[Mike Hurst]

I want to rally.

I don't care if Subaru can use rallying to sell cars.

I don't care if anyone is watching.

In the old days, we drove slow cars, fields were small, we were
almost invisible, but we were rallying!

Maybe it's time to ban AWD, spectators?, engines over 3 liters, forced induction, but continue to rally.

flame on,

Mike

 

[rallytaff]

No Mike, I'm on your side. No spectators = no cancelling of Club rallies. No 4wd cars = less expenses for those that have to pay to have the roads repaired. Underpowered cars with less than a 3litre capacity = closer racing. Less BS and bureaucracy = more fun for everyone. Did I leave anything out? Nice can of worms to open for the weekend.Yes, I did forget something. It's all about having FUN!

 

[Matt]

>>Maybe it's time to ban AWD, spectators?, engines over 3
>liters, forced induction, but continue to rally.


Good thought, but not possible. Trying to keep the public off of publicly owned property is impossible.

Now, if you could find enough privately owned land...

 

[randyzimmer]

Mike,
I put this under "what do we do now" but I don't know if anyone saw it except for a few.
I am a newcomer and not stepped in the tradition of good old european rallying..
"If the problem is indeed insurance, do what the political types do and throw a bone - meanwhile, it can help solve some of our problems too.
Rally too expensive? Roads get rutted? Speeds too high? Get rid of the FIA rules and make a north american series they can copy from us.
I propose 3 classes.
Production - showroom stock.
John's triple 2
The New open with Normally Aspirated 4wd and a rev-limited top speed.
Of course I'd say my car would be the model (2.5RS Subaru) but it could be 2 liter or 3 liter.
Pick a final drive, no more than 5 or 6 gears and limit the top speed to a number and make the rev limit in all gears fit that speed, have officials sit on some straights and shoot radar to police it.
--
This solves a bunch of problems and makes us look safer.
Triple 2 and open should be a good fight for OA.
Less road abuse, easier to drive, cheaper to operate, easier on parts, cheaper to build or buy. No more inlet restrictions.
---
Downsides? Fewer europeans making a living mapping anti-lag ECUs, fewer tire sales, fewer special parts sales. Stage times reduced by 10%, fewer pops and bangs and flames. (or are those more good things?)
A divorce from FIA car rules (of which only GpN is affected so far)."
---
rz

 

[gravelgeezer]

>>>Maybe it's time to ban....spectators

>Good thought, but not possible. Trying to keep the public
>off of publicly owned property is impossible.


Hmmmm... Ok Matt, so that's what I tell the guards at Area 51 when I try to drive in there? Or, when I try to cross a city street between cars during a CART or whatever street race?

So spectators at a rally on USFS, BLM or DNR land can just tell the rangers/officers to go stuff it then?

I'm sure glad you explained this to us.


Gravelgeezer (...old, but not buyin' this.)

 

[ProRallyPix]

>Now, if you could find enough privately owned land...

Sorry, but the "suspension" of ClubRally events puts the private land option in serious jepordy. I know the SCCA is trying hard to keep this out of the press, but the suspension is going to cost west coast communities tens of thousands of dollars. Private land owners are bound to ask why?

There are no answers in the SCCA's suspension announcement, so what would you think if you were a landowner? Look, they're cancelling a rally sprint, held in a fenced lot, where the only possibe spectator danger is choking on the grilled chicken. Would you want a ClubRally on your land? If ClubRally is too dangerous to continue, what does that say about ProRally?

The road shortage has always constrained the growth of the sport. That hasty suspension announcement will make the road situation much, much worse.

Jim Culp
prorallypix.com

 

[Pete Kuncis]

>but the suspension is going to cost west coast communities tens of
>thousands of dollars.

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm tired of hearing how this is going to affect the west. How they're losing/missing events. How it didn't happen in their area. Does the west have better drivers and the east stupider spectators? No. Everything is the same. If they suspend the east events and run the west ones, and an accident happens in the west, what happens? "Sh!t"poke hits the fan even harder. Stop them all, get a plan sketched up, and implement it from coast to coast. As inept as the SCCA can appear to be, I'm sure they're doing something. It may take a little while, but it'll be right. I'd rather them suspend club racing for 2 years than have to watch 2 people get killed spectating again.

Pete <- just woke up and is letting off some steam

 

[ProRallyPix]

>I don't know about anyone else, but I'm tired of hearing how
>this is going to affect the west. How they're
>losing/missing events.

Maybe you're looking at a different schedule. I've only heard of the sanctions being pulled from west coast ClubRally events. STPR goes on as scheduled, the Dryad Quest is cancelled. Communities in PA receive the benefits, communities in WA take the hit. Out here it feels like Northwest organizers have been found guilty of something, and we never even got a day in court.

Pete, if you really think we have a systemic safety problem, then how can you justify the business of usual approach to the ProRally schedule? You can't really think that any open road rally (like STPR) is safer than the a rally sprint in a secure, fenced lot. Yet it's the rally sprints that are cancelled by the ClubRally suspension.

I don't think we're smarter or even safer on the west coast, I think we've just been luckier. But I also think the partial shut-down does much more harm than good, particularly in the west where events have been cancelled. I know it will have long term implications for organizers in the northwest and I fear for the future of the sport.

Jim Culp
prorallypix.com

 

[Pete Kuncis]

>Maybe you're looking at a different schedule. I've only
>heard of the sanctions being pulled from west coast
>ClubRally events. STPR goes on as scheduled, the Dryad
>Quest is cancelled. Communities in PA receive the benefits,
>communities in WA take the hit. Out here it feels like
>Northwest organizers have been found guilty of something,
>and we never even got a day in court.

STPR is Pro. There is no club events associated with it. I can't comment on why just Club is cancelled and not Pro. I don't know why, but I'm sure there is a reason (good or bad).

>Pete, if you really think we have a systemic safety problem,
>then how can you justify the business of usual approach to
>the ProRally schedule? You can't really think that any
>open road rally (like STPR) is safer than the a rally sprint
>in a secure, fenced lot. Yet it's the rally sprints that
>are cancelled by the ClubRally suspension.

See my comment above again. I'm sure there are politics, etc. Maybe the SCCA feels it has a much better chance of controlling Pro Rally spectating than Club. Pro has enough workers to make an immediate difference. Club might not. And maybe I'm totally wrong. I don't know.

>I don't think we're smarter or even safer on the west coast,
>I think we've just been luckier. But I also think the
>partial shut-down does much more harm than good,
>particularly in the west where events have been cancelled.
>I know it will have long term implications for organizers in
>the northwest and I fear for the future of the sport.

In my opinion, it is far too early to judge what impact the shutdown will have. This whole situation will have a negative impact on the sport no matter what happens. Changes will come and they will be for the good. People may not like them, but they will be for the good.

I'm not defending the SCCA. I'm not defending the competitors. I've got my own stance that something bad happened, something has to be done before the next event to avoid another incident. If there was a light switch that the SCCA could flick and make it all better without losing any events, I'm sure they would have done it. This can't be fixed in the flick of a switch. It will take time. 2 weeks, 2 months, 2 years, whatever. It is worth the wait to not lose any more lives.

Pete

 

[Matt]

>Hmmmm... Ok Matt, so that's what I tell the guards at Area
>51 when I try to drive in there?

Ok. I was being a bit simplistic. Obviously there are certain federal sites (some military owned, some not) that the general public is not allowed access to. Clearly, if you were able to run a rally on one of them, it would be much easier to control spectators. I was speaking more generally, though, as most of the federal land used for Rally is in National forests, and not subject to the same concerns.

>Or, when I try to cross a
>city street between cars during a CART or whatever street
>race?

That's my point. They don't run a CART race through a city, and close the entire city. Not to mention the fact that this is apples and oranges... dealing with a city is one thing. The Feds are completely different.

>So spectators at a rally on USFS, BLM or DNR land can just
>tell the rangers/officers to go stuff it then?

I guess I was being overly-simplistic. I'm sorry. I know I'm not the most knowledgeable person on here about federal land policy and management, but I'll try to break it down a little better:

The Federal Land Policy and Management act (43 USCA s. 1701-1785, if you're scoring at home) controls (oddly enough) federal land policy and management. Section 1711 requires that an ongoing "inventory" of of all public lands. Section 1712 requires that a land use plan be developed for each tract. In developing that plan, the secretary MUST "use and observe the principles of multiple use and sustained yield".

That "multiple use" languge is very important. It appears several times in the FLPMA, and is the basis for being able to keep the feds from closing off too much of "our" land from us. As you correctly point out, not all land subject to the "multiple use and sustained yield" are open to "us". That's because section 1732 exempts tracts that are "dedicated to specific uses according to any other provisions of law."

While it is true that certain land on the inventory can be "withdrawn" from specific use (see section 1714), you're going to be hard-pressed to find the national forests used by Rallyists included in a list of federal tracts withdrawn from public recreational use. In fact, I think it may be impossible.

Not to say that the public has unfettered access to national forest land... we don't. Given the congressional mandate of "multiple use" and the way in which the FLPMA has been interpreted (last I checked, anyhow) by Federal courts, though, you're going to have a very difficult time holding a rally on a federal forest to the exclusion of all other human recreational activity.

Closing the road is one thing. Closing the forest is another. If you don't think so, just try keeping the Sierra Club out of the woods for a weekend, ok?

>I'm sure glad you explained this to us.

Again (for the third time), I apologize for being overly simplistic.

>Gravelgeezer (...old, but not buyin' this.)

Buy what you'd like.

Matt.

EDIT- Just for fun I looked up a plan for one of the federal forests. This is for Chippewa National Forest in Minnesota. Although this is only the first part of the plan, you need only get to page 4 of this Introduction to see the emphasis on multiple use and sustained yield:

http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/chippewa/plan/revision/draft/plan_cnf/chapter1.pdf

 

[BimmerMan]

>Maybe it's time to ban .... engines over 3
>liters

Mike,

how's that Mustang runnin' on 3 cylinders, anyway?
:+

Brian Flanagan

 

[Bee Driver]

Why is the west upset!! Because it is the most affected. This is not directed at you Pete. You just brought up the point. Some may not realise the volume of club events out here.

NW region had 16 club rallys and sprints scheduled. We just lost 6.
California has another 10 or 12. This is not counting rallycross. Many of these club events stand alone.

The NW puts on Rallys of the highest standard. Most of the Club Rallys are run by the same people that do Wild West and Oregon Trails. Many of the Club events are of a National Caliber. Thats why so many posters are asking "what is the difference between Pro and Club?" In the NW there really isn't any difference except the paperwork.

We are also loud. This is an active region. So be patient with us, there are a lot of miffed ralliers. My own rally plans have had to be put on hold. I'm trying to be generous and letting SCCA have the time to sort this out.

Dick Fuhrman
EIO Racing

 

[Rick277]

>Sorry, but the "suspension" of ClubRally events puts the
>private land option in serious jepordy. I know the SCCA is
>trying hard to keep this out of the press, but the
>suspension is going to cost west coast communities tens of
>thousands of dollars. Private land owners are bound to ask
>why?
>There are no answers in the SCCA's suspension announcement,
>so what would you think if you were a landowner? Look,
>they're cancelling a rally sprint, held in a fenced lot,
>where the only possibe spectator danger is choking on the
>grilled chicken. Would you want a ClubRally on your land?
>If ClubRally is too dangerous to continue, what does that
>say about ProRally?

Jim, you're right on as usual. How did SCCA National think landowners would respond to their announcement? If ClubRally presents a substatial safety risk to SCCA, then ProRally represents an even larger risk to me (Simpson), the landowner. If Dryad is canceled, it WILL affect WildWest ProRally, despite SCCA's memo.

The safest thing for Simpson to do now might be to suspend ALL rally on its land entirely, until WE can complete our own evaluation of all rally operational standards and implement appropriate recommendations, which may simply be to cancel rally on our land forever. We will not expose ourselves to ANY risk from rally, CLUB or PRO, based on SCCA's decision to suspend ClubRally.

 

[John Vanlandingham]

I'm not. But I want to see Club rallies continue.

Rick, what can or could be done to convince Simson that the decision was a hasty, ill thought out,stupid, and incorrect overreaction by people far from any vague understanding of anything?
And to convince Simpson that THEIR good experience is what they should be paying heed to?

If insurance coverage and organisation standards and staff and procedures are the same, does Simpson care what stickers are on the car? (as in an alternate sanctioning organisation?)

PS didya find a Ovlov yet?
Everybody i have spoken with says there are millions of 2 door cars so don't let that hold you back! I just saw a used Saab 96 I want to get so I'll make you a deal!
Call when you're not rippin' yer hair out about this.
Or call when you are, I know I am!!

John Vanlandingham
Seattle, WA. 98168

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

Black Rocket Rally Tires
http://www.blackrockettires.com/

 

[Rick277]

RE: I'm not. But I want to see Club rallies continue.

>Rick, what can or could be done to convince Simson that the
>decision was a hasty, ill thought out,stupid, and incorrect
>overreaction by people far from any vague understanding of
>anything?

No one needs to convince me of that.

>And to convince Simpson that THEIR good experience is what
>they should be paying heed to?

Simpson has had an excelent relationship with NWR, and I hope it can continue. But a last minute cancellation will not help.

>If insurance coverage and organisation standards and staff
>and procedures are the same, does Simpson care what stickers
>are on the car? (as in an alternate sanctioning
>organisation?)

Why would they care?

>PS didya find a Ovlov yet?
>Everybody i have spoken with says there are millions of 2
>door cars so don't let that hold you back! I just saw a used
>Saab 96 I want to get so I'll make you a deal!
>Call when you're not rippin' yer hair out about this.
>Or call when you are, I know I am!!

Why would I (or anyone) start building a new car NOW?

 

[John Vanlandingham]

RE: I'm not. But I want to see Club rallies continue.

>>Rick, what can or could be done to convince Simson that the
>>decision was a hasty, ill thought out,stupid, and incorrect
>>overreaction by people far from any vague understanding of
>>anything?
>
>No one needs to convince me of that.
TeeeHeee
>
>>And to convince Simpson that THEIR good experience is what
>>they should be paying heed to?
>
>Simpson has had an excelent relationship with NWR, and I
>hope it can continue. But a last minute cancellation will
>not help.

Good
>
>>If insurance coverage and organisation standards and staff
>>and procedures are the same, does Simpson care what stickers
>>are on the car? (as in an alternate sanctioning
>>organisation?)
>
>Why would they care?
Well that's what 99% of all competitiors I have ever asked says as well, so it seems that all that's needed are new stickers and a sanction from anybody willing to extend insurance coverage.
In other words: bugger SCCA, hello IRDC, USAC, or maybe CCCP.
>
>>PS didya find a Ovlov yet?
>>Everybody i have spoken with says there are millions of 2
>>door cars so don't let that hold you back! I just saw a used
>>Saab 96 I want to get so I'll make you a deal!
>>Call when you're not rippin' yer hair out about this.
>>Or call when you are, I know I am!!
>
>Why would I (or anyone) start building a new car NOW?
Becuase we must always remain hopefull, worse has happened before, this time may be the last straw in relationship to SCCA, but the very nature of driving rally cars down roads is crazy anyway, so doing something likle beginning building a rally car now is in a way in accord with the situation.
Situation crazy, it follows to do something crazy.
besides there's no pressure to get it done hastily.

Vincenzo Lombardi once said the ol' cliché When the going get tough...

But Dr. Hunter S. Thompson said the more appropo:
"When the going turns wierd, the wierd turn Pro"


Calme mes amis, t'jours calme je dire!!






John Vanlandingham
Seattle, WA. 98168

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

Black Rocket Rally Tires
http://www.blackrockettires.com/