gran racing
Super Moderator
Ray, off to LRP and I honestly don't remember all the differences off the top of my head. One thing is the engines are different with the Accord starting off with more HP. Sorry, gotta run...
Please help me understand the Audi issue...
- Thread starter RSTPerformance
- Start date
>> i guess my basic take on all of this is that if the CRB is going to "trump" the ITAC and its recommendations, they should have a detailed rationale that amounts to something more definitive than "because......."
It might get rationalized in any number of ways but any "trumping" will be done based on on-track observation. Conversations about the Audi - and I was in them - spun around and around about various questions, like this thread, but for those who thought it should stay too heavy, it ALL came back to the observation that "they are already fast." The quote from CRB members was that they would become "class killers," and "I'll build one tomorrow" if the 200# recommended decrease came through from the ITAC.
It did.
K
It might get rationalized in any number of ways but any "trumping" will be done based on on-track observation. Conversations about the Audi - and I was in them - spun around and around about various questions, like this thread, but for those who thought it should stay too heavy, it ALL came back to the observation that "they are already fast." The quote from CRB members was that they would become "class killers," and "I'll build one tomorrow" if the 200# recommended decrease came through from the ITAC.
It did.
K
Bill Miller
New member
And that's the point Kirk (as I know you know), they've (CRB ) got the tools they need to address it, should that come to pass. The fact that they folks (CRB ) are willing to trade repeatability, objectivity, and fairness for some level of perceived stability says a couple of things.
They have no faith in their own ability to handle an issue, should it arise.
The don't want to give up the power & control, and are hiding behind strategic ambiguity.
They've got something else up their sleeve
BTW, did they CRB members that this would directly impact, recuse themselves from the discussions? Just lilke you pointed out that Andy went out of his way to stay out of the 1.8 Miata discussions, did Mr. Albin and Mr. Keane stay out of the Audi discussion, or the plan to run all of ITB through the process? If not, that would seem to be a pretty clear-cut case of conflict of interest, if they voted against it.
They have no faith in their own ability to handle an issue, should it arise.
The don't want to give up the power & control, and are hiding behind strategic ambiguity.
They've got something else up their sleeve
BTW, did they CRB members that this would directly impact, recuse themselves from the discussions? Just lilke you pointed out that Andy went out of his way to stay out of the 1.8 Miata discussions, did Mr. Albin and Mr. Keane stay out of the Audi discussion, or the plan to run all of ITB through the process? If not, that would seem to be a pretty clear-cut case of conflict of interest, if they voted against it.
seckerich
New member
I think you all assume that ALL the members of the CRB actually see and are part of these decisions. You would be wrong. Most times they are just dealt with by the Liason to the specific ADHOC. Starting to get the picture? You need to pick up the phone and speak directly with those members in your area. They need to be informed. Please don't assume that this entire group has it out for you. I did until I got deeper into this. They need to be given both sides of the arguement. Some that made these decisions will try to hide behind the letter you have posted about "errors and omissions" used in error. It has been proven repeatedly that the entire ITCS before the GR was nothing but a dart board SWAG with no repeatable process. We were given the go ahead to do that and so far it has worked well. It is an error that they were classed under 10 different criteria over the years and now are getting fixed. This will be an agenda item for them Tuesday night so now is the time to act. Do you care enough to pick up a phone?
I'm having a really big DUH moment here.
The natural way for the CRB - as a whole - to deal with the challenge of managing car-level decisions for such a diverse list of categories is to count on its members who are "in the know" about each one.
In all my time on the ITAC, I ASSUMED - naively, perhaps - that the CRB as a body knew what we were doing. If that's not the case, I think I am back in the game. I've been reluctant to get involved in communication to the BoD because I don't want to distract discussion with what could be perceived as my personal issues re: the mandate to not communicate publicly, and subsequent resignation. BUT maybe the ENTIRE CRB needs to know what was communicated to me through Andy, as representing their position...
K
seckerich
New member
You would be correct. The BOD should also be personally made aware and brought up to speed. Please everyone remember these are for the most part good people that volunteer their time to the club. All I have spoken with are very polite and took time from their daily life to talk things over. Return that respect and be polite and to the point about what we want for IT. A fair shot at a level playing field free from personal motives. If you disagree with that statement let them know that as well.
RSTPerformance
New member
Its just to bad that they (CR
can't be bothered or polite enough to call us. Instead they have secret discussions behind closed doors about people like myself... Some even go as far to complain and start rumors on one hand about possible cheating while on the other hand they say that the performance is valid to use towards classifications. 
I don't think anyone on the CRB has ever shown me respect... although Bob did send me an e-mail last night saying he would get back to me tonight after his first e-mail that didn't satisfy my original e-mail... Its early but I am waiting and hoping that your first quote will come true... I will let you know either way!
We would all like that I think, but from what I can tell this is not what any of the CRB members are looking for at this time... We probably need a complete revamp of the current committee. Kirk would get my first vote as a member... oh wait we as members don't get to choose who is on that committee do we??? Politics at its best
Raymond
RSTPerformance
New member
Its just to bad that they (CR
I don't think anyone on the CRB has ever shown me respect... although Bob did send me an e-mail last night saying he would get back to me tonight after his first e-mail that didn't satisfy my original e-mail... Its early but I am waiting and hoping that your first quote will come true... I will let you know either way!
We would all like that I think, but from what I can tell this is not what any of the CRB members are looking for at this time... We probably need a complete revamp of the current committee. Kirk would get my first vote as a member... oh wait we as members don't get to choose who is on that committee do we??? Politics at its best
Raymond
Never recieved that e-mail as promised.... Same bullshit I have been told for 9 months... "We will get back to you..."
mass E-mail mode goes into effect tomorrow... Can't belive I am even giving a grace period... Realisticly it is because it is to late tonight to send an e-mail that probably wouldn't be recieved until Monday anyhow.
Raymond "yet another disapoitment" Blethen
lateapex911
Super Moderator
Bobs at Lime Rock racing. Maybe he's having a tugh time getting on line?
RSTPerformance
New member
Bob is a good guy... He got back to me, I will digest and share my final thoughts later... as mentionedd by others, anyone who wants cars classed in IT without the potential political or personal influence and those whom want a process that is fair and open for everyone to understand should write to the CRB NOW!!!
Raymond
Raymond
Bill Miller
New member
Raymond,
Glad to hear that Bob got back to you, but that certainly doesn't sound good.
Glad to hear that Bob got back to you, but that certainly doesn't sound good.
philstireservice
New member
My Audi never made 110 at the crank...more like 90-92.......
just forwarded last year's CRB note with additional comments and request for process in general and my car in particular.
well, actually sent it to the BOD and cc:ed the CRB and ITAC.
btw, Kirk is still part of the ITAC per the contact page info so sent it to him as well when adding the ITAC members.
philstireservice
New member
RSTPerformance
New member
Factory is 110 @ 5500 RPM... Add the Quattro header and you get 115 @ 5500 RPM. Not sure where 120hp comes from?
Raymond
RSTPerformance
New member
Phil-
If you get a chance please send me the info on the Audi motors, I have never seen anything posted above 115hp.
To all that have followed my drama-
End results... the "displacement to weight" ratio is on target for ITB and our performance has proven that the car is properly classed. The ITAC process obviosly does not work for all cars.
As promised by the chair of the CRB the November Fasttrack has my denied requests... oh wait, I must be blind, I don't see anything yet. 10 months, maybe we can get a year out of this request!
Raymond
If you get a chance please send me the info on the Audi motors, I have never seen anything posted above 115hp.
To all that have followed my drama-
End results... the "displacement to weight" ratio is on target for ITB and our performance has proven that the car is properly classed. The ITAC process obviosly does not work for all cars.
As promised by the chair of the CRB the November Fasttrack has my denied requests... oh wait, I must be blind, I don't see anything yet. 10 months, maybe we can get a year out of this request!
Raymond
gran racing
Super Moderator
A year? You're such an underachiever.
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
Raymond,
There is no dispacement to weight ratio in IT. You really need to read those emails from Bob more closely - or call me like I asked you to in an e-mail.