autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: HS Protest

To: jss@marimba.com, autox@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: HS Protest
From: TeamZ3@aol.com
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 00:41:18 EDT
In a message dated 9/15/00 6:10:33 PM Central Daylight Time, jss@marimba.com 
writes:

<< Let me tell you the details of the HS protest and penalty against Russ
 Blume, because I can't stand to see people just guessing. >>

Resistance .... is .... futile ... :-), so I'll pipe in a few more details:

Contrary to the "pulling it out of his ..." comment, there were distinct 
visual indicators that the protest was based on.  First, the distributor was 
adjusted to the extreme end of it's adjustment range and it was the 
protestor's opinion that when the timing is set in the proper range for this 
particular engine the distributor would be in the middle of it's adjustment 
range.  This generated protest item 1.  However, the protester also felt that 
if the distributor was adjusted to the extreme end of it's adjustment range, 
yet produced a correct timing spec, it would be possible that either the cam 
timing had been modified or the block/head surfaces had been over-trued, 
leading to protest items 2 and 3.  

Finally, one of the tubes on a multi-vacuum tube metal manifold was open, 
generating the last protest item.  When the protestee removed the air filter 
housing to allow inspection of the open tube end, which was ruled OK, the 
disconnected vaccum line to the EGR valve was found.  There was some 
discussion about whether or  not the vacuum line was accidently pulled loose 
during the removal of the air filter housing, but all the protest committee 
could conclude is that the EGR control hose was disconnected upon inspection. 
 There was further discussion about whether or not these items were merely a 
result of poor maintenance.  It was the protest committee's conclusion that 
regardless of intent, the items had a potential to modify performance 
slightly and it is the competitor's responsiblity to ensure vehicle 
conformance to the requirements of the Solo2 rulebook, resulting in a fair 1 
second penalty being assessed.

With regard to the other HS protest over missing trim items, the protester 
admitted that the missing items which could be verified to be 
factory-supplied would weigh only 3 - 5 lbs total  The vehicle was ruled 
illegal on this count, but of no real performance advantage.  Further, the 
protestee demonstrated good faith as the parts were already on order and due 
in the next day.  The protestee was reprimanded and told to have the missing 
trim pieces replaced before the 2nd day of competition.  The next day the 
protestee provided a receipt showing the missing items being received and 
purchased.  Item 2 of this protest was for the front tires extending beyond 
the fender well.  However, after reviewing a clarification in the April, 2000 
Fasttrack, Solo Tech Bulletin Item 3, identifying the widest part of the 
fender arch as the defining limit of tire coverage the vehicle was ruled 
legal.  

BTW, the stock class tire/fender coverage rule will supposedly be eliminated 
from the 2001 rulebook.  Good riddance.....

Mark Sipe

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • HS Protest, Josh Sirota
    • Re: HS Protest, TeamZ3 <=