May Meeting

Post Reply
Dietmar
Site Admin
Posts: 650
Joined: June 24th, 2006, 11:56 am

May Meeting

Post by Dietmar »

The FV Committee met on May 27
Members attending were: Steve Oseth, Stevan Davis, Bruce Livermore, Dietmar Bauerle

At our last meeting in April we were informed that SCCA has set a timeline for submitting any new proposals for the CRB's consideration for the following calendar year. This date is/was set as May 1. It now appears that this deadline has been extended since SCCA has the ability to post the rules ( and changes) electronically before a hard copy is available. In other words, items submitted after May 1 might still be given consideration.


Dry sump systems were discussed by the Board, and although several letters were received in support of these systems, the majority of the letters were not in favor of making a change at this time and therefore the matter has been rejected by the CRB (June Fastrack).


A proposal for extended sumps has been received by SCCA and will more than likely be discussed by the FSR at their next meeting. Look for more information next month.


A proposal was submitted to the CRB to allow aftermarket swivel (elephant feet) valve adjusters. The rational presented was that these adjusters would help reduce premature valve guide wear. During our Committee discussion a number of issues were presented-primarily the fact that there are both cheap and expensive versions of these adjusters available and their use would require modifications to the present pushrod/rocker geometery set up which many drivers are not equipped to make. The Committee weighed the pros and cons, and the general feeling is that they are not necessary. Unless the membership expresses a need for these adjusters either through the Interchange or by personal messages, we are not recommending them at this time.


No other items were submitted or discussed.

Next meeting is scheduled for June 24
brian
Posts: 1348
Joined: June 26th, 2006, 12:31 pm

Re: May Meeting

Post by brian »

Thanks for the effort guys, I concur with your findings.
The above post is for reference only and your results may vary. This post is not intended to reflect the views or opinions of SCCA and should not be considered an analysis or opinion of the rules written in the GCR.
Post Reply