April Meeting
Posted: April 28th, 2009, 2:54 am
The FV Committee met on April 22. Members attending:
Steve Oseth, Bruce Livermore, Stevan Davis, Mike Kochanski, Dietmar Bauerle
Guest: Fred Clark
The meeting began with a discussion regarding the fact that FasTrack only referenced one letter addressing the intake manifold rules when in actuality, 48 were received. Some were duplicates and some were difficult to discern as to whether the author was in favor or opposed to the new rules. The Committee had asked that members write letters to request further study of the rules with regards to the issue of manifolds, and although MOST of the responses either hinted or actually requested a rules review, the Committee agreed that the rules should remain in effect as written as of 4-1-2009 unless a more decisive request is made by the membership.
Another consideration driving the Committee’s decision is the new RULES CALENDAR set by SCCA. Any rule changes recommended for 2010 must be submitted in writing by May 1, 2009 to allow consideration by the CRB and also provide sufficient time for member input. We felt this time constraint would not allow the Committee to gather further data and then present a proposal which would satisfy the membership.
DRY SUMP:
The majority of letters received concurred with the Committee’s concensus and were opposed to the use of dry sumps at this time . Further discussion has been halted.
WET SUMP: based on phone calls received and by dialogue on the FV Interchange, the Committee spent a considerable amount of time discussing the need for a revision of the current sump rule.
No one on the committee could rationalize the reason for the 250cc limitations but we were all in agreement that a larger sump would not have any performance advantage but could prove to be of benefit to competitors on certain tracks where data loggers have shown a serious loss of oil pressure at certain turns. A larger sump would extend the life of engines and would benefit the class.
With this in mind, a proposal is being written which would allow for a larger sump with unlimited volume provided that it fit within the boundaries of the frame rails and attaches to the original case opening.
An attempt will be made to submit this before the May 1 deadline.
No other items were brought to the Committee nor discussed.
Next meeting is scheduled for May 27
Steve Oseth, Bruce Livermore, Stevan Davis, Mike Kochanski, Dietmar Bauerle
Guest: Fred Clark
The meeting began with a discussion regarding the fact that FasTrack only referenced one letter addressing the intake manifold rules when in actuality, 48 were received. Some were duplicates and some were difficult to discern as to whether the author was in favor or opposed to the new rules. The Committee had asked that members write letters to request further study of the rules with regards to the issue of manifolds, and although MOST of the responses either hinted or actually requested a rules review, the Committee agreed that the rules should remain in effect as written as of 4-1-2009 unless a more decisive request is made by the membership.
Another consideration driving the Committee’s decision is the new RULES CALENDAR set by SCCA. Any rule changes recommended for 2010 must be submitted in writing by May 1, 2009 to allow consideration by the CRB and also provide sufficient time for member input. We felt this time constraint would not allow the Committee to gather further data and then present a proposal which would satisfy the membership.
DRY SUMP:
The majority of letters received concurred with the Committee’s concensus and were opposed to the use of dry sumps at this time . Further discussion has been halted.
WET SUMP: based on phone calls received and by dialogue on the FV Interchange, the Committee spent a considerable amount of time discussing the need for a revision of the current sump rule.
No one on the committee could rationalize the reason for the 250cc limitations but we were all in agreement that a larger sump would not have any performance advantage but could prove to be of benefit to competitors on certain tracks where data loggers have shown a serious loss of oil pressure at certain turns. A larger sump would extend the life of engines and would benefit the class.
With this in mind, a proposal is being written which would allow for a larger sump with unlimited volume provided that it fit within the boundaries of the frame rails and attaches to the original case opening.
An attempt will be made to submit this before the May 1 deadline.
No other items were brought to the Committee nor discussed.
Next meeting is scheduled for May 27