Fastrack Questionaire

[SOseth]

The new fastrack is out. Here is a copy of the questionaire regarding FV Manifolds. Please send your responses to: crbscca@scca.com

SteveO

FV Manifolds
The CRB requests input from FV Regional and National Competitors concerning the direction that should be taken on FV
manifolds. Please send your responses via the member input web form at http://www.crbscca.com.
1. Would you favor the use of controlled manifolds (starting in 2012) that meet the following criteria?
SCCA FasTrack News April 2010 Page 4
a. They would retail for $ 500.00 or less
b. They would outperform any current manifolds
c. They would flow within 1% of one another
d. They would be allowed at all SCCA races once introduced.
Yes_____ No_____
2. Whether or not controlled manifolds are adopted, should VW-based manifolds rules for 2011 be made more restrictive than
the current “state of the art” (i.e., return to power levels of a few years ago) or should the rules just try to limit them to the
existing power levels of the current “state of the art” manifolds through dimensional controls?
More restrictive_____ Maintain current “state of the art”_____
3. I race primarily in:
Regionals_____ Nationals_____ Both_____

[FVartist]

I vote for the specs given at the Runoff By the Manifold Constructors and have so stated to the CRB.

[Dave Gomberg]

Please do not send your responses via email. Use the web page form at http://www.crbscca.com for this and all future communications with the CRB.

Thanks,

Dave

[FVartist]

I did Three Times since the first two times they said the matter was tabled and you do not allow for this option.

[problemchild]

Why was this option not offered?
I vote for the specs given at the Runoff By the Manifold Constructors
It makes the survey irrelevant if you leave the obvious option off!
I have no problem with an open and fair discussion and vote, but this seems like a deliberate ploy to splinter the strongest group into smaller factions.

[Matt King]

It think that answer is implicit in Question No. 2 "Maintain current state of the art" as I believe that was the intent of the suggested dimensions. BTW, I was at the Runoffs meeting, and I don't recall a complete set of concrete measurements being outlined. What I do recall is a discussion of what the important measurements should be and how to measure them.

[hardingfv32-1]

Question 2 is completely ambiguous.
What is the meaning of "state of the art"? Something like the manifold used to win the Runoffs?
How do we know what the power levels were a "few years ago"?
What kind of guidance is this going to provide for the FV Committee? Or, are they really looking for guidance.

Brian

[wroché29]

Question #2 starts: "Whether or not controlled manifolds are adopted..."
If the spec manifold will be superior in performance to the current manifolds: what's the point?

[FV80]

Question #2 starts: "Whether or not controlled manifolds are adopted..."
If the spec manifold will be superior in performance to the current manifolds: what's the point?

The "point" was that additional controls could be implemented for 2011 while Spec Manifold probably couldn't get done before 2012. And there might NEVER be a Spec Manifold.
Yes - the Committee is looking for guidance on this issue.
Steve

[wroché29]

What does "current state of the art" mean?

[FV80]

What does "current state of the art" mean?

Bill,
That's a VERY good question - another one that the Committee has been wrestling with. At a minimum, we would take it to mean 'something' pretty close to the rule proposal request submitted by the group of manifold builders following last years' Runoffs. EXACTLY what it would be would probably be based on the data received by the Committee during our attempts to get measurements from all competitors. The Committee would attempt to 'draw a line' at some point that allowed MOST of the existing manifolds, but still limited "expansion" beyond that. At least that's what the Comittee would TRY to do - SCCA might have other ideas and is under no obligation to follow what we would recommend. SCCA may ... or may NOT... ask for Committee input for that.
Steve