I think Jon ment Jim Burkdol.... or at least I hope he did... Seem to
remember the Burklands Noise as it went by.... Very Twin Hemi....
Keith
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jonathan Amo" <webmaster@landracing.com>
To: "Mike Manghelli" <mmanghel@hughes.net>
Cc: "Dave Dahlgren" <ddahlgren@snet.net>; " Land-speed Racers"
<land-speed@autox.team.net>; " Dan Warner" <dwarner@electrorent.com>
Sent: Friday, January 05, 2001 8:24 PM
Subject: Re: Rotary Factor - Rule Change
> I beleive the Burklands had thier liner power by a rotary at WOS.
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> Mike Manghelli wrote:
>
> > Dave and List,
> >
> > Ok, I have been working on the yard for two days moving rocks (Keith are
fake
> > rocks lighter than the real ones?) and return to find 195 emails. Most
of
> > which are on the rotary factor rule change.
> >
> > Dave keeps asking why there is no comments to his thread from the SCTA
board
> > members, Rules committee members and the folks on the LSR list. Let me
set
> > some things straight. First, I have been Emailing Dave (not via the
list) to
> > try and resolve this. Second, Other than my other volunteer, Dan
Warner, I am
> > the only SCTA board member that is involved with the rules on this list.
> > Third, I think most folks on the list have given you an answer, they are
not
> > that interested.
> >
> > Now let's explore a few things. When the SCTA made the factor of 3 for
> > rotaries it was made based on performance of the rotary and other racing
> > organizations factors at the time. At that time the rotaries were
competitive
> > with this factor, they held several records at both Bonneville and El
Mirage.
> > Obviously, the small block Chevy and foreign mulitvalve engines have
come a
> > long way since this factor was created and rotary development has not.
If it
> > had, we may not be having this discussion. So we come to today.
Rotaries are
> > now at a disadvantage, should we change the factor. Let's consider a
few
> > things.
> >
> > (this is an excerpt from an earlier Email)
> > Currently:
> > So the SCTA uses a factor of 3 and gets
> > 10 982 X 3 = 2946cc F class
> > 12 1146 X 3 = 3438cc E class
> > 13 1308 X 3 = 3924cc E class
> >
> > You want 2.1?
> >
> > 10 982 X 2.1 = 2062cc F class
> > 12 1146 X 2.1 = 2406cc F class
> > 13 1308 X 2.1 = 2746cc F class
> >
> > So all rotary engines will run in the "F" class under your proposal?
> >
> > The E/BMS record at Bonneville is 260.809 (ref pg. 78 2000 rule book)
set by
> > a blown rotary engined car. What do you propose we do with this record?
> > Note it is faster than the AA record in this class. If we move it to "F"
I
> > think the record will stand for a long, long, long time. Or do we
"handy
> > cap" blown rotary cars one class? Obviously the blown rotaries can make
> > plenty of HP!.... Not sure where to go now....
> > (end of excerpt)
> >
> > Let's look at a few Facts:
> > 1. When the SCTA/BNI rules committee makes rules changes that affect
> > specific records, those cars are either reclassified or loose records.
e.g.
> > when blown cars ran against unblown cars with a 2 X handicap. When the
> > records were split out if a blown car had taken the record away from
unblown,
> > the record was returned to the unblown car. (what do we do with the
E/BMS
> > record at Bonnneville?)
> > 2. The committee looks at the big picture:
> > a. How many records does this affect?
> > b. How many people are running these motors?
> > c. Are the people running this at a disadvantage? How much....
(The
> > E/BMS record says NO)
> > d. etc... The rules committee spent 2 complete Sundays
discussing
> > this and other recommendations.
> > 3. This was presented to the Rules committee by Dan Warner at the
first
> > meeting in October. The rules committee recommended to the board that
the
> > factor not be changed at this time.
> > 4. The SCTA board voted on recommendations from the rules committee at
the
> > December board meeting. This must be done to get the rule book out in a
> > timely manner. I (your elected SCTA President) failed to accomplish
voting on
> > all of the recommendations at the December board meeting. Because of
this the
> > rule book will be late this year (mid March), but it was needed to
resolve
> > some other issues that effect several hundreds of competitors. The
final
> > rules recommendations will be finished tonight (Friday, 5 January 01).
We
> > will not reopen this issue since it was voted on by the board at the
December
> > meeting. The board voted to accept the rules committee recommendation
and not
> > change the factor.
> >
> > What can you do now?
> > 1. Write a letter to the Technical committee (Steve Batchelor)
requesting
> > the change for 2002. Include your technical dissertation on why the
factor
> > should be changed. Include all of the other racing organizations that
allow
> > rotaries with their factors. Include recommendations for existing
records.
> > Stick to the facts, leave the sarcasm out.
> > 2. Best way to get everyone to take notice is to have 10 rotary
powered cars
> > show up. Tom Bryant said it best, "rotaries should have their own
class" and
> > not be factored. Best way to accomplish this is to have participation!
( I
> > have not seen a rotary powered car for several years at either venue)
> >
> > I know this is long, I hope it will help. I want to say one last thing,
THANK
> > YOU Dan Warner for all the time and energy that you put into our rules
> > process.
> >
> > Mike Manghelli
> > SCTA President
> > (BTW even though you all think I do not read my Email, I do and my be a
> > lurker, but I do respond every now and then when appropriate)
|