March minutes

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

March minutes

Post by Dietmar »

The FV Ad Hoc Committee met on March 28

Members attending: Steve Oseth, Stevan Davis, Phil Holcomb, Stephen Saslow, John Petillo, Dietmar Bauerle

Guest: Fred Clark

Since Fred Clark was in attendance we asked about any updates on the Birthday Party planned for April 2013. At present the major hurdle is the mandatory use of a head and neck restraint for SCCA sanctioned events. Many organizations do not require them and the event planners do not wish for a competitor to show up and not be able to participate due to not having access to the device.

The issue of a spec tire for FV and the question of increasing weight in FV was a topic of discussion during the last FSRC meeting. Both these items will be forwarded to the CRB for member input. Exact date and exact wording have not been disclosed at present.

Member request for clarification via a letter to SCCA was referred to the Ad HOC Committee for input. The member wanted to know if the use of Torrington style bearings was considered a legal replacement for link pin shims . A long discussion ensued as to what could be considered a washer, a shim, or a spacer. Although the Committee could not justify their use based on the current GCR, a majority of those attending felt that there was no performance advantage to using these bearings and at their current cost, they were available to any and all competitors if they felt the need to use them. As a reminder, the Ad Hoc Committee does not set any policy so this question will have to be turned over to the CRB and a rule change will have to be affected before their use is deemed legal.

More piston discussion: the Committee did not reach any agreement on the legality of the Chinese pistons. We have not yet had the opportunity to carefully measure what would be considered "original equipment". Since the original discussion regarding the Chinese piston came about due to forum comments regarding piston availability, a Committee member will be contacting Kolbenshmidt to find out if they can/will still make the 1200 piston/cylinder, and at what price.

A question was raised on the Interchange regarding REM treatments for transmission components. Although a response was posted by Steve Oseth, the Committee felt that we should reiterate our position on this matter. During our meeting of June 2011, the Committee stated:...

... that they can not support the legality of any material or surface treatments of the transmission components based on the definition of FV as stated in 9.1.1 C.1 B : "FORMULA VEE IS A RESTRICTED CLASS. Therefore, any allowable modifications, changes, or additions are stated herein. IF IN DOUBT, DON’T"

The Committee is still of this opinion and although we feel that it would be difficult to determine if this type of treatment was used, we would HOPE that people would follow the SPIRIT of the rules.

No other items were presented or discussed.

Next meeting is scheduled for April 25
Post Reply