My Two Cents,
Dan and Dave, take a look at Gary Baskervilles(spelling) article in the
latest hot rod edition. He starts out writing how he has been away from
Bonneville for awhile but knows some things don't change. The steadfast
stance of SCTA is one of those refreshing things according to the article,
that he was counting on, I have to agree,
Dave Haller #93
----- Original Message -----
From: "dahlgren" <dahlgren@uconect.net>
To: "Dan Warner" <dwarner@electrorent.com>; <Land-speed@autox.team.net>
Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2000 5:02 AM
Subject: Re: Rotary factor
> Dan and rules committee..............
> So the logic is if someone set a record with an unfair rule that all
> that follow must be subjected to the same degree of unfair LOL what a
> crock if i ever heard one.. Sort of like the 'the floggings will
> continue until morale improves'.. Dan in all honesty I am really
> disappointed in the scta on this one. I can not believe that this was
> turned down. It tells me a couple of things..Mostly that SCTA does not
> really care about conforming in any way to the standards set by the
> motor sport community (aka the rest of the world), and that they do not
> see fit to change an unfair rule as technology moves forward. The piston
> engines are a lot better than they were when the rotaries first came out
> and the rotary is still the same place. Geez it does not even describe
> the physics involved in the combustion process... makes me want to ask
> if there are any sacred 'F' class records that have to stay intact...
> Are there any engineers on the rules committee?? If so any mechanical
> ones??? Did anyone think it had merit or was this universally
> dismissed???
> A pretty disappointed guy here in CT....
> Dahlgren
> Dan Warner wrote:
> >
> > Dave,
> >
> > The feeling among the rules guys was that the existing records were set
with
> > the current factor. So anyone planning on running a rotary would be
racing
> > these records.
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: dahlgren <dahlgren@uconect.net>
> > To: Dan Warner <dwarner@electrorent.com>
> > Cc: <land-speed@autox.team.net>
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2000 3:47 AM
> > Subject: Rotary factor
> >
> > > Dan I have heard that the request to change the factor for rotary
> > > engines was turned down.. Why might I ask ? what was the reasoning on
it
> > > all?? Surely it was documented enough... If it was due to a lack of
cars
> > > that is sort of a self fulfilling sort of thing.. bad factor no
> > > cars...How is this appealed??
> > > Dave Dahlgren
> > >
>
|