rules proposal advice

[Christine D]

I have been to the past couple of rules meetings. Here is some advice for anyone thinking of proposing a rule change:<br>
<br>
1. Proposed changes that sound like "please change rule x.xx so that my car can be more competitive" never go through<br>
2. Unless your proposal is a no-brainer, you or a representative must be at the rules meeting to explain/champion your cause, or it likely won't get discussed much<br>
<br>
Christine<br>


<p></p><i></i>

[mossaidis]

Thanks for advice. Do you know when the next ruls meeting is? and where?

<p></p><i></i>

[dinoracer]

Next board meeting is October 19, at the Ground Round resturant in Chelmsford MA. Show up at 7:00 for a good seat, we usually get going around 7:30.

Thanks Christine for the post. A little more advice:

We (the club board, specially chiefs, etc- VOLUNTEERS, by the way) are in this for the same reasons you are- to play with cars and get maximum track time. We are not looking to make things things harder for you, and certainly not harder for us, as that may take away some of our track time- see above.

We're trying to keep car classifications as simple as possible. For the most part we're all adults, and we rely on the honor system in classifying your car. Nobody wants to spend a lot of time policing the other cars in their class making sure the right air cleaner wing nut is being used. If you'd like to propose changes in a class to allow or restrict specific items, please consider the existing SS/ST/SP/P class structure, and ask yourself if what you're proposing fits into the framework of each class that we've already got.

Thanks

Tom Cannon, club scribe
'65 Mustang 801

[brucesallen]

Another few tips:
1. quote the old rule exactly and write the new rule precisely and completely. No one else is going to take a general comment and rewrite a rule.
2. Our sytem of classification must be simple and obvious to the casual Steward inspection as we don't do tear-downs. This means SCCA rules often don't fit.
3. Handicap systems have been proposed before (by me at length and others) They are generally just too much work and impossible for stewards and competitors to police and have been rejected.

4. I never would have thought that the SP classes of 4, 6 and 8 cyl of any manufacture would work-- but they have bee amazingly effective.

5. Build to the COM rules. Don't make rules fit your car.

[Crusin]

Another few tips:

4. I never would have thought that the SP classes of 4, 6 and 8 cyl of any manufacture would work-- but they have bee amazingly effective.

Hmmm,,,how many SP cars have an engine from another manufacturer? This is why the class has been effective, no one has built a car to the limit of the class.

In another post, someone mentioned the Spec Miata has done very well in SPC. The SM is built now where near the SP rules and in fact is closer to the ST rules.

[brucesallen]

Lee,
All kit cars have engines by other manufactureres. Kit car inclusion is what prompted the removal of restrictions from all SP cars.
But we continue to wonder who will put an F1 engine in his Turner!

[Crusin]

Just waiting for a fire sale on one of the BMW engines.

Just a comment for discussion though. Bruce stated that the cars should be built to COM rules, which is a very valid point and would work well and the number of comments about rules would be minimal if the COM members drove only in COM events and if the COM members built their car exclusively for COM events.

However, this is not the case in many instances. Spec Miata is an example. It is built to an SCCA rule but fits into the "low end" of the preparation scale for SPC. A better example of an SPC Miata is under construction, a limited example of one member building a car to COM rules.

The majority of the COM members bring the car the have owned, autocrossed, hill climbed, drag raced or whatever. Some are involved with the sports compact segement. This group tends to have bolt on mods which look cool, high on the bling factor but low on the HP or handling gain factor, yet these will move the car into SP or ST.

I guess the point for discussion is:

1. Should COM develop class rules that meet the members needs and that allow more cars to be competitive

2. Should competitors construct single purpose cars to COM rules in order to be competitive.

[HerbD]

I guess the point for discussion is:

1. Should COM develop class rules that meet the members needs and that allow more cars to be competitive

2. Should competitors construct single purpose cars to COM rules in order to be competitive.

You missed the most important point for discussion:

- Should COM continue to have simple rules that an all-volunteer staff
can police without knowing the details of every car in the field.

Point #2, above, is the same question everyone has to ask themselves
about every club they participate with, not just COM.

Please remember that the COM rules already state in large print
that the rules are NOT designed to allow any particular car to be
competitive. Just to give everyone guidelines to get on track with
whatever car they already have.