SCCA Racers - Important Announcement, FProd Competition Adjustment Options

[ChrisFoley]

The Club Racing Board has seen fit to restrict our engines as a result of the Runoffs win by Mark Hotchkis.
This season we get to use 34mm venturis instead of the 38s we had last year. It is time to gather our evidence and write letters to the CRB expressing our feelings that this is an unfair competition adjustment which will hurt all the regular FP 914 competitors. The Kirby/Finch car will probably never be raced again and the rest of us are being made to suffer as a result of the superior effort expended by an essentially professional racing program in an amateur sport.

[ChrisFoley]

I decided there was more wrong than just an excessive competition adjustment so I wrote this letter to the SCCA Board of Directors. (IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/html/emoticons/mad.gif)

To: SCCA Board of Directors
Subject: Club Racing Competition Adjustments

In the February ‘06 Fastrack Addendum Tech Bulletin, TB 06-02a, it was announced that the FP Porsche 914 is now limited to 34mm venturis, down from 38mm in 2005. This is a drastic change (20% reduction in intake area) and effectively eliminates the 914 from being competetive with the Spitfires and MGs in F Production. I have already written a request to the CRB regarding this change, using their new online request form. A copy of that letter is included below for reference.
I am concerned that fair and proper procedures were not followed during the period leading up to the decision by the CRB. The sole basis for the competition adjustment appears to be that the lap record set by Mark Hotchkis (1:36.28) during the 2005 Runoffs was nearly 0.6 seconds faster than the next fastest car, the Spitfire driven by Steve Sargis (1:36.82).
Several things concern me about the procedure followed by the CRB which prompted me to write to the BOD:
· It is my understanding that a letter was received by the CRB requesting that the 914 be slowed down. NO acknowledgement of the letter was posted in Fastrack as would be the standard operating procedure for such requests. Such an announcement is required in order to give the membership an opportunity to respond and have their collective voice heard on such matters. I understand that the CRB has the ability to make competition adjustments as necessary without consulting the membership, but all requests by individual members should be presented to the rest of the club for their response to be sought. If the Competition Adjustment was made in response to such a private request and not due to a proactive Production Advisory Committee investigation it smacks of the dreaded “good ole boys” syndrome which has unfairly influenced the CRB in the past.
· If the Competition Adjustment was made following a non-biased investigation into Runoffs lap times then the EP Miata would also have had to receive a similar penalty, since Jon Brakke set a new lap record during the ’05 Runoffs EP Race (1:34.96) and was nearly a second faster than the next fastest car ( Lawrence Loshak, Honda Prelude – 1:35.84). However, a similar penalty was not applied to the EP Miata.
· I have never seen a Competition Adjustment of this magnitude handed out in response to a Runoffs lap record, especially after a race as competetive as the FP race was. 4 different types of car had legitimate championship potential and circumstances played as big a role as car prep and driving ability in determining the outcome of this race. Parity already existed between the Porsche, Spitfire, Midget, and MGB and only minor, if any, adjustment was needed to ensure fairness in future competitions.
Please investigate this matter to determine if the CRB acted in the legitimate best interest of fair competition in Club Racing. Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,