Joined
·
367 Posts
Hi Ya'll,
Just thought I'd remind everybody that tomorrow is the deadline for suggestions for the 2003 rulebook...
Following is a copy of the email I just sent off, let me know what you think!
Andrew Havas
http://www.andrewhavas.com
***********************************
[email protected]
[email protected]
To the members of the Performance Rally Board,
Please accept the following list of items I believe worthy of consideration when discussing possible rule changes for the 2003 rulebook:
(1) When considering possible changes in Open Class technical regulations, I strongly suggest any and all changes take the Canadian regulations as well as FIA regulations into account. Any rule changes, I.E., a change in restrictor size, should mimic these regulations in order to foster more participation from international competitors. Our national series gains nothing from a unique set of regulations.
(2) Eliminate minimum weight rule. Too difficult to enforce, and it does not control cost as intended. A manufacturer can still spend an infinite amout of money develop an ultra lightweight car, then add ballast in ideal locations. The banning of semi-automatic geaboxes and other high cost items is the only effective cost-cutting methods. Limiting the number of tires used per car, per event would go much further to levelling the playing field than a minimum weight rule.
(3) Eliminate minimum event participation requirement. This is completely unneccesary, and only punishes the privateer teams for lack of budget.
(4) Require professionally prepared route notes at all national events, and encourage optional recce programs. Necessary to raise the level of U.S. driving talent, and also encourages international participation/interest in our championship.
(5) Require FIA timing, with traditional backup timing by stage workers. The system may be owned by the SCCA or each event, whichever is logistically more feasible. The ProRally series has reached a level of competition where manually timing stage finishes at distances often greater than 50 meters, (line of sight sometimes parallel to the the direction of stage travel!) is an embarrassment!!
(6) Clarify rule 5.6.F:
Main hoop design criteria seems to conflict with FIA design criteria. I.E.- ProDrive's current roll cage design, while clearly superior to most structures, does not seem to meet 5.6.F.1.
5.6.F.2, addresses weld quality. This rule is not enforced properly, and the Performance Rally community needs to take steps to correct this situation before a tragedy occurs.
(7) Clarify seed point awards with regard to international participation, and publish rankings on the SCCA website. Seed rankings are too subjective and often times mysterious.
(8) Consider a change in seed point accreditation, with respect to four-wheel drive vs. two-wheel drive. Current points allocation unfairly favours four-wheel drive competitors.
(9) Consider restricting ClubRally to two-wheel drive only. Alternately, encourage developement of a spec two-wheel drive class, to run alongside ProRally. Benefits of a two-wheel drive only regional championship would be most certainly cost control, as well as creating an arena that places it's emphasis on driver skill more than the car and is a true "stepping stone" to ProRally.
(10) Make rule changes by member vote only. Current system is flawed, I believe a more democratic system for rule changes is needed. The ProRally board asks for and considers member input, but has provided itself the authority to initiate and implement rule changes at any time, and the ProRally community has no recourse.
In order for the series to thrive, we need rules stability. A self-appointed PRB, with the ability to make immediate and final rule changes, does not foster confidence in current competitors, manufacturers, not to mention those considering an involvement in ProRally. It is important that a clearly defined process for the implementation of new rules and rule changes be initiated to ensure the longevity of ProRally.
ProRally Board positions are supposedly named by the BOD and not voted on. I propose this changes also, and we hold annual elections for PRB positions. Members seeking a post will campaign and be nominated by the ProRally community.
Respectfully,
Andrew Havas
http://www.andrewhavas.com
Just thought I'd remind everybody that tomorrow is the deadline for suggestions for the 2003 rulebook...
Following is a copy of the email I just sent off, let me know what you think!
Andrew Havas
http://www.andrewhavas.com
***********************************
[email protected]
[email protected]
To the members of the Performance Rally Board,
Please accept the following list of items I believe worthy of consideration when discussing possible rule changes for the 2003 rulebook:
(1) When considering possible changes in Open Class technical regulations, I strongly suggest any and all changes take the Canadian regulations as well as FIA regulations into account. Any rule changes, I.E., a change in restrictor size, should mimic these regulations in order to foster more participation from international competitors. Our national series gains nothing from a unique set of regulations.
(2) Eliminate minimum weight rule. Too difficult to enforce, and it does not control cost as intended. A manufacturer can still spend an infinite amout of money develop an ultra lightweight car, then add ballast in ideal locations. The banning of semi-automatic geaboxes and other high cost items is the only effective cost-cutting methods. Limiting the number of tires used per car, per event would go much further to levelling the playing field than a minimum weight rule.
(3) Eliminate minimum event participation requirement. This is completely unneccesary, and only punishes the privateer teams for lack of budget.
(4) Require professionally prepared route notes at all national events, and encourage optional recce programs. Necessary to raise the level of U.S. driving talent, and also encourages international participation/interest in our championship.
(5) Require FIA timing, with traditional backup timing by stage workers. The system may be owned by the SCCA or each event, whichever is logistically more feasible. The ProRally series has reached a level of competition where manually timing stage finishes at distances often greater than 50 meters, (line of sight sometimes parallel to the the direction of stage travel!) is an embarrassment!!
(6) Clarify rule 5.6.F:
Main hoop design criteria seems to conflict with FIA design criteria. I.E.- ProDrive's current roll cage design, while clearly superior to most structures, does not seem to meet 5.6.F.1.
5.6.F.2, addresses weld quality. This rule is not enforced properly, and the Performance Rally community needs to take steps to correct this situation before a tragedy occurs.
(7) Clarify seed point awards with regard to international participation, and publish rankings on the SCCA website. Seed rankings are too subjective and often times mysterious.
(8) Consider a change in seed point accreditation, with respect to four-wheel drive vs. two-wheel drive. Current points allocation unfairly favours four-wheel drive competitors.
(9) Consider restricting ClubRally to two-wheel drive only. Alternately, encourage developement of a spec two-wheel drive class, to run alongside ProRally. Benefits of a two-wheel drive only regional championship would be most certainly cost control, as well as creating an arena that places it's emphasis on driver skill more than the car and is a true "stepping stone" to ProRally.
(10) Make rule changes by member vote only. Current system is flawed, I believe a more democratic system for rule changes is needed. The ProRally board asks for and considers member input, but has provided itself the authority to initiate and implement rule changes at any time, and the ProRally community has no recourse.
In order for the series to thrive, we need rules stability. A self-appointed PRB, with the ability to make immediate and final rule changes, does not foster confidence in current competitors, manufacturers, not to mention those considering an involvement in ProRally. It is important that a clearly defined process for the implementation of new rules and rule changes be initiated to ensure the longevity of ProRally.
ProRally Board positions are supposedly named by the BOD and not voted on. I propose this changes also, and we hold annual elections for PRB positions. Members seeking a post will campaign and be nominated by the ProRally community.
Respectfully,
Andrew Havas
http://www.andrewhavas.com
