The FV Ad Hoc Committee met on March 24, 2010
Members attending: Steve Oseth; Stevan Davis; Bruce Livermore, Dietmar Bauerle
Guest: Fred Clark
The major portion of the meeting centered around the manifold survey published in Fastrack. Notice of the survey was also posted on the Interchange and via a FV Registry e-mail. This survey provides the opportunity to voice one’s opinion on the merits of a spec manifold with a possible acceptance for the 2012 season and also some guidance for the FV Ad Hoc Committee with regards to the current manifold rules. It is important that every member vote. It is equally important that members ONLY VOTE ONCE. (Also, the topic here is MANIFOLDS. If you wish to propose or have an opinion on another issue, please refer to the suggestions on presenting proposals outlined in the last paragraph of the Minutes).
The form that is to be used can be accessed by going to http://www.crbscca.com . This is the only form that will be accepted. Multiple votes will be discarded. It is also important to vote in a timely fashion. This serves two purposes- one is to get the votes tabulated before the CRB meets and also to help the Committee begin the task of formulating a recommendation for current manifolds to be presented to the membership. It is suggested that anyone interested in voting should do so within the next 2 weeks.
Fred Clark mentioned that in his discussions with members of the FV community ( and also evidenced by comments on the Interchange) there is some confusion as to what qualifies as a “state of the art” manifold. The Committee would have liked to have worded the questionnaire differently to eliminate this confusion, but it is what it is! The Committee agrees that “state of the art” can be considered a manifold that has exceeded the 1.050 measurement in any part of the horizontal tubing and may have a shortening of the horizontal runners beyond the area considered “the bend”. "Maintain Current State of the Art" would include the vast majority of the 127 manifolds the committee received dimensions on. "More Restrictive" would likely disallow in the range of 15% - 30% of the manifolds we received dimensions on.
Steve Oseth commented that the new format for presenting opinions to the CRB via http://www.crbscca.com is working very well- better than any method of communication used in the past. Letters are assigned a number and therefore can be tracked for future reference.
There was a question on the Interchange as to whether or not the FV AD HOC Committee would look at a suggested change to the weight limits in FV. The Committee has no problem discussing this or any other issues in future meetings, however, it is important to remember that we (the Committee) do not generally initiate the agendas for our meetings. We are primarily an arm of the F/SR committee and the best way to get something on our agenda is to formally present the request to the CRB via the new format: http://www.crbscca.com .
No other items were presented or discussed.
Next meeting is scheduled for April 28