Drivers meeting on Sunday at Jigsaw
Posted By : Nigel Gibbins, 10-Nov-2004, 11:26am
Me, Andy, Stacky, John, John... dunno about any others others 
-
Drivers meeting on Sunday at Jigsaw
Posted By : Michael Davis, 10-Nov-2004, 12:26pm
Would have gone but I have another event on that day so won't be attending.-
Drivers meeting
Posted By : Andy Vowell, 24-Nov-2004, 01:54pm
A quick summary of relevent points.
No real technical cahnges for TSSC cars as we voted last year for no rule changes in 04/05 so TSSC cars should not change.
However, Yokohama are now making their A048R tyre in the right sizes and we can run them in 2005. Probably a performance advantage in running these over the currant A032R's but by how much nobody knows yet. (I don't know if I want to bin my newish 32s yet for the 48s, I'll see how far behind I am in the first few races)
Also stand by for fire extinguisher changes in 2006 when most TSSC cars will require a mediun 2.25 Litre plumbed in system.
Triumph cars not complying with the regulations can be raced at the committee's/secretary's discretion in the invitation class. Though they must retain the "spirit" of the championship ie still look like period Triumphs, run similar tyres and promise not to win.
A rule change on which the TSSC drivers were not allowed input as it was for a TR class was that the 'tuned' four cylinder TRs are now allowed to run multiple choke carbs. (I am little concerned about this as the faster TSSC cars have tended to battle with the Tuned TRs which will now drive away from us)
Anybody else have anything to add?
Andy-
Drivers meeting
Posted By : Nigel Gibbins, 24-Nov-2004, 02:51pm
I had wondered why we weren't allowed to run A048Rs in the TSSC anyway as we are all on 13" rims, but I never pursued it. I need a new set of tyres anyway so a spankin' set of '48s will be on santa's sleigh
.
I'll reserve the judgement on the multi-choke TRs but I suspect you will be right in the long run. In practice swapping from SUs to webers has seen the driver actually get slower at first as they get used to the new power delivery.
My 'concern' about the proposals was the big brakes discussion for the tuned TRs - there was a proposal to fit bigger disks and brakes due to 'safety' reasons (which is often the argument for brake improvements) and although it didn't get through this time I suspect we'll get it again next year as they just made their cars faster. In a nutshell though, they just want better brakes so they can brake later and so decrease their lap times.
I put the idea to Graham Miller and Mike Hughes that they bring the V8s back down to 3.5 litres and so help close the field up - but of course I can't propose it 'cos it's not my championship. Oddly enough, Graham wasn't against the idea
.
To be perfectly honest I can't see any reason why the regs should ever change unless some new item/tech is available that needs to be considered. Our regs still have a few little things I'd like to fix but of course I don't have carte-blanche to do it. (I would like to though
- not the engines thing though).
I'd also like to change the way we introduce/discuss regulation changes as the drivers meetings can be labourious. I see a seperate committee considering the proposals and voting on them, these people ideally not be racers and not directly linked to any racer. This way we should be able to get a good unbiased rule set that will only be changed if there is an actual need for change. The current set up is confrontational and actually requires drivers to openly disagree with each other for a balanced vote. And then the regualtion can be pushed through by 'packing' the meeting with drivers who would benefit so the vote can be 'bolstered'.
The driver's meeting itself would still need to happen but the regulations changes section would simply be an update rather than a vote/discussion.
This committee could be made up of the class representatives with a rep not being able to vote on regs that directly affect their class only. There's lots of ideas and they are all aimed at making life easier for you guys and maintaining stability in the regs. Generally speaking though the TSSC drivers seem to be pretty sensible on the regulations as we seem to be happy to run to the regs and just go racing.
-
Drivers meeting
Posted By : Andy Vowell, 24-Nov-2004, 05:28pm
Monster Post Nig!
Why were we not allowed A048s - Because we beat enough TRs already perhaps?
Multi choke carbs - we shall see, but I expect Steve Small's TR7 Sprint will be flying next year. Incidently it also allows Mark Fields Sprint back into the class.
Big brakes - yep, agreed. A bit of a misnomer (is that the right word?) but better brakes means a faster car. Though from the meeting discussion it seems though the class D regs say use standard calipers, most of them are on princess four pots anyway.
V8s to 3.5 Litres - Excellent Idea
Reg changes - Agree, they are good now and as I have all my changes in over the years we should fix them (except for weight limits of course )
Regulation Committee without drivers. - I sorta agree, and this is how the 750MC and many other championships run their shop. I think the way we do it is in the minority, though I do enjoy the bunfight. Though if we continue with drivers voting on their own regs then I reckon we should do it as a single championship with no TR/TSSC divide. We are about 50/50 now and the consequences of every change effects all cars so why be separate.
Andy
-
Drivers meeting
Posted By : John Davies, 24-Nov-2004, 10:26pm
Al,
Rule changes to be decided by non-racers? Shurely shome mishtake.
What other sport decides its rules in this way? OK, lots of past participants are on organising and rules committees. What was it those in the RFU were called? Old Farts?
John-
Drivers meeting
Posted By : Jon Wolfe, 25-Nov-2004, 09:53am
The thought of bringing V8s back to 3.5 litres is an interesting one. It's the same prob you would have if 2.0+ engines were allowed in GT6s/Vitesses. By allowing big engines you hit existing racers who have sunk big money into current reg engines and you create a situation it's very hard to come back from.
For me, changing from 4.0 litres to 3.5 litres would be mega money and I'd actually end up with a 3.65 (3.5 with max permitted overbore). I would not be happy with it for obvious reasons, but similary would be against an increase to say 4.5.
-
-
-
-
-