Rules query

[philip myatt]

Dear all

Important information for your consideration.

The club has been asked by a competitor to clarify part of the following rule.
Rule 5.7.1
Removal or addition of material in the induction and exhaust ports is permitted.

To be completely precise this must also be read in conjunction with other parts of the rules.

However, the main thrust of the question looks at the word "or". What does it make the rule mean?

Does it mean "and" or "either" or other variations, can you add and remove material or are they mutually exclusive.

This has been discussed at considerable length by the technical & management committee and legal opinion sought.

Very compelling arguments have been put forward to support both sides of the debate. The end result of all this debate is that no definitive answer can be given.

Philip

[Paul Robertson]

Just to make my customers aware that this problem will not affect any of them .Non of our engines have had both processes done,we only ever remove material.

[philip myatt]

Well, we now have the definitive answer, Trevor's protest has ensured that we now know exactly how the current scrutineer interprets the rule.
Was it what you thought?
This post was read over 100 times, not many responses though.

See also "rule changes thread".

[Geoff Archer]

i cant see a problem with the heads, yes it has now come to light that the majority of the members miss read the rule, lets just change the rule to and and remove,

i hear some people say but the cost, i reply everything costs, to me the heads cost little to do, it only costs if you cant do them, for example i dont have a dyno, so my dyno costs can and are about a grand, i dont have a circuit so my testing can be a grand, so whats the difference??

[Francis Rottenburg]

"It only costs if you can't do them...." seems to be the point here.  If we use standard heads then everyone has the same and the racing gets less expensive. 

Also, arguably 2cv heads will become more and more scarce.  The more we take them and hack them around the less there will be.  Then the club will start casting heads etc. etc. £££

The paradox to all this is there is something in the club history that has smiled on amateur/professional engineers being allowed to try things within the rules.

I suspect if you ran standard cars then the existing fast teams would be the front runners simply because they are slicker at pit stops and race craft but at least the slower guys could stay in the tow for a few laps....

Perhaps there should be a rule that says "No car in the 24 hour race may have more than one previous series champion as a driver."  That would even things up a little as well.....  :)

[Martin Harrold]

We had 27 cars on the grid this year, and there are over 40 registered drivers, presumably each with a car. There are many more 'once a year for the 24hr' cars out there. The track is licensed for, I think, 46 2CV's, so the target must be to get that number on the grid.

Francis is dead right - experienced teams will always get the best out of any car, but we must make it as simple as possible for any car / team to join the grid in the true spirit of 'cheap racing'.

I'm quite convinced that by allowing the expense to creep up, eg, by allowing the adding of metal to the head can never be cheap, then every small stage has a marginally negative effect on 24hr grid numbers.

Lots of ideas are already being aired for the future, perhaps a College Cup for genuine college cars, perhaps a Saga Challenge for teams with most drivers over a certain age, etc. But such efforts may be negated if we get people interested and then they find the prep work is just too much time and cost.

All those people who have invested in 'added metal' heads have been disappointed by the Scrutes / Stewards decision, and I sympathise with them. But every one who had one done must have felt that perhaps they were engaged in pushing the limits of the 'cheap racing' ethos just a bit further than was intended when the club was formed.

And remember, if the Land Rover carb is adopted and found to be quicker, that could be £200 per engine, so at least £400 for the 24hr. It keeps on creeping up.