Minutes from the workshop are up

[13inches]

http://www.casc.on.ca/uploadedFiles/CASC-OR_2005_Solo_2_Workshop_Comments_and_Actions051118143805.pdf

[Greg F]

Some competitors feel that a 90 degree turn between the start line and the timing beam be mandatory to
eliminate the advantage by some vehicles of having a “Drag Launch”.

:cool: *snicker*

[7plymaple]

:D Ah and the natural evolution of the sport continues. With this problem "solved" we will move on to others... like for instance... LSD VS no LSD cars launches arround corners. :D

[Slowpoke]

Some competitors feel that a 90 degree turn between the start line and the timing beam be mandatory to eliminate the advantage by some vehicles of having a “Drag Launch”. I have mixed feelings about this. It's hard on high HP Subaru's to drag launch them with sticky 710's. If the clutch doesn't go (like mine & Kyle's), then it's the axles (like Trung's). If you reinforce the axles, then the bearing race in the wheel hub can go (like Joe's). If none of the above, then it's probably the diff that dies next (Daniel's).

So, my wife would be kinda happy if this was actually implemented, with a corresponding reduction in our PAX. However, I think that it's always bad policy to design in any rule with the purpose of taking away an advantage that a certain engineering style has.

Maybe Miata's and Insights should have to add 300lbs of ballast in the rain. Maybe Civic's and Neons should take a 2 second penalty everytime they corner on three wheels as a safety promotion rule.

If a Subie owner has a huge budget and wants to beef up the clutch, axles, hubs, and diff and let the tires shred where they may, that should be open to them in the rules.

But please implement this anyway and lower the class of my car so that my Solo II budget is lower. :o Afterall, I'm in Solo II to learn precision driving, not to drag race.

[Slowpoke]

... OH... and I really like the idea of putting the stock alignment rules back to common sense.

I would even go so far as to require an alignment print-out from every Stock and SS competitor to confirm it. e.g.: Lowering springs can take you into negative camber that would otherwise only be achievable through a camber-plate. Yet lowering springs are SS and camber plates are SP.

Like in Solo 1, for a competitor who lowers the car into out of stock realm of adjustment negative camber, but wants to run in SS, they should have to purchase camber plates to move BACK into stock realm of alignment.

[fireproof suit on]

That, or make camber plates and other changes in suspension geometry an SS mod.

(I think that the SPDA reps voiced this at the meeting, no?)

[Marsh]

That, or make camber plates and other changes in suspension geometry an SS mod.

(I think that the SPDA reps voiced this at the meeting, no?)

It won't matter if you get camber adjustments allowed in SS, camber plates are still illegal under the bushing rule. Changing the SS rule would mean that either you let everyone in SS run spherical bearings, or cars with MacPherson struts can't add camber adjustment.

[holliko]

Who gives a crap... Until we run SCCA rules in Ontario we might as well be from another planet..... I'm not the only person that feels this way I'm sure.. Flame/taunt whatever no further responses will be given to this opinion....
Robert

[Slowpoke]

It won't matter if you get camber adjustments allowed in SS, camber plates are still illegal under the bushing rule. Changing the SS rule would mean that either you let everyone in SS run spherical bearings, or cars with MacPherson struts can't add camber adjustment.
Although I don't see why spherical bearings warrant SP... okay, what about using dual crash (alignment) bolts at the strut mounts to correct the alignment? I'm not sure how this would affect other suspension styles though... (Just an idea thrown out there.)

Or why not just put it on the driver? Change your springs and maintain stock alignment range? Fine, SS. Outside of stock alignment range? SP.

P.S.: My observation was that 710's would knock rear crash bolts on my car out of their original settings. Yup, those things have grip.

[Wedge]

Although I don't see why spherical bearings warrant SP... okay, what about using dual crash (alignment) bolts at the strut mounts to correct the alignment? I'm not sure how this would affect other suspension styles though... (Just an idea thrown out there.)

Or why not just put it on the driver? Change your springs and maintain stock alignment range? Fine, SS. Outside of stock alignment range? SP.


A couple things:

Camber plates are auto-SP under two rules: 1. The rule that says "no camber plates", and 2. the rule that says "no metal bushings". Since all camber plates are spherical bearing. So there's no way they'll ever be allowed in SS.

Also, SS rules say "any alignment setting using the stock adjusters".
There is no alignment range which must be adheared to in SS. If some cars can gain extra camber by use of lowering springs, fine that's within the rules, and there's nothing stopping you from doing the same. But extreme lowering of a car (without any other appropriate mods) has some big disadvantages also. So there's always a compromise.
As it is, there are no limits on what alignment settings can be used in SS. There are only limits on how alignment can be set.

As for the alignment in stock. The rule right now is identical to the SCCA rule. Which allows any setting, and even allows things like crash bolts in certain cases. I think that's perfect just the way it is.

[finboy]

the part I don't get is why that poetic individual who doesn't compete in the regional series comments/poll is taken with no weight.. then points are made, addressed and discussed at the meeting and is mentioned in the minutes

take a jab at me... then pick and choose what items are usefull

http://www.casc.on.ca/forums/showthread.php?t=7088


feel free to ignore, make comments or suggestions with this reply
these are just my views on things

2) overall and pax?
does the sport need an overall winner? or should simply winning your respective class be enough

-using pax (unless you have a min-max standard on course designs/lot size, it will never be fair)

3) should the shootout continue?
-for only the solo II folks.. it doesn't make much sense when the prep point
structure isn't the same for I and II

as much as people like the DDT, does it meet the requirements in the rule book? (don't think it does)

4) event results?
-run results should be official 30min after a completed cycle of cars (including re runs)

-if there is no protest indicated on that completed posted run sheet, then
it should be official

(that would cover the last run.. 30mins after.. people are still packing up)


Number of runs?
-first car on the grid should be off by 10:00am
-min of 3, max of 6
whatever run # is occuring at 4pm or 5hours after the first car off, should be the final run

(6hours is enough.. don't you think)

Protests:
-any official protest indicated on the posted run/events results
will be concluded either at the event or 48 hours after the event
Managed by the Event/Series Steward

-the plaintif, will outline the specific violation in the rule book
-(all competitors are required to have the factory
shop manual pressent and should have the rule book at the event)

Appeals:
-create a Committee comprising of different club members (if possible)
-3 to review the facts and issues to determine if the ruling was correct
IF changes need to be made to the rule book, then it should be
documented and forwarded to the director to update for the following year

(intent is not the issue, simply concluded if the defined rules were violated or not. IF there is a definition that needs to be changed it will be addressed
before the following year)

Licences to compete in the Regional series?
-as long as you are a member of a CASC club you should be able to particpate in any Regional Event


Pylon penalities/reruns
-the definition in the rule book is different than what happens, afaik
if you're on course, and hit a cone.. then get flagged, we carry the cone
on the rerun..yes or no??

-any cone(s) hit by a driver on a overlapping section will count ONCE

LSD
-aftermarket or OEM should be considered the same

NON factory vs. Aftermarket Forced induction
-the current prep schedule should OEM FI Schedule
and an Aftermarket Schedule

currently there is NO distincition


Straight "drag" start
-whoever complained about that needs to rethink it...
unless the course is UNSAFE, and follows the rule book it shouldn't be an issue

consider the prosolo events.. every car has its strengths and weekness
a car might be good at 1 section over the other.. but its the colllective
layout of the course that should balance it all out

Rules:
if the "rest of the world" is using SCCA rules why aren't we?

I had different views before.. but if we want to get the best to compete at our events (and send our best to other events)

why not make the change?

our ontario regional series is basically a fancy shamancy Big Club series

A Survey of all past and current coneheads should be taken, find out why
people are choosing not to run in the regional series.

-is it the rules/class structure
-number of events?
-can't commit to the min required events to be scored
-small venues?
-the people (for those that say its the people that make the difference)

EVERY REGIONAL event should be hugely attended and well represented
like it was a MEGA/GALA event

is the Regional Series maxed out in your mind.. or should it be something more special?

what is it lacking? or what should change to make it a better attended series?

[thekid]

Dave, why didn't you step up to run the series? There was a vacancy.

[finboy]

hi Brian...

not prepared for 2006.. might depend on how things go pho 2007

word on the street is, i'm not the only one who is interested..
but they're in the same boat..

and not ready to launch a ton of changes for 2006



well see....

[miataboi]

hi Brian...

not prepared for 2006.. might depend on how things go pho 2007

word on the street is, i'm not the only one who is interested..
but they're in the same boat..

and not ready to launch a ton of changes for 2006



well see....



I second the nomination.

[thekid]

cool, sounds like we should have some interesting nominations for next off seaosn then! :D

[Tony Kloosterma]

You guys are all talk.
Either put up or shut up.

bitch bitch bitch, whine whine whine....

No wonder the series can't grow

Thankfully we do have a group of people that care enough to volunteer to help run it and put in considerable time, trying to make it better, I think thats happened over the last couple years, keep this up and no one will want to run it.

Tony

[Greg F]

For such a grassroots series, there sure does seem to be an inordinate amount of complaining going on. How come the real racers don't complain as much as the Solo 2 guys?

[7plymaple]

For such a grassroots series, there sure does seem to be an inordinate amount of complaining going on. How come the real racers don't complain as much as the Solo 2 guys?

AMEN!

[holliko]

Rules:
if the "rest of the world" is using SCCA rules why aren't we?

I had different views before.. but if we want to get the best to compete at our events (and send our best to other events)

why not make the change?

our ontario regional series is basically a fancy shamancy Big Club series

:D :D :D

If you take over and change the rules in 2007 then maybe I'll run again... but I'm only running nationals if there in Ontario.... Got other plans for this summer.... Anybody want to buy a lightly used Miata.... (no joke)....

[finboy]

thanks for the LOVE TK!!

[13inches]

:D :D :D

If you take over and change the rules in 2007 then maybe I'll run again... but I'm only running nationals if there in Ontario.... Got other plans for this summer.... Anybody want to buy a lightly used Miata.... (no joke)....
Does it involve a lot of left turns? :D

[13inches]

I'm still scratching my head at some of the comments I'm reading this morning....

Bitching, whining and complaining, or constructive comments? Is this not an open forum for solo2 competitors in Ontario to discuss issues and ideas for the sport? Why does everyone take these comments so personally? No one's pointed a finger and said "he's doing a bad job" or "this is being done wrong"....but how can the sport evolve if no one is even going to consider new ideas? Dismissing someone's comments on the basis of "the person" (this sport is all about the people, right?) makes no sense to me.

[Tony Kloosterma]

for the last 3 years I have seen a lot of "what you call constructive comments"
In the last 3 years I have seen very few people come up to the gate and say " I'll help"

Personally I think that some of the posts on here are just put up to instigate things. It's getting old.

Thats probably why my post count is down lately. I no longer have anything constructive to say.

Apologies for those I have offended

Tony

[miataboi]

I'm still scratching my head at some of the comments I'm reading this morning....

Why does everyone take these comments so personally? No one's pointed a finger and said "he's doing a bad job" or "this is being done wrong"....but how can the sport evolve if no one is even going to consider new ideas? Dismissing someone's comments on the basis of "the person" (this sport is all about the people, right?) makes no sense to me.


I agree Ryan... some comments here make no sense and while there is some validity to the basis of the thought... this is not the right thread, topic, etc for such comments... it's disjointed and irrellevent to the topic at hand..

point: "I'll step up in 2007"

counterpoint: "Keep that up... and no one will ever step up in the future!"



:confused: :confused: :confused:




And I'd rather open discussion... then masking "self-serving initiatives" as constructive series input.

I have a variety of summer plans myself. Winter too.

[13inches]

Tony, I agree wholeheartedly that more competitors need to get involved if they want to see things change. I personally got involved in 2005 and feel that even to some small extent I was able to make changes to improve the series (even something as small as convincing Wes to buy FRS radios so they can be present at all the events).

That being said, the larger issue that exists (and forgive me for repeating the words of others) is that the sport, and by-and-large the regional committee, does not have a defined mandate/goal/vision to work towards. For the short time that I have been competing the series has been fairly status-quo, with the only change that I consider to be significant would be the car classing change in '04. Don't get me wrong as there have been other improvements made (the scoring/timing system has been upgraded, the website has evolved and pre-reg was added, etc etc), but none of those has significantly changed or improved the sport in this province, IMHO. Why? Because there has been no vision. Changes have been made to make our events run smoother, but where's the growth?

Have the fields gotten larger? (in 2003 184 people scored points in the series; 2004 was 151; 2005 was 134)

Have the venues improved? Considering the venues used in 2005 compared to previous years, I think at best things have remained the same

Those are just 2 examples...

No one will deny that the current batch of volunteers does a damn fine job of putting on the series, schools, shootouts etc throughout the summer; however there should also be some committment from the volunteers to evolve the series and sport in the province. No matter how good the events are today ($30 for 6 runs is a damn good deal!), you can see from the general banter of the competitors that there are still things that CAN be improved, and it should be the responsibility of the committee to ensure that these things are being addressed.

Volunteering is not a self-serving task. It is a committment.

Now, how do things change from today's world? First, find a way to encourage the right people to get involved. People who can and will affect change. People who can and will listen to EVERYONE who has an idea. People who can and will make a committment. And find a way to give them satisfaction for their effort. Then, make it clear how a competitor can influence change. Set up a process that allows them to express their ideas, and be involved in the process. Similarly, find a way to give them statisfaction for their effort.

The fact is, people will get involved for the right reasons. They simply need to be provided with the right tools.


for the last 3 years I have seen a lot of "what you call constructive comments"
In the last 3 years I have seen very few people come up to the gate and say " I'll help"

Personally I think that some of the posts on here are just put up to instigate things. It's getting old.

Thats probably why my post count is down lately. I no longer have anything constructive to say.

Apologies for those I have offended

Tony

[Tony Kloosterma]

Probably one of the best thought out replies in a while.

I would argue the growth number a little as we did have competitors that did not score this year as opposed to other years when everyone scored.

I would say that in my opinion the level of competition is higher and closer then it ever has been.

I would say that although the venues have not changed signifigantly in the last 3 years that the layouts are far and away superior to those run in say 2003, I'm sure that some people on this board recall the post in which I pleaded with organizers to give us flowing courses. ( One of the most replied to posts in the history of this board)

I would also say that the organization of events and how events flowed this year exceeded any previous year. All events started on time, and no lineups at registration, a sub committee for timing all contributed.

I have been to the last 3 annual meetings, very few attend. That is a problem in itself, if you want changes you need to stand up in the formal setting and plead your case.

I agree that the committee needs a long standing vision. As long as we have people that feel forced to take the directorship role ( and this is in no way offense to wes) then we will continue to get what currently works. If you want visionaries then you have to rally behind those people, convince them its worth the time and aggravation and they have to put up thier hand to run things. I currently don't see that happening. I have stepped down from my role as registrar for the series as I was unable to committ to solo2 this year. A change professionally is in the works and I don't even know if I'll be in Ontario, so it was best that the committee have someone that could handle it from the outset. If i am in ontario and at events I will gladly helpout as always. But, my priorities have changed and I am concentrating on Targa again this year, hence my move to mod to avoid all the points issues.

That being said, if there was to be a committe formed to look at the future of solo2 in Ontario and IF I am in the province, I would gladly sit on such a committee. In 2004 I brought up the idea of a super regional series but it was shot down in a heart beat. In my opinion if you want something like this you need to have it regionally driven as opposed to club driven. Right now there is no incentive to have something like this.

Tony