Go Back   American Sedan Forum > Main American Sedan Categories > American Sedan Rules

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91  
Old 02-19-2019, 03:00 PM
nomics nomics is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 131
Default

I understand the process kfan, agree that we need to find some positive communication between racers and committee.
__________________
Matt
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 02-19-2019, 04:16 PM
jimwheeler jimwheeler is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 5,261
Default

Personally, I will race my full prep Firebird and raise hell if they give the RP cars too much in the way of headers and cams. I'm all for the RP cars and have been since they were introduced. I do know that the original idea for RP was to not allow any modifications of the drive train. They were given rear gears, transmission/cluth upgrades and now, possibly, engine upgrades. Not really the RP as originally intended. The SMG cars were always voted down in the various WDYThinks that went out since before Laguna. Up until my leaving the CRB at the end of December I saw nothing that changes that.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 02-21-2019, 04:35 PM
scottybwhite scottybwhite is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 8
Default

A couple things...

1.
I hate the way this happened because it didn't follow procedure and it got shoved down the A Sedan community's throat or slipped in under the back door or whatever you wanna call it so I feel for you guys who are long time AS racers...
2.
Y'all have NOTHING to fear from the SMG, I've spent way too much time in those cars and they will get KILLED everywhere except Sonoma, Mid-O & Laguna... Even in the rain an RP car was able to win handily at Sonoma and COTA over a very talented and arguably the best SMG driver around (x motorcycle & roundy roud driver of multiple years)
3.
I DO however think it's time to bring A Sedan into the 1990's and allow ABS on ALL the cars with an appropriate weight penalty of course... I believe strongly it will add entries to A Sedan from multiple sources... I hope a rule gets in allowing ABS to be retrofit onto FP AS cars with weight penalty of XX since this would be an easy thing to do just buying wrecking yard parts for those who want it but the penalty needs to be such that ABS will NOT become an advantage.

Further, if you allow ABS on RP cars they need to run COMPLETELY 100% as delivered or run in T2 as a crossover... No mixing and matching FP & RP rules...

Just my $.02 and worth exactly what you paid for it...
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 02-21-2019, 05:06 PM
PamRichardson PamRichardson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Rockville, MD
Posts: 824
Default ABS in FP cars

Scotty --

Thanks for the supportive comments.

Question, since I have so little experience in this area. Most FP cars and, as time goes on, most RP cars have dual master cylinders and a balance bar. I've heard in the past there were racing ABS system that could accommodate such a setup, but, can't quickly find anything now. Also heard they were very pricey in the past, in the $25000 range. Likely if they still do exist for 3rd gen Cambirds, Fox Bodies, potentially any SN Mustangs that didn't come with ABS, ASers wouldn't want to do that.

One of the issues with changing the rules in AS, is that, the community doesn't really like rules creep and cost to be competitive. But, as you know, not my call anymore, just a heads up.

Any thoughts you might have on this would certainly be appreciated.

Pam Richardson
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 02-21-2019, 05:36 PM
jimwheeler jimwheeler is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 5,261
Default

Scotty,
Thanks for the info. As to whether the SMG is competitive, or not, that was not part of my issue with the car coming into AS. Going back to before Laguna, the ASAC sent out a number of requests for input about bringing the cars into AS. The result was pretty much 100% against, except for the handful of SMG drivers. This was mainly due to the cars having a bunch of stuff that had been denied to AS, when requested, over the years. Those things, like aero and aftermarket control arms, etc. were not denied just by the ASAC, but by member input, as it should have been.
I actually put in a number of requests for things that were routinely denied by the ASAC and the AS community. I could easily have gone ahead and made the changes, since I had the votes on the CRB, but I never did. I am positive that the way the SMG came into the class was not done according to the system as I have known it for 9 years.
wheel
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 02-21-2019, 07:22 PM
scottybwhite scottybwhite is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 8
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PamRichardson View Post
Scotty --

Thanks for the supportive comments.

Question, since I have so little experience in this area. Most FP cars and, as time goes on, most RP cars have dual master cylinders and a balance bar. I've heard in the past there were racing ABS system that could accommodate such a setup, but, can't quickly find anything now. Also heard they were very pricey in the past, in the $25000 range.
Pam, my idea would be to allow a FP car to go to an OEM system, like if you retrofitted a gen3 system onto your Gen2...? I imagine this would be complete with master and booster..? I think this is feasible since (I think) most of the FP gang are pretty good fabricators and mechanics...

As for aftermarket ABS, it's VERY expensive! It's not $25k expensive but all of $10k new and $6-7k used... Another important note here is the aftermarket systems are much more sophisticated and MUCH better systems than an OEM that might be retrofitted and if penalty/ballast was equal for these two type systems it would give the haves a much bigger advantage over the have-not's...

I would not endorse the aftermarket ABS, for reference, when we looked at it for T1 we figured a 100LB add OVER the OEM ABS...

I think the important thing is you add enough weight so the ABS is NOT an advantage but will help grow the class... Is that penalty 100#? 50#? 250# IDK but I am a firm believer ABS should be allowed in A Sedan...
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 02-21-2019, 07:31 PM
KFan KFan is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 9
Default

Let me go on record in agreement with Scotty....... I agree that ABS could be a positive, but the current committee must find an inexpensive way to retrofit systems on older generation cars - easily.

If not, then let them find the best way forward. I like the challenge of modulating the brakes during lockup, but it does push the heart rate from time to time.

Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 02-21-2019, 07:38 PM
scottybwhite scottybwhite is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 8
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimwheeler View Post
Scotty,
Thanks for the info.
I actually put in a number of requests for things that were routinely denied by the ASAC and the AS community. I could easily have gone ahead and made the changes, since I had the votes on the CRB, but I never did. I am positive that the way the SMG came into the class was not done according to the system as I have known it for 9 years.
wheel
Wheel,

first of all KUDOS to you for not just gifting yourself adders for your car during your tenure on the CRB. I am sincere in saying that, my biggest problem has been with rules makers who lie and cheat and steal to get exactly what they want for themselves or even just because they think they're smarter than everyone else such as the last few rules changes have been done... All roads lead to one person plus an accomplice and it pisses me off like you can't even imagine... In fact I was fired from the TAC by you for blowing the whistle on this person... I sure wish you knew then what I did and what you know now... You and I have not always seen eye to eye but pretty sure we see the same thing now...

I also know your beef wasn't with the competitiveness of the car but with how it made it's way in to the class...
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 02-21-2019, 08:05 PM
Ted Warning Ted Warning is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: TN
Posts: 9
Default ABS in AS?

You say bring AS into the "1990's" by bringing ABS into FP. Where is the need? Why push it on a community that doesn't want it? "increasing the car count" has been used so many times to push changes onto us existing drivers. Every single time, we hear the same story. "With weight adders it wont be a competitive advantage". Aluminum heads and brakes are 2 examples. Now both are required if you want to run up front. Heck, I'm already $30,000 behind in my build. Now add another $7-10k, plus development.

You say it will increase car counts. I don't buy it but really don't know. I can say, it will decrease car counts by one. It would be cheaper to convert my car to run my local dirt track.

Some have said run and show how the new rules produce over dogs. Done that for 3 years now. Watched the gap grow bigger. Not voting no again, and watch high $$$$ cars get faster. No thanks. And I was so looking forward to VIR this year.
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 02-21-2019, 08:10 PM
scottybwhite scottybwhite is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 8
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Warning View Post
You say bring AS into the "1990's" by bringing ABS into FP. Where is the need?
Ted, it's just my opinion and to be truthful I don't even run AS but I do know something about growing classes, that being said, my opinion is worth every penny you paid for it
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.