PDA

View Full Version : SCCA Runoffs in Topeka Kansas



Hap Waldrop
10-04-2006, 06:50 AM
Well I head out Friday for Topeka Kansas for the SCCA runoffs at Heartland Park, it's our first time at HPT for the Runoffs. I won't be driving this year, shop work got in the way. I'll be crewing for Ron Bartell, 2 time HP champion, we helped Ron switch over from the 948 motors to the Limited Prep 1275s this year. Ron is running a new classification we call "hybrid", meaning the LP 1275 motor with the coil over suspension car, right now we feel the SCCA has our weight too high, so we don't think we can win it, but think we have a good 4th place car anyway and that's close enough to put us in the hunt should others get in trouble. Wish us luck.

aeronca65t
10-04-2006, 09:33 AM
Man, that's a whole different world than my $1000 "bomber" Spridget.

Good luck! (that's a loooong pull!).

Are you guys running the quarter elliptic rears?
Also: what do you think a "limited prep" motor makes on the dyno?

Hap Waldrop
10-06-2006, 06:27 AM
I bet you have as much fun if not more though. Ron almost didn't go this year, it's the first year with the new engine and classfication, with the weight being what it is with this first year classification they made sure we don't dominate, we need a good 25-50 pounds of lead off to be in the hunt. So this year for the most part is to prove to the rule makers we need a weight reduction. When Ron told me he thought he might not go because he didn't think he could win, for the first time ever I wasn't envious of his two national championships, because I've never in 25 years of racing not thought about going to a race because I didn't think I could win, being a national champion does have it's downsides I guess, I'm sure I'll never know as a drivier anyway. I'm going vintage racing in the future because I think it allows the most fun, SCCA national racing can sometimes take the fun out of it all with the serious effort it requires to win.

GB1
10-06-2006, 06:55 AM
Good luck Hap.

Patrick

aeronca65t
10-06-2006, 07:32 AM
[ QUOTE ]
.....because I've never in 25 years of racing not thought about going to a race because I didn't think I could win....

[/ QUOTE ]

I usually just go to a race praying my axles don't break...and if they do, then I'm hoping the beer is cold! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/jester.gif

By the way, Vintage Racer Group ( www.vrgonline.org/ (http://www.vrgonline.org/) )
usually runs an event in mid April at VIR....I'm sure they'll have one in 2007. That's not too far from you. They are a fun group to run with.

VRG also has a Turkey Bowl event coming up on Nov 24-26 at Summit, but I'm Chairing (and running in) our EMRA 4-hour the week before at Summit, so I probably won't make it to that. You are always welcome at our EMRA events too...we are very low key and just in it for the fun.

Hap Waldrop
10-07-2006, 06:01 AM
Yes, love VIR, we head there in couple of weeks for the second annual Production Car Festival. I raced there several times, great track, great facilty. It's probably going to take a year or two to build the vintage car in my spare time, but I still have the SCCA HP car to race while the vintage car is being built. I'm going to take my time on the new vintage car, I've got something to prove to a few vintage car builders /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Oh well, I working on a couple of cups of joe to get me kick started, then hit the shower and head out the door for Topeka, going to spend the night in Memphis, get me some suds/ribs/blues then head out of Memphis Sunday morning for the final leg of the trip to Topeka. Yall be good /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Tim Hollister
10-07-2006, 06:20 AM
Hap,

Have a safe trip and hope Ron and you enjoy yourselves!

Should be interesting how the hybrid runs -- however it finishes! (Will likely be in hybrid myself next season...)

Tim

Gearhead
10-08-2006, 07:41 PM
Hap please keep us informed of how the weekend went lots of fans out here Mark

WhatsThatNoise
10-09-2006, 06:59 PM
Ran this weekend at the 41st annual WOR games in Mid-Ohio.
(SCCA double regional)

Had a blast & managed a 1:52.1 (not bad for a POS ITB Pinto)

We had 2 Brits in our group.
AH Sprite (H-prod) DNF Sat-DNS Sun
MG Midget (H-prod) DNF Sat-DNF Sun

Not a good weekend for Spridgets......

We also ran w/ Spec Racer Fords.
With a 10 second difference in lap times, it was kind of stupid to run us together.
Talk about getting passed fast...

MGAdams
10-10-2006, 04:02 PM
Class HP qualifying is here:
http://leaderboard.vfx.com/SCCA/Runoffs/LiveTiming.asp?Class=HP
You can also follow live timing as well.

Monkeywrench
10-10-2006, 05:38 PM
It should be noted that it was raining today, that is why there were so few cars on the track in Q2. Craig Chima is on the pole so far in HP. The first qualifying session was dry.

cherokee
10-20-2006, 10:37 AM
Warning:
Shamless Plug!!!

Look at my pics at www.gt-actionphotos.com (http://www.gt-actionphotos.com)
Lots of LBC pics.

DART
10-20-2006, 01:16 PM
Man, that is a humongous effort!!! Kudo's for doing all those pics and making them available for free. How did the team you crewed for do?
BTW, is there still a sports car club in Jefferson City? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cheers.gif

Hap Waldrop
10-23-2006, 06:36 AM
Post deleted by Hap Waldrop

aeronca65t
10-23-2006, 08:11 AM
Man, I hate to hear stuff like that!
You guys probably spent in one event what I spend in a full season.
And that is why I do all my own valve jobs on an ancient KO Lee tool grinder (not a valve grinder) that I borrow once in a while. My three-angle valve jobs may not be perfect, but at least they are basically correct.

So anyway, what was the silly oil pressure mistake?
(if you did it, chances are the rest of us will do it too...and I'm switching to a 1275 next year, so it will apply to me)

pbraun
10-23-2006, 02:26 PM
Bummer, Hap. Sounds like you did a yoeman's job attempting to fix the problem, tho. Next year, better results!
Notice how those MINIs did pretty well in SSC this year. Next year, no restrictor plate and they will have to kick the butt of the Solciste and others to win again! That will no be easy. Ever notice how when a car does really well, the SCCA gives it a major penalty? All in an attempt to equalize competition........hrumph! One reason why I am not running any more.

Hap Waldrop
10-24-2006, 06:40 AM
The silly oil pressure problem is goofy for sure, Ron has been running dry sumped 948 forever, no engine dipstick, dipstick in the dry sump tank. Ron was doing all the oil checking , so I never paid any attention to the dipstick, until we pulled the motor and look closely at everything and saw no problems, then I saw the dipstick, it was 948 dipstick, they do not have a stop built into the stick, but rather the the 948 had and indention in the oil pan to stop the dipstick from hitting the bottom of the pan, the 1275 unit has a stop built into it which stops on the plastic dipstick tube. Long story short, the 948 dipstick was bottoming on the Winners Circle oil pan and the readings were low because of it, not enough oil in the pan to begin with. I told it was silly, but to Ron's defense, he just didn't know, he been using the dry sump set up for many years now and had never had a 1275 before.

Ron did good job to just make the conversion over to the 1275 and qualify for the runoffs this year, in the past he has had more crew throughout the season and with his job it has been tough to acomplish what he did this year. So he had alittle growing pains with the new set up and he knows now and we plan for next year, even with all this we were still the fastest "Hybrid (LP 1275 engine w/ full prep suspension) there and we were surely good enough for the top 5 had we not had the problem, so we chalk the first year up as a learning experience and move on.

aeronca65t
10-24-2006, 06:51 AM
.......we chalk the first year up as a learning experience and move on.

Those are good rules for life in general!

That dry sump system costs more than my whole car, so I guess there is no chance that I will ever have that problem!

Tim Hollister
10-24-2006, 10:02 AM
[ QUOTE ]
...even with all this we were still the fastest "Hybrid (LP 1275 engine w/ full prep suspension) there and we were surely good enough for the top 5 had we not had the problem...

[/ QUOTE ]

So Hap, just curious but have you modified your opinion as to the whether or not the hybrid weighs too much as classed?? (SCCA minimum weight for those that may not know...)

Curious because I'm considering doing the same thing next season, and maybe with two cars.

Thanks,

Tim

Hap Waldrop
10-24-2006, 06:20 PM
Tim, no I thinks it needs a weight break, but we knew this going in, this year was to prove to the SCCA that it was classified too heavy at 1677 pounds, that's 100 pounds more than it had to weight with 948 and 144 pounds more than the LP car. I talked with Adhoc about this from the get-go and we felt like 1625 was the right weight to begin with, but they put us in at 1677 to place it safe and avoid a overdog.

Ron was the fastest "hybrid" in qualifying but I think we could go faster than we went, but at HPT even if we had put our best effort forward we would still be 2 seconds off Feller and another two off Chima, so we need a break for sure. Tony Drum, Randy Canfield, Kendall Jones, Loren Moore and few other were running this set up as well, Tony Drum did go faster in the race than Ron did in qualifying, but not much quicker. Also keep in mind the 1098 Spridget is now headed to HP at 1650 pounds for 2007 and I believe it will be the most potent package of them all, Look for Gary Whitman to make a good showing if he comes to HPT next year.

As for the hybrid and the LP 1275, they pretty much dominated the HP field, I think they were only 3 or 4 948s even in the race. So to answer your question even more, I think the "hybrid needs help, but even now at 1677 is a better choice than the 948, look for the 948s to be a thing of the past in a couple of years in HP.

Bugeye58
10-24-2006, 06:26 PM
"Look for the 948s to be a thing of the past in a couple of years in HP."

Not what I wanted to hear, Hap, but I suppose the handwriting has been on the wall for quite awhile.
BTW, Kendall Jones and Tom Feller both got their start with us at Waterford Hills.
Jeff

Tim Hollister
10-25-2006, 09:17 AM
Hap,

Many thanks for the information -- appreciated! I suspected as much regarding the weight break but was looking for confirmation. (even though I very, very, seldom post, I read the Prod board daily)

I am somewhat surprised the 948 is going by the wayside so quickly though. It was certainly interesting reading back when you were addressing the possibility of the hybrid car and the reasons for its necessity. Rods were the limiting factor, then cranks, and now finally the actual engine blocks themselves breaking. Understandable though with what we were trying to get out of them. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazyeyes.gif

I may put both my cars in H Prod next season or I may keep mine in F and the one my son drives in H. We'll see.

(One thing we'll see for sure is if my car will even be allowed to run with the current cage!! What a shame -- the roll cage fiasco!)

Anyway, thanks again and have great day!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cheers.gif

Tim

aeronca65t
10-25-2006, 09:45 AM
Interesting reading...

There are still lots and lots of 948s in vintage....I was on the track with at least 5 of them in my last vintage event (Summit). I guess the vintage stuff will end up being the "home" for a lot of these motors.

Also, can you explain the issue with the new roll cage rules? (I'm just being curious....I know it won't really affect me).

Tim Hollister
10-25-2006, 02:48 PM
Nial (hope I've got that spelled right! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif)

WARNING! VERY LONG POST AHEAD!!

I've got an SCCA National level 948 that I bought from a well-known racer a couple of years ago and have yet to fire it up. I'll have to dig up the dyno sheet but it was between 90 and 95 horsepower. Dry-sumped too though that can be undone. I'll probably hang onto it awhile longer as a spare for the kid's car.

The roll cage fiasco? I'm not fully qualified to explain it as it goes back several years before I got involved in road racing. My qualification comes from owning a car that may be declared ineligible to run as soon as 1/1/2007 and therefore feeling like a victim of the club I am a member of. By the way, this car (the lead car in my avatar) won the 2000 F Production Runoffs race while being driven by a previous owner. This ongoing situation is one of a couple of things about the SCCA that causes me to have a love/hate relationship with the club. Anyway, to try to keep long story as short as possible...

Back in the mid '90's there was a move to modify the main hoops in the roll cages so the main hoop would extend across the width of the car thereby getting rid of the cages that loop up over the driver's head and right back down. A deadline was given and some folks modified their cars and some didn't. Some of those that did not were issued a "Gold Card" or "Gold Seal" allowing them to continue to run with the "non-compliant" cages. (I bought my first car and it had a Gold Seal in the logbook. I thought that was a good thing as it stated the cage was compliant! I was uninformed and dead wrong!) Over the years, various deadlines have been issued and rescinded. No one seems to be able even recall the reason for the proposed changes -- safety or a perceived aerodynamic advantage.

The SCCA has/had a drawing in the GCR that is/was labeled as "recommended." Before the Board of Directors now is a proposed rule making the "recommended" cage required 1/1/2007 unless one was issued a Gold Card before sometime in 2005.

Two things wrong with that. No one I am aware of knew Gold Cards could still be issued therefore we didn't ask for them. I seriously doubt they would have been issued even if folks had asked!

And it splits cars that are basically built the same into two groups -- those with the cars with Gold Cards that can run another three seasons as they are, and those that must fork out the cash now for new cages to run next year. IMO, inequitable and unfair to the latter group -- especially guys like me who got involved after this mess had started and did not know about it.

And this has see-sawed back and forth several times since. Stop-go-stop-go. Spend the money, oops, sorry, you don't have to spend (waste) your money, oops again, yes you do! Sometimes I feel like removing the good parts from the car, breaking out the acetylene torch, and cutting up the car. And then sending it to the SCCA headquarters in Topeka!

Also, the SCCA ordered an engineering study and testing of their recommended cage. The SCCA's own recommended cage failed the tests they sanctioned. And the results of the test were sealed however a few copies did get out. I don't know if I still have the one I had but just how ridiculousl can one organization get?

So why am I likely to be required to waste my money? Some people are mad because they spent the money to comply while others were not required to? Some as yet undefined safety reason? Or some ill-perceived competition advantage? If you were to ask around, you'd likely get all three answers. I find none of them acceptable and I like my car the way it is!

Then there was the reduction in life span for SFI certified restraint systems from five years to two years. The SCCA did that on the SFI's recommendation based on a 30 plus year old study of fibers exposed to ultraviolet light -- not even on a recent study of woven harnesses. I used to run TeamTech harnesses in both cars but now I run cheaper stuff I do not care for. Who pays the bills for SFI? The manufacturers of the safety equipment! Conflict of interest? Ya think?

Head and neck restraints -- another sore spot. Lots of folks like the Isaac system and many have spent the money for it. The SCCA BOD just rejected a proposed rule that would have outlawed the Isaac devices so on the surface it looks like I could safely invest in a couple -- one for me and one for my son. BUT with SCCA's wishy washy track record, I've a gut feeling this is not over yet and I could still be wasting my money.

So as you can see, I feel the SCCA would have me spend (waste or potentially waste) my money on items I do not feel are necessary for my, or my son's, safety.

The SCCA wants to retain members and attract new members. IMO the SCCA itself is running people off! I know I'd like to take part in some SCCA events and even earn the coveted national license however because of the way the SCCA is, I have only turned a wheel in one SCCA event. That was a joint driver's school between the SCCA and Waterford Hills (WHRRI). And that was two years ago now.

Anyway, I've rambled on here far longer than I intended. The above is certainly not complete however I do feel it is pretty accurate especially in how it affects me, and other potential members/racers.

Let me say this loud and clear. It is absolutely wonderful to have an organization like Waterford Hills, its people and facilities only three miles from my house!

Hap, Jeff and/or Jolly, please feel free to jump in here if you want! I'm only an SCCA member who has chosen to date to not partake in the SCCA's club racing only due to the SCCA's own actions over the years. Don't get me wrong, I have got myself fired up several times and was "going to do it" only to be beat back down by the SCCA.

Love - hate. Love - hate. Ya gotta love, err, hate it!

Tim

PS: Wish the vintage organizations were more active in these parts. I could be convinced!

aeronca65t
10-25-2006, 07:28 PM
Tim:

Yes, you spelled Nial correctly! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif

I am a former SCCA member, and I hate to say it, but this type of stuff is part of the reason that I am no longer a member.
I still have lot of friends who are SSCA-ers, so it's not the club-members....it's the "manangement" (using that term somewhat loosely).

I think that part of the reason that the vintage clubs have grown is due to people like me, who just want to go out and have some fun with their cars. And surprisingly, despite the (generally) more valuable cars in vintage, the racing is often cheaper because we aren't *killed* with pointless rules.

This is also the reason why regular club-racing groups like WHRRI, EMRA (my club) and NASA have done OK....many of the members of these smaller grassroots clubs are disgruntled former-SCCA members. NASA in particular has been very successful in marketing itself as an alternative to the the SCCA on a nationwide level. EMRA was started (in '69) by some of my friends who felt the SCCA costs had gotten out of hand....yes, even back then.
And the grassroots clubs seems to have more true amateurs like me. EMRA has it's share of big motorhomes and giant car carriers, but we also have dozens of race cars that have probably been built for under $2000 (including mine). Please note that my little econo-racer has already been in 12 races this year at five different tracks (with some enduros and some vintage events) and I still have at least three races left. My total '07 campaigning costs for #11 will probably be less than $4200, including tires, car maintenance, entrys, meals, gas and some decent hotels. My local SCCA pals could never come close to that level of cost versus seat-time.
Your cage fiasco is just that. If such changes really need to be brought about, they need to be phased in so that everyone has a fair chance at compliance.Creating a group of "Haves" (with Gold Cards) and "Have Nots' (without the Gold Card) is an arrogant and surefire way to irritate the folks who are supposed to be your constituents. It's interesting that the SCCA seems to have "buried" the results of the failed engineering test....gee, I wonder why?

I'm the EMRA RaceChair and I HATE the restraint rule! I get at least two notes a week about it. When the SCCA went over to it, we were basically forced by our insurance carrier to follow suit. So now, many of us buy cheezy, Chinese-made harnesses because the good ones we bought are three years old. By the way, last time I needed new belts, I paid extra for the "FIA approved" belts so that they would be good for five years. They were also Chinese imports that don't look any different to my eye than the 2-year belts (except for the FIA tag). Someone is making a buck off that deal.

As far as head restraints, I am still waiting for one I like. To me, there are a lot of reasons why the Isaac looks better than the HANS (and not just cost). There is also an opinion among some of us that the older-syle HANS device may actually create a safety problem in some applications. I would spend the money if I felt there was a system that really looked like it made me safer....I'm unconvinced at this point.

By the way, I would love to tow out and meet up with you and Jeff at Waterford, but I've still got this job-thing for a few more years.....a weekend at Waterford would be a great retirement gift to myself.
Hang in there, and don't forget....we're doing all this for *fun*, right! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/jester.gif

WhatsThatNoise
10-25-2006, 08:21 PM
[ QUOTE ]

Back in the mid '90's there was a move to modify the main hoops in the roll cages

[/ QUOTE ]
Next year the 2 door bar rule is suppose to be enforced.
(passenger side)
Once again I find myself noncompliant. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif

AngliaGT
10-25-2006, 10:57 PM
Heck,back in '81 we called it the "Spendy Car Club of America!
Running Showroom Stock "C",most of us drove our cars to the track & were on tight budgets ($200/race).
I would love to drive in competition again,but don't
see it financially possible.
Man,I miss the "Old Days"!

- Doug

Tim Hollister
10-27-2006, 10:04 AM
Nial,

Fully understand and agree with your post above!

By the way, private message sent...

Tim

Tim Hollister
10-27-2006, 10:08 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Heck,back in '81 we called it the "Spendy Car Club of America!...

[/ QUOTE ]

Doug, that's the funniest thing I've heard today! If only it weren't so true! If you don't mind, can I use that line? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/yesnod.gif

Tim

DrEntropy
10-27-2006, 11:37 AM
Doug's right and I'm just gonna ~steal~ the quote.

"Cubic Dollars" rule of motor racing.

rileyimp
10-27-2006, 12:53 PM
Nial,

As an individual who used ( and I stress the term used) to race a G Mod sports racer let me tell you a bit about safety in a racecar. I was at Sebring October 23, 2004. I was racing in the vintage group in my G Mod Beach Mk4 (see Beach history on Nick England's website, lots of great pics!!!). As I came out of Big Bend under the drive over bridge my rear suspension let go. Needless to say I hit the wall at a fairly fast rate of speed and fortunately didn't die (although I broke both arms, both wrists, three ribs and a vertibrae and now have an 8" titanium bar in my arm and,oh yea, my wife and my doctor won't let me back in a racecar again after 38 years of racing). You need to get comfortable with the HANS because it could very well save your life. It did mine!!! I was told later that if I had hit the wall without one I would be dead. I was driving a little car on a well used racetrack in perfect conditions and the "It wouldn't ever happen to me" happened. Regardless of how well you prepare and how well you drive stuff happens. We are driving old racecars and adding new technology i.e. tire that stick, and even after having all of my suspension magna fluxed it still happened. Get smart and be safe, it can happen even in the smallest of cars (mine was less than a liter). Any time I hear someone say "I'm waiting for so and so to happen" or "I'm waiting for something more comfortable" or "I"m waiting for something cheaper" I could just strangle them. Your safety in a race car should be your first priority!!! We do this for fun, not to take undue risk. If it means you don't get to race for a couple of months as the cost of the safety equipment you just bought took all your entry money than so be it. The next time you get the chance to race you'll be safe!!! I hope you and all else who read this post take heed. Go fast but be safe.

AngliaGT
10-27-2006, 10:53 PM
Tim,Doc,

The quotes yours!

Thanks!

- Doug