Proposed amendment to Class 4 Regs

[Peter Carmichael]

Final thought, as I haven't really understood this at the first go... and aving asked mark to shut down debate this might be a topic for 2008...

 

I can see we are to have classes mixing 1A and 1B (radial) tyre users. Could the speed trap mechanism be used to ensure that abuses of the spirit of the championship are not made. i.e. in any class, the max permitted trap speed for 1B users should be lower than for 1A users. Consider Ken's car on list 1As as being a worthy competitor for my car on list 1Bs (minus the sequential gearbox, which as Tony has pointed out gives no runtime advantage, but does make consistent runtimes easier to achieve).

 

 

[Jason Plato]

Quick was just refering to speed traps, at the majority of venues where we dont have speed traps the only measure is the stopwatch .

 

Your theory *may* be true at Curborough, but the other venues where we have speed traps this year are not really relative to power output. Gearing also plays a role. Plus many venues don't have speed traps.

 

At Mira its dependant on how much bottle you have to keep your foot in and where you brake.Compare the speeds between a 190 bhp car and a 250bhp car and its not much at all - its mostly driver dependant. A powerful x flow romped through the mira trap faster than me this year , and yet we were swapping 10th's at other venues. Aintree is largely dependant on diff ratio, I was on the limiter in 6th 40m before the line and yet a R400 with 30 bhp less recorded almost the same speed with a taller diff. Shelsley walsh is entirely dependant on your exit from the preceding corner. One solution is of course that we buy our own sped trap and set it up at the venues !. Bike engined cars may go through the trap at the same speed or often less and yet make up loads of time in the twisties.......

 

The issue that has been created with the regs for 2007 based upon your estimated bhp outputs is that there isn't any prescribed class rules and regulations and its all very loose and your competitors in class are dependant on who makes a protest which would all be very tedious. This could result in either grumpy competitors protesting at every opportunity if they get beaten or the championship being devalued as a result of the paddock power rumours.

 

I would seriously consider postponing some aspects of this radical overhaul, where so many aspects are being changed in one hit and consider a more simplified fettling of the 2006 structure and further developing it in 2008. Focusing on publicity, novice days, introducing new entrants and permitting additional cars in classes and making folk aware that power is only one aspect of "being competitive", I fear that a unenforceable regulation animal is being created that could actually put off newcomers and present experienced runners?.

 

 

Dave

 

 

 

 

 

here is C7 TOP

South Wales AO

 

Edited by - Dave Jackson on 23 Nov 2006 08:00:53

 

Edited by - Dave Jackson on 23 Nov 2006 08:10:43

[Irrelevant]

The club could buy a couple of these and take readings at more than one carefully selected point.

[neil.cavanagh]

Peter,

I agree that if you have a lardy ar8ed car as well as a low powered car you can't expect to be at the top. My point was that there is a big weight difference between cars. I could probably get mine down to low 510kgs or so, but it would cost serious money and compromise the car for the road to go below that. A SV is inheritantly about 25kg heavier. I'm stuck with that... I don't fit in a regular 7. (and a diet wouldn't help (its to do with a 35" inside leg and size 12 feet) before any smart ar8e comes along!!! 😬 😬)

 

The way I see it I have a perfect excuse for being 1st loser! blame the lardy car! 😬 😬 Maybe I do have racing driver blood in me?? *eek*