AspireTec Engineering  468
PrevPrev Go to previous topic
NextNext Go to next topic
Last Post 03 Feb 2015 09:37 AM by  The_Winch
ESP V8 guys have done it again! Nice!
 70 Replies
Sort:
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Page 3 of 4 << < 1234 > >>
Author Messages
gary p
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
Posts:2730


--
03 Dec 2013 06:08 PM
Posted By jfossum on 03 Dec 2013 02:38 PM
Seriously, I can see moving the WRX out. The STI/EVO nearly destroyed the class for good, and the timing for moving them out wasn't great, since the new boost rules kicked in the same year shortly followed by a bigger engine & turbo on the "base" WRX. I don't claim to be an expert on these cars, but it seems you could build a WRX that would be pretty close to the performance of the old STI in ESP trim.

The "bigger turbo" wasn't available until 2009.  The 2008+ WRX is already in ASP.  You probably didn't know because very few people are masochistic enough to campaign one there. 

 

Joseph Carozzoni
New Member
New Member
Posts:22


--
03 Dec 2013 06:16 PM

I sure hope this link does not show how rule changes are influenced!

http://www.vmsc.org/index.php?optio...pic=2143.0

This guy supports the rule changes, asks everyone to write letters (even if not in the class), even drafts the letter for them, and finally provides the link/instructions to submit the {possibly} bogus request.  I checked his times at Nationals, he still need to figure out how to beat 18 other cars  ;o)

mrazny
Basic Member
Basic Member
Posts:462


--
03 Dec 2013 06:22 PM
He's lobbying his position just like Fedja here is. His "draft a letter" isn't really much language at all. Next, if he did draft the language, don't you think the SEB and SPAC would notice that all these letters look exactly the same?

Give as much context and insight as you can within your letter, send your letter.

If only the fastest were eligible to write letters there'd be no letters at all (and we likely wouldn't have Street). Some might say that'd be for the better...
gary p
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
Posts:2730


--
03 Dec 2013 06:24 PM
Posted By Mario Linguini on 03 Dec 2013 06:16 PM

I sure hope this link does not show how rule changes are influenced!

http://www.vmsc.org/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=26&topic=2143.0

This guy supports the rule changes, asks everyone to write letters (even if not in the class), even drafts the letter for them, and finally provides the link/instructions to submit the {possibly} bogus request.  I checked his times at Nationals, he still need to figure out how to beat 18 other cars  ;o)

LOL at the guy with an Vega bitchin' about some other guy using a "loophole" to beat him in HS with some unspecified Subaru Wagon. 

Joseph Carozzoni
New Member
New Member
Posts:22


--
03 Dec 2013 09:47 PM

mraznyUser is Offline  Yes but no.  One is posting his views to this forum, the others is asking "anyone" to write potentially bogus E-mails to influence SEB decisions on making changes to classes.  Possibly, we should not only post our SCCA Membership Number, but also what class we participate in SCCA Solo.  Just a thought - if you have a dog (or cat) in the fight, I believe you should should voice your view. But if you're not in that class, well...focus on your class and not helping your friends in other classes.  All RWD "pony/muscle" cars should voice their view (right or wrong).  But a car in HS or AM should ***NOT*** writing letters to SEB asking (potentially) "I'm in this class". Help me out" - when you're not in that class.

BTW - I started SCCA in the 1960's as an SCCA Explorer (sub-16 year olds).  We were taught "Honesty and Integrity".  Ok - that may be obsolete now...But should it?

 

sjfehr
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts:634


--
03 Dec 2013 10:00 PM
Posted By Mario Linguini on 03 Dec 2013 09:47 PM

mraznyUser is Offline  Yes but no.  One is posting his views to this forum, the others is asking "anyone" to write potentially bogus E-mails to influence SEB decisions on making changes to classes.  Possibly, we should not only post our SCCA Membership Number, but also what class we participate in SCCA Solo.  Just a thought - if you have a dog (or cat) in the fight, I believe you should should voice your view. But if you're not in that class, well...focus on your class and not helping your friends in other classes.  All RWD "pony/muscle" cars should voice their view (right or wrong).  But a car in HS or AM should ***NOT*** writing letters to SEB asking (potentially) "I'm in this class". Help me out" - when you're not in that class.

BTW - I started SCCA in the 1960's as an SCCA Explorer (sub-16 year olds).  We were taught "Honesty and Integrity".  Ok - that may be obsolete now...But should it?

 

Where in that thread is anyone advocating lying or misleading?  Where is anyone suggesting writing bonus emails, or suggesting using false representation?  Are we reading the same thread?  FYI, VMSC is an indie autocross club that uses SCCA classing to stay consistent with the other clubs in the area, so VMSC members that aren't necessarily SCCA members are going to be impacted by the rule change, too.  Key difference being that only SCCA members have a voice in SCCA.  Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see anything untoward at all about the OP or any replies?

 

Not like he's trying to bribe people with "save the pony" t-shirts 

ileagle
New Member
New Member
Posts:41


--
04 Dec 2013 07:57 AM
Posted By Mario Linguini on 03 Dec 2013 06:16 PM

I sure hope this link does not show how rule changes are influenced!

http://www.vmsc.org/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=26&topic=2143.0

This guy supports the rule changes, asks everyone to write letters (even if not in the class), even drafts the letter for them, and finally provides the link/instructions to submit the {possibly} bogus request.  I checked his times at Nationals, he still need to figure out how to beat 18 other cars  ;o)

You got to love a guy who's only been in the class for 2 years, trying to get cars kicked out that have been in the class since 1989.

ileagle
New Member
New Member
Posts:41


--
04 Dec 2013 08:14 AM
No one was crying for cars to get reclassed when the winning margin was 1.000-3.000 seconds, and now we're upsetting the apple cart over 6 tenths? Co'mon Man, I make mistakes on course that cost more time than that.

The 3 years I've run ESP, a quarter to a third of the class has been AWD, maybe AWD is part of ESP's "resurgence". The lowest participation in ESP at nationals since 2006 was the one year that NO AWD cars showed up. A quick look at the results doesn't show a disporportionate grouping of AWD at the top either.

I guess with Mark going to CP, and kicking out the WRX/DSM, we can get a Mustang in the top spot. And if Dave can get the Mustangs kicked out as well, then maybe a 15 year old Camaro can win
MrAWD
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts:880


--
04 Dec 2013 10:46 AM
Posted By mrazny on 03 Dec 2013 06:22 PM
He's lobbying his position just like Fedja here is. His "draft a letter" isn't really much language at all. Next, if he did draft the language, don't you think the SEB and SPAC would notice that all these letters look exactly the same?

Give as much context and insight as you can within your letter, send your letter.

If only the fastest were eligible to write letters there'd be no letters at all (and we likely wouldn't have Street). Some might say that'd be for the better...

I guess I missed that part where I was asking everyone to send a letter where I tell you what to say and where to send it!

I was hoping to have some insights on what actually brought this proposal to the Fast Track and to see who is behind it. I have never asked anyone to do anything about that! If you feel you need to write a letter or two, do so regardless you are for or against it.

The only thing I voiced here is that it looked like that someone who is miles away from understanding anything in this sport (aside from legal part, as it looks like) complaining about things in this class. And, from the above link it looks like one of those guys showed up.

Fedja


MrAWD
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts:880


--
04 Dec 2013 10:59 AM
Posted By sjfehr on 03 Dec 2013 10:00 PM

Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see anything untoward at all about the OP or any replies?

I guess, just find someone to be your witness and tell them what to say is perfectly fine for you! Even if there is nothing illegal for his actions, if you see all of that as OK, than you are just different from where I stand!

Fedja


Z3papa
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts:525


--
04 Dec 2013 11:37 AM
Posted By Mario Linguini on 03 Dec 2013 09:47 PM

mraznyUser is Offline  Yes but no.  One is posting his views to this forum, the others is asking "anyone" to write potentially bogus E-mails to influence SEB decisions on making changes to classes.  Possibly, we should not only post our SCCA Membership Number, but also what class we participate in SCCA Solo.  Just a thought - if you have a dog (or cat) in the fight, I believe you should should voice your view. But if you're not in that class, well...focus on your class and not helping your friends in other classes.  All RWD "pony/muscle" cars should voice their view (right or wrong).  But a car in HS or AM should ***NOT*** writing letters to SEB asking (potentially) "I'm in this class". Help me out" - when you're not in that class.

BTW - I started SCCA in the 1960's as an SCCA Explorer (sub-16 year olds).  We were taught "Honesty and Integrity".  Ok - that may be obsolete now...But should it?

 

 

I don't think you have to be actively running in a particular class or group to be able to express an opinion on an issue out for comment.  People change or are contemplating changing classes all the time.  Class changes have a rippling effect on the group as a whole.  Does this mean I'm going to write a letter on this specific proposal, not necessarily but I should not be prevented from expressing my thoughts even if I don't run in ESP. 
MrAWD
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts:880


--
04 Dec 2013 03:28 PM
Posted By Z3papa on 04 Dec 2013 11:37 AM
I don't think you have to be actively running in a particular class or group to be able to express an opinion on an issue out for comment.  People change or are contemplating changing classes all the time.  Class changes have a rippling effect on the group as a whole.  Does this mean I'm going to write a letter on this specific proposal, not necessarily but I should not be prevented from expressing my thoughts even if I don't run in ESP. 

If you would have to be part of the ESP, than all of the stuff that came from my end is worthless!! I am trying to get my BS car to work properly and my DSM that I used to run in ESP is a thing of the past. Or perhaps, I could instead start to reclass all of the faster cars from there so I would be able to win...hmmm, guys, could you write a letter to SAC to move all of the S2000, Corvettes, Pontiacs, Skys, and anything else that is way to fast for BS into the AS or even better SS, because they don't fit properly in there! While there, just in case, add that older generations of EVOs and STIs have to carry weight plates to match the weight of the latest generation of  EVOs so things would be easier! Thank you for support!!!

Fedja

mrazny
Basic Member
Basic Member
Posts:462


--
04 Dec 2013 03:55 PM
Wow, this is circling in too many directions to keep track of...

The SPAC will only act on things that it *also* sees merit in. It wouldn't only move the AWD cars because 50 letters are for it and 2 are against it. The for it have to make a case that they agree makes some sense. The 50 letters means they'll spend more of their unpaid volunteer time discussing it and trying to see the merit.

This move, if it happens, will be executed if it makes a totality of sense, not because of some guy whining. As to Dave on that site, to me who is uninvolved emotionally, I don't see whining. He might have a point of view that can be disagreed with, but he certainly is showing less emotion about it than some on here. There's no problem with emotion if it has substance behind it. When AWD in ESP has been a piece of discussion for this long, I don't see why it *has* to be coming from some guy whining. Dave also isn't automatically the origin of the proposal. His post is after the fasttrack.

If you actually believe that the SEB and ACs don't weigh all these factors you guys seem to be afraid of, I don't know what to tell you. It's simply not fact. However, the overall health is not great for SP. The origin of *this* specific proposal could be coming from somewhere entirely different. I don't see a need to jump to conclusions. State your opinion, state some facts to back it, state your involvement with the classes effected, see where it goes.

Joseph Carozzoni
New Member
New Member
Posts:22


--
04 Dec 2013 06:31 PM

I agree that the SEB and the eventual authorizing BOD will make the right decisions.  I simply don’t think it is appropriate for someone to attempt to sway them with a mass mailing campaign that is not fully based on familiarity with the class issues.  Some corrections:

Sjfehr – “Where in that thread is anyone advocating lying or misleading?  Where is anyone suggesting writing bonus emails, or suggesting using false representation?”

Not what I said.  I said the possibility exists for “potentially bogus” letters.  Others in the class or  familiar with the class would not be bogus.  However, if a “friend” who didn’t Solo but instead did Road Rally wrote a letter to support the class changes – that is potentially bogus.

Z3papa – “I don't think you have to be actively running in a particular class or group to be able to express an opinion on an issue out for comment.”

Possibly, it really depends on what your intent is.  In B-Stock at regional events, I see the difference a course can have on RWD, FWD, and AWD cars.  Drivers in Corvettes would like to see a dry course with some decent straights.  The Evo and STI drivers are hoping for snow (Possibly a little exaggeration here  ;o)  -  you get the point.  I could probably write an informed letter stating what I see going on in ESP.  But I think it is only appropriate if the letter I write mentions “While I’m in BS, I think I have relevant experience to commet”.  Again, I think the key is my intent – sharing knowledge versus pretending to have knowledge to help a friend (these are the two extremes, many points in-between).

My favorite class is C-Prepared – the Heavy Metal.  That is a class that historically has special status in Solo.  F-Stock, to a lesser degree, another historically special class.  IMHO – reserving these classes for high-powered RWD cars have been a plus for Solo.  Simply an observation and no advocacy of any kind intended.

MrAWD
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts:880


--
05 Dec 2013 09:16 AM
I guess one more car needs to be added to the list of those helped with the boost - 2015 Mustang. Now how likely they will come with all wheels driven?
mlane350z
Basic Member
Basic Member
Posts:238


--
05 Dec 2013 09:19 AM
Big Power + IRS = ASP for the new mustang IMO.
ratt_finkel
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
Posts:1650


--
05 Dec 2013 10:19 AM
Posted By mlane350z on 05 Dec 2013 09:19 AM
Big Power + IRS = ASP for the new mustang IMO.
You forgot to add big weight.  Just like the new(er) Camaro.

mrazny
Basic Member
Basic Member
Posts:462


--
05 Dec 2013 11:36 AM
Mario, many people don't read fasttracks. Getting the word out on forums is one way of engaging with more people. Yes Dave didn't say "well only Solo people should respond", but he stated the context, and his reason why he supports it and then noted that people can send a letter to the SEB. the "incendiary part is..

"The SCCA has just proposed moving the AWD turbos out of ESP and putting them in ASP with other AWD turbos. I would really appreciate it if those of you who are SCCA members would write to the SCCA in support of this proposed rule change. Something simple, like"

I guess? Since he's talking to autocrossers that are in an independent club, not all of them are SCCA members. He didn't say "hey rally guys! send letters for me!", just that he'd appreciate support.

I just don't think this is as bad as you sound like you think it is. People are allowed to get the word out and state their case.
mlane350z
Basic Member
Basic Member
Posts:238


--
05 Dec 2013 12:34 PM
Posted By ratt_finkel on 05 Dec 2013 10:19 AM
Posted By mlane350z on 05 Dec 2013 09:19 AM
Big Power + IRS = ASP for the new mustang IMO.
You forgot to add big weight.  Just like the new(er) Camaro.

No, not really. Check out the initial curb weights...

Joseph Carozzoni
New Member
New Member
Posts:22


--
05 Dec 2013 07:38 PM
mraznyUser is Offline- I fully agree with your response - as long as their intent is based on knowledge and experience and not "helping a friend without actually knowing what the issues are".  Agree?
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Page 3 of 4 << < 1234 > >>


SPS 88x31 Button Woodhouse Motorsports
Vorshlag 88x31 Button G-Loc Button
Sunoco 88x31 Button

Advertise on SCCAForums.com and reach thousands of visitors per day!

SafeRacer FREE SHIPPING over $99

Shop for Pirelli tires at Tire Rack. blank




Sunoco Bottom 468x60 Banner