Keith Church
Well-known member
This discussion began as a response to low Runoffs entries but really belongs here so I have moved it.
My personal loss of interest is directly attributable to leadership decisions that cost me money with little or no fun or recognition benefit. I will admit that the long drawn out G Prod debacle let a lot of wind out of my sails. After killing my class in 08 they gave me a slim chance in HP for 09. I built a new HP car as the GP chassis was full prep and couldn’t be retro-fit. The HP car was fast, just not reliable. I’ve lost 5 motors in 4 years, all due to con rod failures. Unfortunately, the Prod adhoc chairman’s myopic reaction to the “rules creep” of the 80’s and 90’s prohibits seemingly knowledgeable motor guys from allowing the use of aftermarket con rods on LP motors. Although aftermarket rods offer no competitive advantage or increase engine power, the nattering neighbobs of negativity that make our rules refuse to allow them. At $369 a set they cost less than the CRYO, REM and machine cost necessary to prep stock rods that then fail every 2 or 3 races. My loss of interest has more to do with the ironheaded attitude of a couple of rules czars and the failure of our elected leaders to recognize the attitude problem. If a requested rule change reduces a members cost without providing them with a competitive advantage why is it automatically opposed? Other sanctioning bodies seem to have a much better understanding of how engines work and what constitutes a competitive advantage.
OK guys, I wrote letter 9102 to the CRB requesting aftermarket steel rods FOR ALL HP LP ENGINES. Write your letters to agree or not, just don’t take the position that a rule that doesn’t help you must therefore hurt you as that is a very selfish approach. At the Runoffs last year in a miserable cold 8:00am rain start I went from about 16th to 6th very briefly (in part due to offs by three front runners) before a stock rod with less than an hours run time decided to exit the engine through the left side of the block. I was very disappointed as I watched the rest of the race from the exit side of Canada Corner. I watched lots of drivers struggle with the oil I had deposited at the entry to Canada Corner and I saw Tony Drum spin and end his race in the tire wall there. Sudden catastrophic engine failures don’t afford a driver the luxury of deciding where to put the escaping oil and parts, so allowing all of us the same level of bottom end reliability may indeed benefit even those with stock forged rods. I will post this on the rules topic so as not to distract from the intent of the “runoff entries” original post.
Thanks,
Keith
My personal loss of interest is directly attributable to leadership decisions that cost me money with little or no fun or recognition benefit. I will admit that the long drawn out G Prod debacle let a lot of wind out of my sails. After killing my class in 08 they gave me a slim chance in HP for 09. I built a new HP car as the GP chassis was full prep and couldn’t be retro-fit. The HP car was fast, just not reliable. I’ve lost 5 motors in 4 years, all due to con rod failures. Unfortunately, the Prod adhoc chairman’s myopic reaction to the “rules creep” of the 80’s and 90’s prohibits seemingly knowledgeable motor guys from allowing the use of aftermarket con rods on LP motors. Although aftermarket rods offer no competitive advantage or increase engine power, the nattering neighbobs of negativity that make our rules refuse to allow them. At $369 a set they cost less than the CRYO, REM and machine cost necessary to prep stock rods that then fail every 2 or 3 races. My loss of interest has more to do with the ironheaded attitude of a couple of rules czars and the failure of our elected leaders to recognize the attitude problem. If a requested rule change reduces a members cost without providing them with a competitive advantage why is it automatically opposed? Other sanctioning bodies seem to have a much better understanding of how engines work and what constitutes a competitive advantage.
OK guys, I wrote letter 9102 to the CRB requesting aftermarket steel rods FOR ALL HP LP ENGINES. Write your letters to agree or not, just don’t take the position that a rule that doesn’t help you must therefore hurt you as that is a very selfish approach. At the Runoffs last year in a miserable cold 8:00am rain start I went from about 16th to 6th very briefly (in part due to offs by three front runners) before a stock rod with less than an hours run time decided to exit the engine through the left side of the block. I was very disappointed as I watched the rest of the race from the exit side of Canada Corner. I watched lots of drivers struggle with the oil I had deposited at the entry to Canada Corner and I saw Tony Drum spin and end his race in the tire wall there. Sudden catastrophic engine failures don’t afford a driver the luxury of deciding where to put the escaping oil and parts, so allowing all of us the same level of bottom end reliability may indeed benefit even those with stock forged rods. I will post this on the rules topic so as not to distract from the intent of the “runoff entries” original post.
Thanks,
Keith