Any updates on the AI race? I was told there was lots of contact and stuff.
Printable View
Any updates on the AI race? I was told there was lots of contact and stuff.
http://www.mylaps.com/results/showru...592&perclass=1
Martin 1st
Patterson 5th
Schlender 6th
A gutted hood relocates weight. These quarter windows are not lighter. Did I mention the steel marine style air scoops? Come on guys, relax a bit.
I must've missed the part in the rule book where it says "If it doesn't say you can, you can't, unless it doesn't relocate the weight."Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Fernandez
Yeah - who put the mothballs in my gas tank? :wink:
How many of these National Championships will have to have an asterisk next to it before all the regions stop doing things their own way?
Lexan windows on the winning car and a DQ for a strut tower bar mounting infraction.
I dont get it.
Too much power on the dyno I get.
Is this some ones opinion that the strut tower bar is giving a advantage or do they have facts to back it up like a dyno sheet.
Sounds like lexan windows should have been a DQ or strut tower brace should have been a fix it ticket.
Anyway great racing guys. Congrats to everyone.
:twisted:Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchntx
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Fernandez
So it's OK to have illegal parts if you implement them poorly???
Richard P.
Oh just wait till you here the poop from tech today after the AI race.Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchntx
jb
Where's that <popcorn> emoticon when you need it.Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffburch
Do tell.... Do tell... Enquiring minds want to know. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffburch
Naa. Wanna see spin in it's natural state. You can though pull up dyno form and brush up on what it says.
jb
http://www.jpmotorsports.biz/smilies/popcorn.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by Fbody383
I'm going to temper my frustration.Quote:
Originally Posted by GlennCMC70
First of all, get your facts right. There was questions about my track width - my wheels did not stick out past my fenders. At that time, there was no track width rule. The 4th gen cars did have tires sticking out past their fenders, as many used 3rd gen rims to increase their track width.
In my case, the entire group was allowed to decide to leave it be, and it was dropped.
In this case, the racers were not notified.
If the guy's windows weren't a performance advantage, then why do we refuse to permit lexan windows?
Glenn - you, of all, people cannot defend this. You are, and have always been, black and white on the rules.
Send him home? No. But crown him the 2010 CMC National Champion? Certainly not. The decision effects contingency $$$ for ALL the finishers.
It's the NATIONALS, not a Regional event.
I have no more time to spend discussing this.
Every one should be worried about me coming to texas and building a new car. :P
You are right in that I am a black and white rules kind of guy. However, some understanding should be given.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Ginsberg
Lets look at JK for instance. He was DQ'ed and had a means to resolve the infraction. Had DB been DQ'ed in a qual race, he would have been afforded the same option of resolving the infraction. There is also the ability to have all racers involved agree or disagree to allow the offending driver to stay and race if the infraction cant be resolved.
In the case of ES, he could remove the windows, or run w/ what he has. This year I do not recall votes being offered (from what I'm told). Al made the decision for you.
Al issued many, many, many fix it tickets to the CMC field at this event. And in fact the person who I'm told got the most is a car you crowned SoCal CMC Champ and who you feel should now be CMC National Champ.
So, just as ES's regional director allowed him to run this way or just flat never pointed it out, is no different than how one of your own regional guys has similar issues. Your on Al's ass for not DQ'ing a guy, but you didn’t follow your own advice w/in your own region to those you crown CMC Champ.
As for your legality..... semantics. Your right, your wheels didn’t stick out past YOUR fenders, but they would have stuck out past an OEM fender. You are correct that 2 4th gens there had 3rd gen wheels w/ similar wheel/fender issues. All were afforded the option of staying and racing w/ what they have.
As has been mentioned before, if you want ES DQ'ed, DL will get DQ'ed along w/ yourself. So the Champ will then be KO.
The above is just my opinion.
Bring it big boy. Got a new one in the works myself.Quote:
Originally Posted by K Shaw
I predict you'll have contact just loading it on the trailer.Quote:
Originally Posted by GlennCMC70
I hope I'm using your trailer then.Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchntx
I'll say it again - you need to get your facts straight. Especially since you didn't attend this year. So, realistically, you should keep out of this, since you did not witness a single thing at the 2010 Nats.Quote:
Originally Posted by GlennCMC70
There may have been many, many fix it tickets issued at this year's Nats (your words), but we (the racers) didn't know about them, as they were not discussed in the driver's meeting.
My car did not receive a single "fix it ticket" at the 2010 Nationals, so I'm at a loss to understand why you are saying otherwise.
How you come to the conclusion that my car should be National Champ is completely beyond me - not once did I say that, anywhere.
You, Al and Todd are very adept at trying to turn this around and point the finger at the person calling them out for the mistake. Stop twisting this around - Al made a significant mistake, and he refuses to admit it.
Where you come up with this shit is beyond me - I didn't say anything about Erik's regional director not catching stuff on his car, so remove that from the argument. JK's car was found with illegal chassis stiffening - that means it was missed in TX for 2 or so years. So what? It was found at the Nats - enough said.Quote:
So, just as ES's regional director allowed him to run this way or just flat never pointed it out, is no different than how one of your own regional guys has similar issues. Your on Al's ass for not DQ'ing a guy, but you didn’t follow your own advice w/in your own region to those you crown CMC Champ.
A CA AI driver was found with 10" wide wheels - I haven't caught that all year either. So what? It was found at the Nats - enough said.
The key here is.....this is the NATIONALS.
Yes, they were. And you're proving my point yet again - ALL the driver's were notified. Not so at this years event.Quote:
As for your legality..... semantics. Your right, your wheels didn’t stick out past YOUR fenders, but they would have stuck out past an OEM fender. You are correct that 2 4th gens there had 3rd gen wheels w/ similar wheel/fender issues. All were afforded the option of staying and racing w/ what they have.
I didn't finish the damn race due to a mechanical failure - I finished DFL. I'm not saying I should be the National Champ - don't muddy the waters with inconsequential junk.
Additionally, how should I be DQ'd from the Championship race? Because I didn't go to tech while being towed in?? Fair enough - I'll take the DQ because it doesn't mean anything.
Crowning a CMC champ with lexan windows should not happen, plain and simple.
Let me be clear yet again - the car crowned the National Champ had lexan windows. By Al's own admission, he knew about it on Wednesday. Not a single other driver was notified about this very blatant rules violation. It looks poorly on the class.
I'm going back to work.....
:mrgreen:Quote:
Originally Posted by GlennCMC70
I predict contact with the wife when I UNLOAD it from the trailer.Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchntx
Revkah and I discussed moving to Texas this AM.....Quote:
Originally Posted by K Shaw
If I could go back and do it again, I would LOVE to be DQ'ed in the qual race.Quote:
Originally Posted by GlennCMC70
I was impounded once over the first 2 days, weight and my car was checked for safety items and what appeared to be chassis stiffening (they looked at the subframe rails. Wish the other item was found I would have taken that sucker out quick.
Last thing in the world is for me to be labeled a cheater (esp as a regional director). More importantly, how does this make Maximum Motorsports (strut tower bar) and my primary sponsor Hanksville (who built my cage) look? This is what I am more embarrassed about :oops:.
You know Dave ... you are a class act.
Not so much worried about yourself as you are those around you.
Refreshing ... makes me want to move to RMR ...
so far I love it. But I think i may have brought a brunch of rain with me.Quote:
Originally Posted by nasa-rm
Austin is fun and north Austin around the roundrock Georgetown area is nice. Oh and cheaper than Denver. Oh and I gave all of my snow removal tools away.
Rich was asking me about the STB and I told him I didnt think there was anything weird about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by nasa-rm
Your right, I wasnt there. I did however spend alot of time on the phone w/ Al over the last few days. Your were specifically mentioned as having a fix it ticket. My facts are straight, as they were presented to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Ginsberg
As for not being present, thats never stopped your involvment in any way.
Because Al told me so today. But lets redirect back to Don's car. Care to respond to that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Ginsberg
So I expect you will be calling for a DQ on Don as well, right? Fair is fair. He was allowed to run in a manner less than 100% legal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Ginsberg
Yes, they were. And you're proving my point yet again - ALL the driver's were notified. Not so at this years event.[/quote]Quote:
As for your legality..... semantics. Your right, your wheels didn’t stick out past YOUR fenders, but they would have stuck out past an OEM fender. You are correct that 2 4th gens there had 3rd gen wheels w/ similar wheel/fender issues. All were afforded the option of staying and racing w/ what they have.
I guess you think that is a right you have. Sorry to inform you, but it is not. Al makes that call.
I dont think you should be, never said it. But reporting to impound was required to maintain a legal status. You did not, but was given a place above Rob and Dave, not DFL.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Ginsberg
Ya know, my car has had non-OEM window tint on it since the day it was built. Should I send back my National Champ awards?Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Ginsberg
I think your expecting a level of involvment that is not obligated to you in any way. Al has that right. Its his show. Deal w/ it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Ginsberg
I would side w/ you more if this was discovered post qual race. Even more so if it was a tech item.
Your being a poor sport at this point.
I would like to see pics.Quote:
Originally Posted by K Shaw
You could mosey on over to the Maximum motorsports web site and look for a STB for a 4.6 sn95 mustang. Cant help you on the cage mounting points.Quote:
Originally Posted by GlennCMC70
Wow, that site is not navigation friendly.
Post a link?
http://www.maximummotorsports.com/st...roducts_id=600Quote:
Originally Posted by GlennCMC70
No kidding. I had to click on chassis stiffening & bracing AND THEN strut towers AND THEN 96-97 Mustang. The nerve of them. :roll:
Hey D. Francis, I just got to give someone computer help. :D
You have taught me well master.
Your "facts" are incorrect. There was no 'fix it ticket' noted in my logbook. You weren't there, so telling me what did or didn't happen doesn't work very well.Quote:
Originally Posted by GlennCMC70
So, let me say it again - there was no 'fix it ticket' noted in my logbook. The car passed each tech inspection, including the initial tech by Covini on Wednesday evening.Quote:
Because Al told me so today.
Unless, the "fix it" you are referring to was the missing car classifications and numbers on the front and back. Which was fixed Wednesday evening.
Is that the same as lexan windows?? Let's stay on point.
No, I won't redirect back to Don's car - you are still obfuscating the real issue - naming a National Champ with lexan windows, and not a single CMC competitor was aware of this issue. Let's stay on point.Quote:
But lets redirect back to Don's car. Care to respond to that?
What you've been doing is pointing out various items that direct attention away from the real issue - a car was deemed the National Champion that has lexan windows, and not a single other CMC driver was made aware of Al's decision of a "fix it ticket".Quote:
I dont see it as a mistake. But rather a decition he made that likely differs from mine or yours. Its his to make. You are in no greater position to say he is wrong than I am to say he's not. You say I'm turing it around on you, but really I'm just offering a counter POV.
Ok, I'll bite. Just so we're all on the same page - you are intimating that Don's missing dash plates are the exact same performance advantage as lexan windows?Quote:
So I expect you will be calling for a DQ on Don as well, right? Fair is fair. He was allowed to run in a manner less than 100% legal.
Clearly, one could argue the weight difference. Let's see.....less than 1lb of sheet aluminum vs. two glass windows replaced with lexan. Same?
Al notified all the CMC2 drivers that a CMC2 car didn't meet the track width rule by 1/8". He left it up to the drivers to decide. He wasn't consistent in letting the CMC driver's make the same decision. He didn't even let us know there was a car with lexan windows.Quote:
I guess you think that is a right you have. Sorry to inform you, but it is not. Al makes that call.
My car was on a tow hook. It's finishing position, prior to the DQ's, was 7th. You need to read the CCR's (section 17.1) - top 4 are required to go to impound, unless the driver is unsure of his/her's finishing position (I was well aware of my finishing position). There is nothing in the 2010 National SUPPS about a towed vehicle required to go to impound, so the CCR's are our guide in this case.Quote:
I dont think you should be, never said it. But reporting to impound was required to maintain a legal status. You did not, but was given a place above Rob and Dave, not DFL.
Driver's meeting announcements by the Group Race Director supersede the CCR's, and the SUPPS. There was no mention in the driver's meeting of a vehicle being required to go to impound if it's on a tow hook. As such, I followed the CCR's. Was I required to go to impound? Not according to the CCR's.
Rob and Dave have DQ's, are not DFL as they do not get a finishing position. My finishing position, given I was a race starter, and they were DQ'd, was DFL. In this case, 5th. According to the CCR's, not required to go to impound.
But, we're getting off point again.
Window tint the same as lexan windows?? Again, obfuscating the real issue at hand. Let's stay on point.Quote:
Ya know, my car has had non-OEM window tint on it since the day it was built. Should I send back my National Champ awards?
Wow - I'm being a poor sport. For being dissatisfied about a car with lexan windows being named the 2010 National Champion.Quote:
Your being a poor sport at this point.
Glenn - are are defending an indefensible position, and using tactics that draw attention away from the real issue. I'm staying on point.
Clearly, without a doubt, I'm wrong.
Great. Sounds like we have a even trade of mitch for David or will we have to sweeten the deal?Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchntx
Adam ... good luck on this one. The wagons are obviously circled. You are wrong because Glenn said Al said so.
So those "fingers" that attach to the firewall are with 18" of where a knee bar attaches to the cage?Quote:
7.6.2 One bolt in stay rod may be fitted between the upper front strut towers and between each strut tower
and the firewall, as long as the firewall attachment point is not within 18" of a roll cage attachment point on
the other side of the firewall.
That tells me where cage bars intersect not where a knee bar runs. If its where the knee bar runs, ANY 3 point or 4 point is illegal.Quote:
a roll cage attachment point on the other side of the firewall
And if that's the case, why set a racer up for failure?
Say ....
The rest of that rule is jibberish.Quote:
One bolt in, 2 point stay rod may be fitted between the upper front strut towers.
I'm just wondering how long it took GL and AG to link together all the quotes, counter-quotes, and quotes of quotes....
I don't have that much time in my day to put all that together...
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchntx
The cage had bars going from the A-pillar down tubes forward to the foot well/firewall for foot protection (fully legal). The car also had a strut tower brace mounted in the engine compartment (also fully legal). The distance on the firewall from the foot protection tube to the strut tower mount was less than 18" (not legal).
Richard P.
Got it!Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardP
GL AG AF TC DO DG DB BFD SFM GTFOH .... does any one have a line-up card?Quote:
Originally Posted by marshall_mosty