Special Stage Forums banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
768 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
- Why don't we "Historic Rally Nuts" elect Glenn to be our Historic Rally Boss?
- He's shown to be able to cut through the BS, make fair rules and shows common sense
- What else we need?
- Unlike "the other guy", who was clearly defending his silly car, Glenn can see the big picture
- I don't care if he's a SCCA guy, NASA or what ever - the main thing is to get the ball rolling and have FUN!
PS. IF this happens, rules are fair and we have at least 4 events in the West I'm going to drive "Crazy-John's" SAAB V4 with cross-ram DCOEs (he doesn't know this yet!) and kick some a$$...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,275 Posts
I appreciate the sentiment; personally I bear Phil no ill-will, and also remember he was bypassed in the 2004 rules process; or at the very least not consulted about what was actually voted on.

The last thing historic needs is a new chief or more chiefs - the focus should be on competitors and bringing more cars out to events.

We can continue to lobby organizers --- an example was getting the WSRC to agree to count historic points, subject to participation minimums like any other class.

While the proposal I made is not totally in line with Phil's position, it is *closer* than what had been put there by the PRB for 2004 (ooh, my hidden agenda is showing).

However, I do want to suggest that you all WRITE THE PRB in support of the proposed rules changes. If you do nothing else, do that: [email protected], "Attn: PRB".

They meet on the 17th, so DO IT NOW!!

Glenn
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
186 Posts
OK, enough already. Topi et al, you guys are being horse's asses...my participation/efforts with H Class were NOT specifically to "defend" my car, and second, my car was no more "silly" than those top-heavy aircraft wanna-bes that you guys seem to come in your pants about.

I'm done trying to defend my involvement with H Class to infantile closed minds. My position was stated quite clearly in an earlier thread recently, obviously some people choose not to read this. Only one reason I can think of and "spoiled child" comes to mind. Come on, grow up.

And what's this about criticizing a rallyist's choice of car? Is this just another example of Small Dick Syndrome? Anybody who can afford to rally can certainly afford to go buy a built car, especially one that is known by all the Experts to be a Real Rally Car. I think part of the enjoyment and challenge of rally - especially in a vintage car - is to take a car you just like and figure out how to meet the challenge of stage rally. No matter how crude my car was, EVERYTHING on that car, except boring the block and grinding the cranks, was done by me, in my own shop. I learned a lot about what it takes to make a rally car. And I learned to squeeze about everything out of that car, and whooped a few AWD turbo cars in the process, as well as some other scandinavian cars... I'm sure JVL does all his own work, but there've been a whole lot of critics who pay somebody else to do their work. I'll consider your inane comments when I see you successfully racing from a similar position.

I truly wish Glenn well, and more luck than I had in helping this class along. Maybe being born somewhere other than the USA is what will give him credibility with some readers of these forums. Whoever gets it done, I still think it will be a blast to see a group of vintage cars on the stages. Even better, sometime while I can still rally, a dedicated vintage rally series in the USA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,550 Posts
Wooooooow,

P Smith, hold your horses.

I have nothing to do with historic, I don't know what the deal is between you and them, I was just browsing by, but I don't like and appreciate your tone and language. If you have an issue with someone this forum is not the place to settle, please do it somewhere else.

Cheers

M.Samli
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
768 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Well....Glenn "from-the-colonies" comes across with an easy to understand rules...

Compared to this:

B. Eligible cars meeting Series Production Touring Car (T), Competition Touring Car (TC) and Standard Grand Touring (GT) specification as defined in Chapter II, sections 8, 11 and 12 of Appendix K to the International Sporting Code of the FIA, are eligible to compete in Historic Class. The car's driver is responsible for providing proof of compliance with these rules.

C. Eligible cars meeting Historic and PostHistoric specifications of the MotorSport Associate (UK) current Competitors' Yearbook (Blue Book), section K paragraphs 36 through 37 are eligible to compete in Historic Class. The car's driver is responsible for providing proof of compliance with these rules.

..and I ain't that smart.. So, my choise is an easy one!

PS. To call your car "silly" is not a put-down. I know they won LeMans (many class wins) and that's something to be proud of.
- I also have had many silly rally cars so that's OK.
- But to make rules to favor own silly car is not cool...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,275 Posts
Christian confirmed that Ralph has my submission on the agenda for tomorrow night's PRB conf call. It is not too late to WRITE THEM AND LET THEM KNOW WHAT YOU THINK OF THE PROPOSAL.

That is all.

End of line.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
56 Posts
The ridiculous personal attacks on Phil (and any other competitors) are not only out of line but off-base and need to cease. I have known Phil for several years and competed against him many times. Phil has spent countless hours of his own time collaborating with every other current H-class competitor over the past three years to create revisions to the original H-class rules. All of his inclusive efforts were intended to induce the creation of a large, competitive and competitor-friendly historic class. The current rules found in the rule book were not Phil's creation. They were prepared by Mark Williams with assistance from two others selected by the PRB. If you have a gripe with the current rulebook (and the age cut-offs), bring it up with the PRB, not Phil.

I can't think of a single instance where Phil ever sought any rule change to specifically help his car at the expense of others. He continued to work on improving the class and making it more attractive to aspiring H-class competitors despite numerous reversals from Kurt and the PRB in their level of interest in seeing this class grow. Phil and the other competitors discussed, negotiated, drafted and reached *full* consensus (not an easy task) on two separate complete revisions to the H-class rules (at the PRB's or others' behest). There were never any recriminations leveled during that process by any competitors against others. The proposals were submitted to Kurt and the PRB and then largely ignored, only to have Kurt eventually come back and say "Let's not change anything in the rule book for now." It was Kurt, not Phil, who paid lip service to his vision to see H-class become a featured element at every US rally.

Despite the enormously frustating reactions (or lack thereof) to countless hours of cooperative thought and work product, I noticed Phil never lost his interest in making the rules more attractive to potential competitors. He may have become frustrated with the PRB (as we all have), but he never walked away from improving the class.

I don't know what is really behind these personal attacks on Phil, but it is so childish and boring to read. I don't recall seeing any of you at events or receiving any constructive input from any of you to help the class grow or improve (except for the occassional gripe over the age-cutoff). The small minds of the arm chair H-class "enthusiasts" should spend a lot more time building or learning to drive a RWD car and less time thinking up baseless insults and accusations.

If Glenn's well-intentioned proposals lead to a class of competitors made up of you folks (Glenn aside), then I don't want any part of it. The H-class with Phil was marked by respect and friendship for fellow H-class types, a willingness to share expertise, resources and muscle, and a gentility completely absent from the do-nothing cowards sitting behind their keyboards. Phils' characteristics are what US rallying was largely about until recently and what made it such a great community. Competitors' attacks on one another are as damaging to the sport as the PRB.

Give me a break and move back to Rally-L where this kind of BS led to the creation of ss.com in the first place. Or else waste your limited abilities on some other topic where you might actually have a vested interest.

Bill Rhodes
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
630 Posts
Put Glenn in charge of H, not GrN

I do not know where all the animosity towards Phil is coming from but it is not becoming. I have never seen anything Phil has proposed that seemed like he was trying to defend his car. He HAS stated, quite candidly, that certain changes in the rules would render his car totally obsolete, but he has not said that he would fight them if that was the general consensis of the H class competitors. He welcomed my thoughts on a V8 Falcon, which would fit the old rules and clearly be much faster than his car, so that arguement that he was "defending" his car doesnt hold water with me. With certain people this is comming from some deeper persoanl issues with Phil that are not related to the rules themselves and it is not productive in the least.

Having said that, I do not agree with him on the rules as he wanted them, I thought they were too restrictive and said so, but it was not personal. I liked Glenn's proposal for H class, I think it is by far the best way to arrange the class and it should be adopted immedeatly.

Just dont let him change Grope N to the top class!!!! :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,275 Posts
RE: Put Glenn in charge of H, not GrN

Mmm, group N historic cars. :)

~~~~

I'd also like to defend Phil -- we've swapped email for quite a while now, and even though we haven't agreed on every single point (e.g. the Grp 2/H cross nomination) he's always been enthusiastic for the class.

Can't we all just get along? There are so few historic cars out there, at least people willing to prep them and compete that we just have to try to be more inclusive.

~~~~~~~

Here's an idea I have for 2004. How about a "historic shootout"? We don't have a lot of participation yet, but what if we tried to pick ONE relatively central ProRally event that we all tried to attend and have both a big show of cars (attendance wise) but also got to have some competition on the stages?

We shouldn't forget our Canadian bretheren either.

Glenn
 

·
Big Jump 800
Joined
·
716 Posts
You know... I hate to sound negative...

All Christian could have confirmed was that Glen's letter is under "Correspondence" on tonight's agenda.

The 2004 rulebook has been sent to the printer... the 2005 rules making process is beginning.

I'm really hoping that's what you all meant and were hoping for, 'cuz I really hate telling people that their expectations aren't realistic.

J.B. Niday
www.nidayrallysport.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,275 Posts
RE: You know... I hate to sound negative...

I was not aware the rule book was at the printer.

Thanks for helping set our expectations.

If the PRB says something like "great ideas for 2005, we might consider them if we get a good H turnout in 2004" then that might not be the best plan.

The revisions proposed are essentially "CPR" for the 2004 H rules as passed. I don't know anyone who was overly happy with the 2004 rules as is.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top