|
|
Post by dave FF 50-aka "Harm" on Jun 30, 2005 15:12:41 GMT -8
Say, did anybody else notice that we will have a huge turn out? 12FFs;20CFs;17FVs;3F5s entered = 52 total!
dave
|
|
|
|
Post by qposner on Jul 6, 2005 17:24:24 GMT -8
I just saw that today. I gotta say, I'm not terribly excited by this...  |
|
|
|
Post by dave FF 50-aka "Harm" on Jul 6, 2005 18:21:15 GMT -8
LISTEN UP!!!!
Peter was able to get the "powers that be" to agree to the same split qualifing sessions (Fri & Sun) as we had last event. I think Vees first for 10-15 minutes then Fords for 10-15 mins. Let's all try to play nice and line up on grid in order of expected lap time (fastest to slowest). Please be honest in your appraisal of your own driving ability.
When you see Peter on pregrid, be sure to thank him.
Also, if you have not done so, why not contribute to the gas card fund for the workers. Peter will gladly accept cash or checks.
dave jalen
|
|
|
|
Post by qposner on Jul 6, 2005 19:14:00 GMT -8
That sounds good! I was most nervous about qualifying. How have the races been down there with the split starts? Have the fast vees been mingling with slower fords? Have the fast fords had problems with the vees? Playing nice will help us all. At the March National down there I had a ford come inside me in 1 on the last lap (he was chasing Townes) while Ian and I were hanging onto Colin. I darn near went off and when I came in, noticed my dust cap was gone. Turns out we touched wheels. Unfortunately, that let Colin get away (but, like I said, whomever it was was chasing Townes so thats racing).
|
|
|
|
Post by qposner on Jul 11, 2005 6:58:15 GMT -8
Well, I don't know how many will read this, but here is my two cents. I think we are done with SF regionals unless something is done with the starts. Blake believes being right with the CF's is safer, but I disagree. Being in a mess of all of those backmarker fords is just plain dangerous. Add in the horrible accordian effect for the vees due to the fords nearly stopping before the green and it is a recipe for disaster. I know several ford drivers are not happy with it. I had one guy in a blue crossle telling me he has vees passing him in the grass at the starts nearly every race. He was clearly not happy. What the region really needs is 20 seconds between each group so they can space themselves out. Until that happens, see you at SF national races only.
Quinn
|
|
|
|
Post by btatum on Jul 11, 2005 8:43:55 GMT -8
Its like this. I have raced plently of races in this region and at Thunderhill. I have found an advantage by starting up close to the Fords. I can not help it if they can not get going at the start and I am able to pass them because they are too slow. Now I am a racer, I have found an advantage, and have used it. Quinn you can not tell me if you are in the court room and you have an advantage over your opponent you wil not exploit it. If someone else wants to lead the field up differently then qualify for the pole. I will race with whatever hand is dealt to me. If what I was doing is illegal then the officails would have dealt with it. Now I know they are not happy with it but until the rule states differently I will continue do start up as close as I can. Frankly I get tired of pulling a guy around an entire lap only to have him pass me because he is following in my draft. 90% of the professional races in the USA have multiple classes racing at the same time. Dealing with the different cars is part of the sport. Now that being said I can tell you there are some serious problems with leaving a gap between the two groups. The problem is the people with radios will have a significant advantage because at tracks like Infineon and Laguna if the gap is large enough the lead group will be getting the green flag out of the second group's sight line. Since the racing starts when the green flag is waved then some people would get an even larger jump which is what happened at the first race of the year at Laguna. The only way this close spilt will work is if they give two green flag starts. I think we should abandon the close split idea and just line up according to qualifiy times like they do at the National races. If you have raced at a regional race this year then send in you vote on how this should work and I will bring it up to the board. If have not raced any regionals this year I do not want to hear from you. Blake Tatum P.S. I have about three gallons of ERC race fuel for sale if anyone is interested  . |
|
|
|
Post by qposner on Jul 11, 2005 8:57:25 GMT -8
Blake, I'm not saying you are wrong for exploiting an advantage. I am just saying I feel running in the midst of all of the slower fords is a significant problem. We don't have to agree, but we don't need to fight over it either. I realize I do not run in many SF Regionals, but we try to plan a couple every year. However, its not worth coming down there only to be fighting through the slow fords. I know a few out of region drivers' concern will not impact a regions position, I am just trying to address something I see as dangerous. As for 440's (excuse me, 500's), well, the more things change, the more they stay the same.  |
|
|
|
Post by brian on Jul 11, 2005 9:27:20 GMT -8
Well, I haven't raced in any SF regionals this year but I just won one at Nelson Ledges. But after nearly 30 years in vees and like I with hundred of races in other regions, I think I will add a couple of thoughts. First, true split starts are supposed to receive two green flags so I'm confused by the radio argument. Yes the second group will always get the green flag but racing will not start until the group receives their green flag at start/finish. On restarts it's different, the entire track goes green at the drop of the flag and a radio is a huge asset. SF region has this willingness to depart from the GCR and do their own thing. These "close up" split starts are a mutation of the "visable on the longest straight" guideline discussed in the GCR. See section 7.6. 2. The whole idea of a split start is to avoid the inherent dangers of the two classes during starts, not to reduce being lapped. The greater the distance between classes, the more time the drivers get to sort themselves out. I agree with Quinn and think this SF mutation sucks but it is the drivers that make them dangerous. Impatience and the desire to take advantage of bottlenecks, lead to dangerous situations. I have never figured out why some drivers try to do so much when there's so many laps to go. Stewards inactivity is no indication of safe driving. They often refuse to act even when presented with driving protests. Blake's right , 90% of the pro racing does have combined classes but let's remember, they're professionals and they still colide with one another. I can't remember a post race interview when someone didn't complain about backmarkers.
Class combination is a fact of life in racing and we're only going to see more. We vees have avoided the hassle for a long time and now it's up to each one of us to adapt and yes, even take advantage when safely possible. But if you think SF region is not proceeding in the right way, let them know about. If they won't listen, do what I did, protest the stewards of the meet and get the issue documented to National office.
|
|
|
|
Post by btatum on Jul 11, 2005 10:26:49 GMT -8
The region and I personnaly appreciate you attendance at the races in the SF region. And I do not think we are fighting over this I think we are discussing the issue.
A little history on how this got started. Last year when our group had a drivers meeting it was decided a close split would be best because it would give the lead fords several more laps until they lapped the lead vees. But the problem is the close split without a separate green flag is hard to work out.
When we had large split we had a constant problem with the pole vee driver playing games at the start trying to break away from the rest of the pack.
Basically I want to state my position with the previous post and then seek suggestions on how do solve the problem. (and to see if anyone wants the gas). Everyone who has raced this year needs to respond so this issue can be worked out.
I do not want to promote a dangerous situation and I do want to promote racers from outside the region showing up. This last race was the first one all year where there was an acceptable number of vees racing. The second race was a lot of fun once the caution period was over even though we had to deal with oil over 2/3s of the track. The first race I went to the grass on aviod hitting the fords in front of me. Someone in the middle of the pack slammed on the brakes for some reason and alot of people got on the brakes right when I was on the gas. I think Ullstrom followed me through the weeds.
I know how you feel, I was ready to pack up the whole camp and go home after being DQed. If it was not for my wife calming me down I would have left. We will work out this issue and hopefully by the time
the regional / national at Laguna is here you will be racing in both events!!
|
|
|
|
Post by btatum on Jul 11, 2005 10:38:03 GMT -8
Brian,
the reason the drivers with radios have a big advantage is because once the green flag drops the racing starts for the entire group it does not matter where you are in relation to the lead group.
The difference is when we had true split starts we had a separate green flag for each group. With the close split we do not have a separate green flag.
So as you can see the people with radios will know when the race has started long before those without radios.
|
|
|
|
Post by brian on Jul 12, 2005 10:47:49 GMT -8
Sounds like the region was forced to modify the process due to a bad driver or two. Run a true split start with two greens and tell both groups that the pole sitters must maintain the speed of the pace car or they will receive a stop and go per the GCR. It was handled that way at the June Sprints and it worked ok. Sometimes the pace car drivers need to be updated to the needs of the particular classes. If they go too fast the field gets strung out, too slow and some classes will overheat.
Blake, sorry about the fuel issue. At the Sprints we made a gentlemen's agreement for everyone to run Av. gas. Oops, Lisa Noble agreed too so I guess that makes it a driver's agreement.
I've heard that ERC uses masking agents to hide the bad stuff and they will loose their effectiveness over time.
|
|
|
|
Post by dave FF 50-aka "Harm" on Jul 12, 2005 11:50:57 GMT -8
Guys
First, I think it sounds like we need to modified the start to have two green flag in the interest of fairness.
The problems we face are three fold:
1) Declining numbers of open wheelers. The young drivers today don't work on their cars like the "old frats" did back in the day of hot rodding. They want some thing familiar, like a street car (Miata) and some thing like NASCAR instead of IRL/Champ/F1
2) If you stay away, the numbers decline even more and more open wheel classes get combined. The more cars that show up, the fewer classes combined and we can retake our run groups.
3) This is regional AMATEUR racing. We let everybody run no matter what the skill level with the hope that they will learn and improve. I know how frustating it can be to have a higher power car driven poorly. Fast on the straight, parked in the turns.
I also know of some National driver who do the same (remember Seattle?) Maybe we should enforce the 3% rule in the GCR?
As for fuel, Larry R sells many grades of ERC. V5 & V6 are legal high hp stuff. A-19 is legal 110 oct and ERC 110 is illegal. Have you tried the 110 in the leaf blower?
Last thought, it was fun to meet the Posner clan. I hope you do come back.
dave
|
|
GregM
Novice Driver
Posts: 27
|
Post by GregM on Jul 12, 2005 14:56:26 GMT -8
Hi Guys: From the sidelines here's a couple of nickels.
1) Mixed classes suck, but they are the new reality and you have to adjust. I'm racing an FC in Group 2, where we have FA's FS's FM's FC's CSR etc. For the most part, the speed differentials are on the straight parts, but FC's really generate fast corners. Catching an ill handling FS car in a corner is double-d**n guaronteeeed to produce an adrenaline boost.
2) Now that half the season is in the bank, why not modify the start for a race weekend and grid according to qualifying times? The fast FV's will not have to deal with the slow CF's and will take even longer to be lapped by the fast FF's. I think it's worth at least one attempt. Laguna Seca is an excellent trial track because of it's shortness comapred to Thill and Sears.
3) Blake: Truly sorry about your fuel troubles. We've switched strictly to Avgas this year just to eliminate any issues with track fuel or anyone's brews. I always have about 25 gallons at the start of the weekend and would be more than happy to bring some along for you.
|
|
|
|
Post by qposner on Jul 12, 2005 15:28:42 GMT -8
Once again, you SF guys can determine what works for you, but gridding per qualifying times may not solve the problem. You are going to have the slow fords passing the fast vees due to acceleration at the green. The only solution I can see is two seperate greens where the polesitter in the second pack has to behave. I do not see this so much as a "fairness" issue as I do "safety."
|
|
|
|
Post by dave FF 50-aka "Harm" on Jul 12, 2005 16:49:57 GMT -8
Quinn
The slow Fords are slow at the start. They take their time getting up to Vee speed and they are slow to react to the green, where as some Vees can see the green drop around a corner, it seems. I think Gregs right. If your ahead of them in Qual, you can keep ahead. The slowest Fords (fastest lap in race) finished behind Vees with a slower fastest lap.
dave
|
|
.