Yes Joe, your are doing a great job for F500. Be careful that the SCCA doesn't get you on the CRB. Wait a minute, that is a great idea. Joe Palmer on the CRB!
Thanks ... Jay Novak -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of John Whitling Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 10:01 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [F500] Pucks again Thanks for all your work and staying on top of this! Joe Palmer wrote: > John & Classmates, > > Several weeks ago, upon learning that the Improvement Items supporting > documentation never made it to the BOD from the CRB, I immediately > resent it all to the BOD E-mail address and to my local BOD > representative. > > I subsequently sent several messages asking for guidance on how best > to proceed to get the proposal reconsidered with all the supporting > information. > > The latest message I've received indicates that the BOD is reviewing > the decision and I should watch Fastrack for any changes or > clarifications. > > Shiny Side Up, > Joe Palmer > TX Novakar #56 > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Whitling" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 8:25 AM > Subject: Re: [F500] Pucks again > > >> I think that rather than restarting this whole process, we should >> re-submit the 3" maximum puck (you don't have to change if you don't >> want to) proposal but this time with the poling results we did last >> winter. Sure I would like shocks but that's pie in the sky right now. >> Forget it for the short term. >> >> My plan, and probably most people's plan, was to build in some rebound >> dampening with 3" puck so that half was for jounce (means that one side >> of the pucks must be compressed in the cans while the other amount is >> for bump that is a lot more linear. I would like to try this but >> admittedly the performance increase would be minimal and confined to >> bumpy situations. >> >> Joe Palmer wrote: >> >>> Three? 27 at Run-Offs, only a couple teenagers, four newbies >>> announced on this list in the past several weeks, and I'm in contact >>> with four more off this list, and I'm sure there are others. I've >>> spoken to most of them and they all joined F5 for the same reason . . >>> . almost verbatim from Cory & Chuck's messages, which happens to be >>> the same reason I joined, and Cory, and Chuck, and 99% of this list. >>> >>> We all look forward to the learnings from the FS project . . . as much >>> as you're willing to share. I think the "democratic" style >>> "Improvements Initiative" is the fair and efficient way to determine >>> what is best for the class. We're certainly free to launch another >>> effort to push through another list of Improvement Items for the class >>> in 2007 . . . maybe inexepensive shocks and who knows what else. >>> >>> The healthy debate on this list and testing and FS kind of projects >>> are much appreciated by all in providing facts to the debate, which >>> will lead to an informed class membership and informed "vote". >>> >>> . . . we all want the same thing for the F500 class . . . healthy >>> growth and continued close, affordable competition. >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Reinhardt" >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: <[email protected]> >>> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 7:26 AM >>> Subject: RE: [F500] Pucks again >>> >>> >>>> Hey Chuck, and all three of those families will contiue to enjoy the >>>> class!!! >>>> >>>> >>>> CR >>>> >>>> >>>> "McAbee, Chuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> Chris - >>>> >>>> The Rakovan of 2005 used the wording 'snowmobile derived drive >>>> train' to >>>> implement a design around a transfer case that permitted the engine to >>>> be turned so the exhaust ports faced the rear of the car. While that >>>> design was found to be legal, when protested at the 2005 Runoff's; the >>>> CRB/BOD implemented clarifying GCR wording to make it illegal for 2006 >>>> and beyond. The Rakovan of 2005 ventured into the gray area of the >>>> rules. >>>> >>>> If the CRB/BOD would implement a 'RULE' about the 3 inch rubbers or >>>> shocks, that would be in the Black & White area of the rules with no >>>> gray. If there are Black & White rules for the manufacturers to build >>>> cars around, they will as long as someone will buy them. Kenney Price >>>> built, I believe, 6 new Scorpions that competed at the Runoff's this >>>> year. The 'Highly Competitive' racer will always spend his money if he >>>> thinks something is better (i.e.. Faster) than what he currently has. >>>> >>>> I have to agree with Cory - F500 is not a stepping stone class for >>>> young >>>> Karters on their way to be the next Michael Schumacher. It is a highly >>>> competitive class for nominally young FAMILY men (I know all about the >>>> old pharts that also participate, cause I are one) and women that have >>>> the passion to race but don't want to bankrupt their family in their >>>> pursuit of that passion. The talk of Bike Motors, Geared >>>> Transmissions, >>>> Hydraulic Shocks and Springs does one thing and one thing alone - >>>> DRIVE >>>> COST UP AT A GEOMETRICAL RATE besides making all existing cars >>>> obsolete. >>>> >>>> Were the class to implement Bike Motors, Geared Transmissions, >>>> Hydraulic >>>> Shocks and Springs, then the class would be just like all the other >>>> Formula classes and lose it's market. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Chuck McAbee >>>> SEDIV #16 >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris >>>> Reinhardt >>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 11:34 PM >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: [F500] Pucks again >>>> >>>> >>>> Cory, there's no foundation that new cars will be built around new >>>> shocks, ask any of the builders, Jay for example on here, there isn't >>>> enough money/new driver's/interest in the class to design/build a new >>>> car. >>>> Here's a recent example, the Rakovan, do you think he wants to build >>>> a new car around a new shock to find out it will outlawed? >>>> We keep getting back to the fear of the unknown.. >>>> >>>> CR >>>> >>>> >>>> ----------------------------------------- >>>> This email transmission and any accompanying attachments may >>>> contain CSX privileged and confidential information intended only >>>> for the use of the intended addressee. Any dissemination, >>>> distribution, copying or action taken in reliance on the contents >>>> of this email by anyone other than the intended recipient is >>>> strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error >>>> please immediately delete it and notify sender at the above CSX >>>> email address. Sender and CSX accept no liability for any damage >>>> caused directly or indirectly by receipt of this email. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------- >>>> How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone >>>> call rates. >>> >> >> [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type text/x-vcard which had a >> name of jwhit.vcf] [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type text/x-vcard which had a name of jwhit.vcf] ________________________________ FormulaCar Magazine - A Proud Supporter of Formula 500 The Official Publication of Junior Formula Car Racing Subscribe Today! www.formulacarmag.com or 519-624-2003 _________________________________ _______________________________________________ F500 mailing list - [email protected] To unsubscribe or change options please visit: http://f500.org/mailman/listinfo/f500 *** Please, DO NOT send unsubscribe requests to the mailing list! ***
