What's up with ECRs?

I see all this Viper stuff, but I see no one offering up Vipers and Corvettes for enduros and 13 hour races.
With BP a national SCCA class, maybe the Vipers and Corvettes and World Challenge cars should be classed their anyway.

I just wanted to point out that I don't see an invasion of Vipers coming to a race track near you. I saw Zero at VIR last weekend, Zero at my last NASA race at Roebling, Zero at NASA at Barber, 1 bp Viper at my last SCCA Road Atlanta race.

Street stock Mustangs I see. Vipers I dont.

I will add a photo for visual.

barber5.jpg

[/b]
Click to expand...


Just becouse you have not seen one does not mean that they are not out there.
There is a Daytona prototype Riley down in the south that run club races. And he makes the cut to be a ITO car ,and he wants us to let him run enduros. That should make a ITC take a another look.
 
Most of the enduros are running sprint times the whole race. As a driver I could live with the speed differential. As a race chair I will not under any condition. I would love to be able to run my ITO RX7 but realize it would not be safe. Might fly at a track like Kershaw, but never at VIR or Roebling.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Which, for the most part, is true for even the long enduros. For the past several years, the Point has been mostly hares and few tortoises.

I find it curious that what you find acceptable as a driver, you do not find acceptable as a race chair.

VIR? Plenty of opportunities for an uber car to get past an unter car - Turn 1 to Nascar, Turn 6 to the uphill esses, South bend to Oak Tree, Oak Tree to Roller Coaster, The righthander after Roller Coaster into Hog Pen, Hog Pen to Turn 1... and that's without the untercar being nice and getting off line to allow the ubercar past. I know from firsthand knowledge.

Closing speed isn't an issue on straights. It is a potential issue when present in corners and I'm not certain that the differential between a hotsnot ITS and ITC CRX is all that different than an ITO Mustang and the CRX is all that different in corners.

The bottom line is that ECR doesn't need these ubercars to earn its keep and so there is no reason to add them, even if there were a dozen of them clammering to get in.

RX3There is a Daytona prototype Riley down in the south that run club races. And he makes the cut to be a ITO car[/b]
Click to expand...

Tube-frame car, correct? Ran in the GrandAm Rolex Series, correct?

From the SEDIV ITO rules:

"Tube frame race cars are not eligible for ITO"

Competition vehicles from the following Touring type series are allowed to
compete in ITO:
SCCA World Challenge GT
American V-8 Supercar Series
BMWCCA H thru I Stock/Prepared
Corvette Challenge
Ferrari Challenge
GrandAm GS
IMSA Firehawk GrandSport
NASA American Iron
NASA Camaro/Mustang Challenge
PCA A thru F Stock
Touring Corvette Challenge (TCC)
Viper Racing League

Mr. Riley DP fails to qualify for the class on two counts.
 
the cars have a monocock frame.
[/b]
Click to expand...

From 2003 re: Crawford
"The Crawford DP03 is built with push-rod suspension, an Xtrac gearbox and an aluminum honeycomb chassis surrounding the mandated Daytona Prototype tube frame center section."

Today re: Riley
"Engine bay chassis tubes ceramic coated to reduce heat transfer to cockpit"

Date unknown re:Pontiac-Riley Mk XI Daytona Prototype R&T.com
"Even though the tube-frame Daytona Prototype"

Date: August 2007 re:Rohr DP
"The chassis construction is a steel tube frame combined with aluminum semi-monocoque.."

I believe the cars are tube framed with a skin put on the tubes to approximate a monocoque.
 
In addition, neither Daytona Sports Prototypes nor the Rolex Endurance Series is among those "Touring type series" listed as being eligible for ITO. I can certainly believe Mr. Tuttle wants to run enduros to obtain additional seat time, but I can NOT believe CFR (which refuses to allow Craftsman Series trucks to run in SPO) is seriously considering such a request.

And I again repeat Rob (Cobrar05, not Langlotz), don't base your relative speed argument only on events you've been to. But even if you choose to do so, at VIR there was a decent National T-1 Corvette disguised as a BP car (Russ Snow) running 2:03's. The TCC rules are more liberal than T-1, so the best of those guys will be nearing the magic 2:00 mark. That brings the 2:04 turned by the ITO winner pretty much into line.

What jjjanos said is the best statement so far - "The bottom line is that ECR doesn't need these ubercars to earn its keep and so there is no reason to add them, even if there were a dozen of them clammering to get in." And right now, there aren't a dozen ITO cars even running the sprints. Build that number first.
 
Butch, I saw Russ and his vette. Its Bob Maher's 38 car that he bought. Its not the T1 car. Unless you mean Maher's car is a T1.
The blue car below.

47b7d635b3127cce985486ed373e0000002.jpg
 
Rob,

I was not aware Russ had bought Bob's car (I DID know that Bob had a new one, however), so I stand corrected. It was T-1 National Champion AJ Aquilante that ran a 2:04 in August in a borrowed T-1 car, but then that puts ME in the spot of using one event to make my case. :blink:

I agree that the #38 car is not a T-1 car, but as a former World Challenge GT car it IS eligible to run ITO as well as BP. A decent T-1 car runs 2:08's at VIR, so a more modified TCC car should be faster - maybe not the 2:00 mark, but certainly 2:03-2:04.

How 'bout we continue this discussion off-line at the track next week?
 
If they can go that fast then why are they are not required the safety equipment of cars with like speed and horse power. An I.T. cage is not sufficient for a car with this much horse power and weight. In my opinion,
 
From the SEDIV ITO Rules (emphasis is mine):

= = = = = =

1. All cars shall meet or exceed current safety standards in the ITCS (9.1.3.D 10).
2. Fuel cells, weld in roll cages, fire systems, and NASCAR style door bars are recommended.
3. All cars shall run on D.O.T. approved tires unless otherwise using a spec tire for their particular Touring type series.
4. Unless listed below, tube frame race cars are not eligible for ITO/ITU.
5. Competition vehicles from the following Touring type series are allowed to compete in ITO:

American V-8 Supercar Series
BMWCCA H thru I Stock/Prepared
Corvette Challenge
Ferrari Challenge
GrandAm GS
IMSA Firehawk GrandSport
NASA American Iron
NASA Camaro/Mustang Challenge
NASA Factory Five Challenge
NASA 911 Cup
NASA 944 Spec Super Cup
PBOC Stock/Improved G thru L
PCA A thru F Stock
Touring Corvette Challenge (TCC)
Viper Racing League (except GT-C and GT-MC)

6. Additional cars from Touring type series will be considered for future inclusion by application to the SEDIV Class Review Board.
7. Cars entering from the above series must have in their possession a copy of the rules from that series and must comply entirely with those rules.
8. No “cherry picking” of preparation rules from multiple series is permitted.
9. All cars shall display ITO as their class designation.
10. Factory manufactured all-wheel-drive cars are eligible.

FUEL TESTING:
ITO shall meet fuel specifications in GCR 9.3.25 for either GT or IT cars.

= = = = = =

ITO gives us a place to allow cars from other Touring series and groups (i.e. - NASA) to run SCCA events without having to modify their cars to the SCCA prep rules (fuel-injected Pony cars being the prime example). A LOT of regions do the same thing and call it ITE. I think CFR called it ITGT.

Bottom line, if you don't want to run ITO in CFR, then put it in your Supps to exclude them.
 
Sure you can. You do it now with selected SPO cars (the Craftsman Trucks) and that's a SARRC class.

4.7.1 allows you to refuse any entry without giving a reason and that's not appealable. So I wonder if you DO give a reason (you think ITO cars are unsafe), does that fall outside 4.7.1?

You also choose to override the SEDIV (SARRC) rule for tires in SM by putting that in the Supps because you think that's best for your region. Why would this be any different?
 
Butch
I thought that we may be able to work through some of these things with a phone call but I see that you do not want to talk. And you do not wish to resolve any of the issues that the two regions have.
 
Grafton,.

Sorry for my tardy reply, duty called. I thought you were referencing something I had done during one or more of the races when you were talking about the ECR and GCR rules, I try hard to abide by them, it creates too many problems when you go "off the reservation", but I understand what you are referencing now.

Your points are absolutely valid, the results have to be available at the track, even the next day is unacceptable.

Timing and scoring in the Florida Region is a chronic problem, one that the Region must find an answer to, there was one SARRC race run last fall (2007 race held in 2006) that didn't have results untill June of this year, and those are sprint races, there is NO excuse for that.

I absolutely agree, Points should be posted promptly so teams have the ability to plan ahead. Information is the lifeblood of any series, ECR is no different and points are a major part of the equation.

I don't think I should comment on the Homestead/pit lane situation, I believe it is in the C.O.A. at the present time, I will have to wait to see what happens just like anyone else, I am just a spectater now.

I believe we should do away with pit transit times altogether, advise teams what the average pit lane transit time normally is based on the length of pit lane at the different tracks, but make the total pit stop time 5:30 and maintain pit lane speed with radar guns. It should be the responsibility of the teams to make certain that they stop a sufficient length of time to make it a legal pit stop.

These are all things that can be worked out and the input from drivers such as yourself can help a lot, make suggestions and requests, include anything that you feel will improve the series.

Of even more importance is what we can do to make the ECR series more user frinedly for the Regions, that it is too expensive for the Regions goes without saying, and if we can't get the Regions behind the ECR Series, it is going to die on the vine.

Once again I would like to see the ECR series more closely modeled after the SARRC Series, although SARRC isn't perfect, it is one of the most successful series in club racing.

On another subject, I have to agree with Robin, ITO cars are just going to be too fast/heavy for the ECR Series, and we have to draw the line somewhere, anywhere we draw it , someone is going to be left out and unhappy.

Krys
 
Krys,

Thanks for your response. You're ruling on the protest quite refreshing given the disrespect for the rules shown by the other parties involved. I don't include you in that group. My accusation of poor conduct is aimed squarely at the Series Administrator (Carol Cone) and the ECR committee (Jim Creighton, Robin Langlotz, and Buddy Matthews).

That said, I realize these folks are volunteers, likely overworked and underappreciated. I will be happy to help if I'm allowed (and I know of two others who may as well).

Grafton
 
Grafton

I don't think anyone did anything wrong, especially the committee, heck we have all spent a lot of time on this thing and I am not certain that the outcome will satisfy everyone when it is finalized.

I haven't seen the results after my ruling, but I am afraid that it is going to have a negative impact on some drivers that weren't penalized before and, I guess now, that I won't find out untill the COA renders it's decision, regardless, If we are going to continue an ECR series, we need to let the committee know how we would like to see it structured. Any new structure has to be user friendly for the Regions, if it costs the Regions $ and there is little or no benefit to the drivers in the Region, then it simply isn't going to fly. Talk to the other drivers, get some feedback flowing and lets help the committee put together a series that will not just survive, but flourish.


Krys
 
Grafton

I don't think anyone did anything wrong, especially the committee, heck we have all spent a lot of time on this thing and I am not certain that the outcome will satisfy everyone when it is finalized.

I haven't seen the results after my ruling, but I am afraid that it is going to have a negative impact on some drivers that weren't penalized before and, I guess now, that I won't find out untill the COA renders it's decision, regardless, If we are going to continue an ECR series, we need to let the committee know how we would like to see it structured. Any new structure has to be user friendly for the Regions, if it costs the Regions $ and there is little or no benefit to the drivers in the Region, then it simply isn't going to fly. Talk to the other drivers, get some feedback flowing and lets help the committee put together a series that will not just survive, but flourish.
Krys
[/b]
Click to expand...
The future of ECR is one issue. You run a series for money and you have a higher standard to meet. You do not change the rules after the fact when it changes prize money. This is the very reason many RE's are looking at dropping the current series for 08 and starting over. This is a big black eye for all involved.
 
Steve, The Committee believed it had the right to make those changes, it remains to be seen whether the COA will agree, and I am not going to comment on that while it is still in the COA.

"This is the very reason many RE's are looking at dropping the current series for 08 and starting over. This is a big black eye for all involved."

There were a total of 22 drivers registered in 7 of the 9 ECR classes who were running for money in 2007, just over 3 per class and yet the cost to the Regions was still $30.00 per ECR car and $25.00 per non ECR car. We normally had between 30 ond 40 cars (CFR would have slightly larger numbers), but an average would probably be 35 cars, assume 25 were ECR Class cars then the cost to the Region to put on the ECR Enduro was $1,000.00 right off the top, that is $10,000 generated by the SEDIV Racing Regions for 22 drivers, THAT is the reason many Region officials are reconsidering the ECR series. I believe it was Robin Langlotz who commented on this forum earlier this year that CFR had 2 drivers participating as REGISTERED drivers is the ECR and was wondering why CFR should spend the time and money it takes to run an ECR if CFR Regional drivers weren't participating, I have to agree, and if we don't change it there won't be a Divisional Enduro Championship or an ECR.

Sorry to disagree, but talk to Robin Langlotz or Mike Finn or maybe Butch Kummer, I think they will agree that the Series has to be Region friendly and cost effective, and it also needs to include a new, easily understood rules package that is enforceable and ENFORCED.

Krys
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top