month we see requests tabled for various reasons.



------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
 
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Fair enough Darin, I'll take that at face value. You know, you could have avoided 90% of this discussion, had that been published in FasTrack. Every month we see requests tabled for various reasons.</font>
Click to expand...

There is were you get sideways Bill, I am sure the whole ITAC would like the samething if it was in their control. I think you end up getting on the wrong people. I don't think these guys have any control over the publishing or scheduling process.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top