|
Post by Bruce on Sept 11, 2006 12:10:48 GMT -8
It looks like there will be a few Vee's entered. I used the on-line registration and found it to be easy. See you there.
|
|
|
Post by dave FF 50-aka "Harm" on Sept 19, 2006 12:42:25 GMT -8
Driver's meeting @ Laguna With two board members as our fellow racers, we have good representation from Grp 4.
Peter Nosler emailed this to the Ford guys. Food for thought. I personally would rather race with Vees than a few of the Ford guys. And I would definely rather race with Vees and not grp 2 with FA,FM, etc. And by the way; oily, yes, but not bloody. dave jalen
Peter, Thanks for sending out a note to everyone for a heads up to the drivers meeting. While you do not agree with the safety issue, 98% of drivers do. True, there is some % of argument about it is more appealing and fun racing only with your class, the major reason is safety ( speed differential ) . This is very evident as I talked to 98% of all drivers in our group about this. It's the bloody truth. Just talk to the ones of us that have been in the wrong place at the wrong time the last couple of years and have our cars turned into a pile of metal. Look what happen on the most recent weekend with a Stillwell ( all 4 corners torn off his car). Speed differential? Never have seen that happen before. The two ideas the were presented to Mike were not my ideas. Both came from V drivers while discussing the bloody issue. There were a few others that drivers had, those are just two that seem to make folks more interested. I hope we can all find a solution before we lose too many unhappy drivers.
I have sent an email to Blake a few weeks ago to get a list of FV drivers so we can give them a heads up , but have not heard back from him. It would be nice to have one FV driver as a contact point to relay info to the other drivers as we move this issue forward. If you talk to Blake I think that person is Rick Schick from what I can gather.
Your supporter!!!
Chuck
At 1:29 PM -0700 9/18/06, Peter Nosler wrote: >FF Race Fans >News: > >1. SFR Board >2. Formula "V" issues >3. Laguna Drivers Meeting >4. Wheel >5. Gas Cards >6. New Class: F1000 > > >1. San Francisco Region Board >As the current board is running with no opposition this election it >seems I will be serving my third two year term starting next >January. I have really enjoyed working for the club and we have a >really terrific board. Racers in FF, FV, FC, SRF and SMT plus SOLO >plus a Steward make for well balanced and very active board. The >amount of work is daunting and the hours that Mike Smith puts in as >RE amounts to at least 20 hours a week in addition to race weekends. >The word "board" is very misleading. This group is really the >management committee that runs the club down to the smallest details. > >Obviously there is a certain level of satisfaction in how the club >is doing in our FF group as the board hears only rarely from any FF >competitor. Last race Chuck Horn weighed in on running with the FV's >(see below) but that's it for this year. Even if you don't have any >big complaints, surely you have an idea or two on how we could do >something better. Drop me or any board member an email or better >still give a call (cell 650 867-7248) and share an idea or question. > >2. Formula "V" issues >Chuck Horn circulated a letter to Mike Smith forcefully urging that >FF and CF no longer run with FV. While I did not agree with Chuck's >bloody use of the safety issue as the selling point, I do agree that >discussing the make up of our 7 run groups is a very valid topic. >Especially so when the group 4 numbers hit 45 at the last race. >Chuck's efforts included two ideas on how to develop partial or >total separation from the FV's. First idea is to run fewer races for >FF and for FV. FF might have 4 races with FV not running those >events and FV would have 4 races with FF not running those events >and then we would have 4 races with FF and FV running together as we >do now. A partial separation with no scheduling impact, just an 8 >race season rather than a 12 race season. The second idea is to >eliminate bonus races and shorten the race times for all run groups >to 20 or 25 minutes. This would then allow 8 run groups (FF and FV >having their own run groups) instead of the 7 run groups we now have. > >My own feelings revolve around the number of FF (FF + CF) entries >and the number of FV entries. This year so far we have had a high of >27 (last race) and a low of 18 and the FV's have a high of 18 (last >race) and a low of 13. When we merged with the FV's a few years ago >the club made it clear that you really need numbers above 30 to have >a run group to yourself. Seven run groups works best and with 250 to >300 (or more) entries you have to have 35 to 40 cars per run group. >If we can consistently get entries above 30 then we have an argument. > >And we must not forget that we were granted a real gift to have our >qualifying split up so FF's and FV/F500's each have their own >qualifying session. Many of the other multiple run groups have asked >for the same consideration and have been turned down. > >Another issue is split starts. When we have had split starts the >stewards have been most cooperative in putting the FV/F500's rather >close to the back of the FF group rather than the usual half a lap >back. This amounts to some 10 to 15 seconds back which means the >lead FF's come up to them a bit sooner but this gap represents about >10% of the slower FV lap times. Not too big a deal. And for the lead >FV folks it is truly a big deal. The fast FV's without the split >start would have to start amidst the slower FF's (CF's) which often >really messes up their starts. So this accommodation does not seem >to be so serious. > >On all of these FV issues you may feel differently, very >differently. Let me know. We have a group 4 drivers meeting at the >next race at Laguna and that is a great time to review any of these >issues if there is sentiment to make some changes. > >3. Laguna Drivers Meeting >We have not had a group 4 drivers meeting this year so our Friday, >September 29 meeting will be our first. We will have just an hour so >we need to make the most of our time together. Here is a list of >topics including the two FV issues and I would hope that you can >suggest additional topics. It's mostly our meeting and I am unaware >of any particular steward or administrative issues that are already >on the agenda. >a. possible changes to the group 4 run grouping. >b. FF/FV split starts >c. Desired changes to the Thunderhill new paved areas outside >turns 8, 12/13, and 14/15. >d. Tech issues >e. F1000 is now a class, impact on FF's and FV's >f. The group 4 gas card program >g. Promotional ideas for more FF's and FV's (SCCA School, >Wheel articles, etc.) > >4. The Wheel >Changes are brewing for the Wheel. Upgrading the quality of the >Wheel seems in order but exactly what to do and how much to spend >are, as always, the issue. We are most likely going to switch to a >"magazine" format that simply means that the size will be about 8.5" >x 11" and stapled rather than the folded newspaper format. Modest >upgrade in paper quality. > >I am sending at the same time as this email an email titled "Wheel >Survey". It will not take more than 5 minutes to complete and could >really help us in figuring out how best to make the Wheel a much >better publication. This survey is just going to the FF folks. If it >produces good feedback we may go to more members. > >5. Gas Cards >Again this year we are on track to distribute 50 of the $50 Shell >gas cards to the workers. This Group 4 program is really appreciated >by the workers and I feel strongly that the program should continue. >Next year I will work a bit harder convincing you that this deserves >your attention (and contribution) as the income shortfall this year >was a bit steep. > >6. New Class: F1000 >SCCA National recently approved F1000 as a new national class. Think >of this class as a Formula Continental with a 170HP 1000cc Suzuki >motorcycle engine/sequential transmission package. The class has >been around in England and Europe for several years and there are >several car builders both domestic and foreign. Cars are said to be >race ready for some $35k. I plan to test drive a car later this year >and will let you know how it goes. Predictions for the success range >from "why will it be any different than the failed Fran Am class to >this could be something like the next really popular formula car. > >
|
|