Special Stage Forums banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Mä meen vittu sinne!
Joined
·
6,058 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So got a call from Vicky. She's trying to confirm numbers by this weekend for the Friday Oct 18th CHCA awards banquet. Just wanted to give everyone a heads up, though I suspect many got a call from her already. The awards banquets are pretty fun, but Mark and I will be gone that weekend so won't make it.

Also noticed on the CHCA website the following announcement, "2009 Rulebook - Owners will meet on November 12th, 2008 (Wed) at 7:00 pm to propose and vote on any rule changes. Owners must be present, we will not mail out ballots. Again, the rules will be proposed and voted on this evening only."

Based on the General Rules Change announcement on there, I assume the 12th meeting is only for class specific changes, any General Rules Changes will still be mailed out to members. But if you want to propose or vote on any potential class rule changes, plan to go down there on the 12th. I'll be doing so in the wonder Saturn if anyone wants to ride along with Mark and I.

Also, if you have rally specific rule proposals but can't attend, you can PM me them and I'll let you know if I'm willing to propose them.

The two main things I can think of is:
Allowance of any and all aerodynamic devices. (aka the Dave Kern rule)

And changing the wording of:
Rally cars are not required to run restrictor plates
to
Rally cars are required not to run restrictor plates.
 

·
stay less flat...
Joined
·
777 Posts
I think it would be good for relations with the CHCA if the rally class represented at the banquet. apparently only Dave, Allison and Aaron are going. the Conley's will be at lspr.

I can't drive and it's a long ways from carbondale, but I'll cover Adam and Sterling to go get the jacket - I think I got 2nd...?

Steve and Brian should go. someone should make a formal thank you to the CHCA on behalf of the Colorado Rally Cup.

Scott
 

·
Mä meen vittu sinne!
Joined
·
6,058 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I've always really enjoyed the banquets too!

One other rule I was thinking we should change is to only award trophies to the top two instead of top three, since we seem to not be able to cover our trophies with sponsorship funds and often our class doesn't really have that many competitors, though hopefully that will change. Still do the FQ trophy though!
 

·
Left 4 into beachball
Joined
·
1,920 Posts
Allowance of any and all aerodynamic devices. (aka the Dave Kern rule)
The rule I was going to propose would be to allow the same aero devices that are currently allowed in Time Attack (and most PPO cars seem to use them as well), as I've heard rumors that several of the PPIHC competitors may try to come out to some events. Any and all aerodynamic devices is probably a bit too open IMO. Here's the wording from the PPIHC book:

Aftermarket, non-OEM vertical planes / fins added to a competition vehicle may not exceed 432 square inches. Vertical side plates that come standard with any publicly available and marketed aftermarket rear spoiler does not count towards the 432 sq. in. limit unless it is secured by any other part of the vehicle other than the rear spoiler.

This rule would allow for commonly purchased aftermarket wings & spoilers, canards, and you wouldn't have to worry about getting a homologated spoiler, or expensive copy of a homologated spoiler. i.e. the WRC style GD STi and Evo spoilers run ~$10,000 for the homologated version, and I'm sure copies are still in the $1,000+ range. Typical aftermarket spoilers used on Time Attack style cars are often quite a bit cheaper than that.

The current RA rules:

For Open Category, wings or other aerodynamic devices are permitted if they are visually similar to devices available from or homologated by the vehicle's manufacturer for any model sold. Aside for minor modifications for fit, the aerodynamic device may not be altered in any way. In addition, any Open Category vehicle may add one or more aerodynamic devices. These aerodynamic devices must be securely attached to the original bodywork and may protrude no more than 150mm from that bodywork. They may not be attached to another aerodynamic device. Scrutineers may require that an aerodynamic device be removed
or modified (subject to the limitations above) in the interest of safety. The Technical Director may also require it be removed or modified for aesthetic reasons.


The grey area here is that the rules say it must be 'visually similar' which is a bit open to interpretation. In addition, the way I read the rules, you can add as many additional aerodynamic devices so long as they don't stick more than ~6" from the body work and touch eachother.

Personally I think the biggest issue facing the class with awards is the jean jackets. WTF? None of us wear them (so why would anyone want to sponsor them), and they're taking away from our prize funds.

Dave
 

·
Mä meen vittu sinne!
Joined
·
6,058 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Who wants to enforce or worry about that? Just make aerodynamics open for the rally class, provided they are firmly attached and made from quality materials. IE. No wooden rear wings Mr. Bis.

The jean jackets is a lost cause. In 2005 I tried to convince them that we should get something more functional to rally competitors, like Sparco gear bags (I still use my CHCA bag I got that year as my tool bag, though I don't recall why we got the bags).

Still not sure how rule 903B made it in regarding end of year trophies complying with the rest of the club. Don't remember ever seeing or voting for that rule in the past.

And there are a few rally competitors who do want, appreciate and wear their jean jackets. I also heard that this year they were doing different jackets.
 

·
Left 4 into beachball
Joined
·
1,920 Posts
FWIW, I spoke with Vicki about the jackets and a bunch of you were there too, and it was too late to do anything about them this year. She did seem open to the idea of picking out several jackets, having the club vote for one. It would still mean jackets, but maybe something us 'kids' would actually wear.

Dave
 

·
Mä meen vittu sinne!
Joined
·
6,058 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Weird. Just read through a bunch of the rulebook. Couldn't find anything regarding end of year awards other than having to compete in 50% of events to be eligible and what's in the rally car section. Also couldn't find how the payout is divided within classes, just how many of them got payouts in each class (eg. Quad top 70% of class). But is it evenly split? Who decides how it's split for each event for each class. I thought some of the classes were different in what percentages they paid out. The rulebook says nothing about jackets and that the top three in class get them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
364 Posts
What Size restrictor? also it needs to be specify for turbo cars only, or AWD turbo cars only. It seems that it would put the two wheel drive turbo and the N/A cars at a bit of a disadvantage if we did not write the rule in the same manner as the RA rule book.
 

·
Left 4 into beachball
Joined
·
1,920 Posts
I vote for restrictors required.
I vote we all kick you in the nuts....well at least those of us with turbo AWD cars.

BTW, you may not have noticed since I think you only showed to the first 2 events this year, but many of the 'old timers' at the CHCA events are finally starting to get excited to see rally cars. Guys at the top of the hill are jumping out of their cars to see the rally cars tear it up. Why turn back the clock and make our cars slower?

When my car was getting tuned, I was at a local Mitsu tuner, and there were probably 6-8 Evos in the parking lot. People were psyched on the car, and they asked what engine/turbo I was running. When I told them that the car was on a stock turbo, they immediately lost interest. If we're all about trying to drum up more spectators, we need to put on a show. We're racing cars, they're supposed to be fast.

Dave
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top