Originally posted by Joe Harlan@Nov 17 2005, 05:16 PM
<DELETE>Other wise we may as well change the name to Replacment touring and get on with it.
[snapback]65692[/snapback]
OK Earl I'll buy into that...,Then why slow the E-36 down why not give the 240 a little compression and a little camshaft. Allow the RX7 a little street port(something new to police)....Again once you change the outlook of the class it has to change a bunch to get to parity. I am all for one or the other but lets not be half pregnant here. If Motecs or AEM's can be stuffed into the stock box then lets just get it on and allow the whole deal cause if even one person takes advantage of the full rule then the bar is raised to that level for everyone.
Originally posted by Joe Harlan+Nov 17 2005, 03:15 PM-->
I guess it all boils down to where you want the class benchmark to be - if it's the BMW, then you will have to adjust a few dozen cars to bring them up to the standard. If it's the RX7 or 240, then you only have to adjust one car to bring it back to the group. I think that horse has been beaten about as much as we can though, hasn't it?
<!--QuoteBegin-Joe Harlan@Nov 17 2005, 03:15 PM
I am all for one or the other but lets not be half pregnant here. If Motecs or AEM's can be stuffed into the stock box then lets just get it on and allow the whole deal cause if even one person takes advantage of the full rule then the bar is raised to that level for everyone.
[snapback]65716[/snapback]
Originally posted by Joe Harlan@Nov 17 2005, 10:16 AM
Geo, I don't think your nuts, I think you are biased in your oppinions and you would stand outside in a speedo in a snow storm saying the sun is shining to be right. I don't have a problem with that at least your consistent. You often ignore the other questions brought up on this subject. How do you handle the traction control issue.( I have used it real world) How do you equalize the ability to create an optimum map with traction control for every track in your division? I again am up for discussion but I have to agree with Bill D. here and I said it when the BMW got classed. We pushed the class intent right out the window when we started classing and adjusting things well beyond improved. Open ECUs are not improving anything they are replacing. Thats the problem with the current rule. It should limit to improvement. Other wise we may as well change the name to Replacment touring and get on with it.
[snapback]65692[/snapback]
On the PITA part, if we assume that we are going to allow modications (because we cannot police them anyway), then if we are going to be fair to others with ECUs (carb guys are getting a bum deal, no question), then the current rule seems to be the lowest common denominator (considering ALL of the ECU equipped cars in IT and not this brand of that). I HATE where we are at with ECUs, but honestly don't see another workable solution.Well the AEM system does not require a wheelspeed sensor to use the traction control and I am sure the Motec is the same way(I have not tried traction control on a motec application.) but since both systems also data log the wheel speed sensor becomes legal because data aquisition is considered a gauge.Originally posted by Geo@Nov 17 2005, 01:26 PM
Just a few things in response. Since you have said (paraphrasing) that it's your opinion I'm biased, I can accept it's your opinion. However, I don't see how I'm biased (sincerely).
I personally don't like MoTeCs in IT. However, the issue with ECUs as I see it is that a) they are impossible to police, anda royal PITA.
As for traction control, doesn't the MoTeC use some sort of algorithm to limit how quickly the revs may ramp up? If not I don't see how it could be done legall unless somehow some car has the wheel sensors wired to the factory ECU. I don't know the answer to my question here, but just guessing. I know you are intimately familiar with the MoTeC so I'm sincerely seeking your knowledge on the matter.
In the end, I'm all for requiring stock ECUs if we could police them. We just cannot.
[snapback]65724[/snapback]
If we are going to this much trouble to stuff the box you think I can't wire the factory data port to serial feed my lap top? Geo there are 16 year old rice rocket kids that can do this stuff these days. I believe that's why it is so hard to get our arms around. We learned on a toilet system with jets.
I would vote for Modifying the factory ECU.
Greg I would almost agree here except the CRB has finally come to the acceptance that they can't police any of the classes. I think that's the trend toward touring from SS.
Originally posted by Joe Harlan@Nov 17 2005, 02:53 PM
If we are going to this much trouble to stuff the box you think I can't wire the factory data port to serial feed my lap top? Geo there are 16 year old rice rocket kids that can do this stuff these days. I believe that's why it is so hard to get our arms around. We learned on a toilet system with jets.
[snapback]65745[/snapback]
That's a good one Joe.You know, I've been running IT for 12 years now. So I've had this discussion with more than one person. But the hardest thing to explain to non scca or new scca people is what our rules are, and why we have soooo many classes. After a while we become numb to it. But you can always spot the new guy at annual tech, or registration, or impound. He's the ticked of guy who just keeps saying "you've got to be ^$&*%#$ kidding me." At some point we need to become more user friendly. I'm not a fan of nasa's every car gets it's own class, or nascar's our way or the highway, but somewhere there must be a happy medium where the rules a straightfoward and the emphasis is on doing your prep work and driving the car. Don't say spec miat because that is a joke in it's self. I don't have the answers, but with today's "take my ball and go home mentality" we need to have stability and simplicity enter the equation somewhere.Originally posted by Joe Harlan@Nov 17 2005, 11:11 PM
Step back from the ledge.....
Rick I have to tell you that right now at this moment in time you have the best group of AD-Hoc guys probably ever. I believe they are working hard and have worked hard to fix a few of the deep rooted issues in IT I believe for the most part they have theor eye on the ball as far as possible corrections to thing that were wrong the past.
I also feel that at this moment in time we have guys on the CRB that are listening to the plan and executing the best they possibly can. I don't know what the future is but there are a few people in place that I have big respect for. So remember we didn't get here over night and it won't be corrected over night but it looks like the tide is turning a little.
[snapback]65760[/snapback]