Jump to content

Rules Silly Season- Closed!


tacovini

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 240
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • D Algozine

    31

  • robbodleimages

    23

  • svttim

    18

  • stevepoe

    17

No worries, then the following season the rules will change to mandate that Dean's left arm be ziptied to the window net.

 

Do they make SFI spec zipties?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Warning: Unpopular post - Items in this post are closer then they appear

 

I asked myself, "How did a thread about rule changes have to do with argueably the best car prep and pro driver in AI"

My conclusion, it has nothing to do with him or anyone persoally, but people just can't get past that. All of the issues are with the cars and the lack of equallity in the cars, not the drivers. No one should have any issues with any of the drivers who choose the new cars and new stuff. It's the best thats available, hands down. Put these cars is very capable hands and it's nearly (I said NEARLY) impossible to beat.

 

However, "the car", (Boss/Grand Aam/WC/ Mustang Challenge) whatever you want to call it has been very benificial to a select few. The changes have made, firstly the Grand Am and Mustang Challenge cars legal in AI, and now the new Boss R legal. Who has benifited from that ?? How many new cars have been built by only a very small select shops? Who has rented out many of these cars over the last few years? A car that dominates makes for a good selling point / rental ?? Winning makes for good business. Now this car, which is basically a Grand Am car that was engineered, developed, and built by Ford Racing to win in Grand Am is not an OEM mass produced car. Its been in a wind tunnel, four 4 post shacker, and every other pro develpment tool that money can buy. The BS about falling behind in technology is so silly, STOP with the AS comparison. Its rediculious.

So, how does a Pro car built for Pro series get made legal for AI? Simple , just change the rules to allow it. And there is a pretty long list, and some changes were needed to be made within a weeks notice, or cars would not have been legal for Nationals. Thank god we altered the rules so a few extra guys (driver in question included) could be legal. Interesting president. Never seen it happen before or since. Maybe there will be an eleveth hour rule change to allow something for a 3rd gen F body. It could happen ?? Pretty easy to see where the "Love affair with Ford" statement is based on. You can expand on that statement and include, "a love afair with Ford and its' affiliates"

If any of you guys think these changes had anything to do with what Ford was producing on the assembly line, your wrong. Every other AI legal platform car had to build a street car into a race car, K members, brakes, control arms,,etc... However, the pro developed Grand Am is a large check away from hitting an AI track near you, which would be fine, if the rules weren't changed in order for it to be legal . By the way the rest of us did it the correct way and we built our car to be legal, not the other way around. Not one single GM car on the podium at Nationals for 6 years, any help for GM cars from AI rules guys? Nothing? (Just an example, don't go crazy with reasons why, there are other relevant examples, as well).

Sorry for the re-hash, just get on a roll. This has been going on for close to 6 years, and nothing, not one single change, adjustment, re-adjustment to level the playing field. This year is my last attempt, so I'm going out in flames. My fear is that the powers to be, just don't get it, which seems crazy. The only other option is, they get it, and that's just the way it's going to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suggest just that, everyone treated exactly equal, including the different platforms.

I agree with you Dave. I think the biggest challenge here is defining "unequal" so we know how to move it back to equal. I bet we ask everyone currently running in AI and we will get at least 10 answers... or 21 pages on a forum.

 

j

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, so after reading the entire trainwreck of a thread I see the following:

 

1 - Todd C. is the devil for unknown reasons

 

2 - Dean Martin (whom I call a friend of 10 years) is also the devil for building a competitive car, having gobs of talent, doing bunches of testing and for being fast.

 

3 - ABS is an issue for the guys that don't have it.

 

4a - The new cars need a higher HP:WT ratio (ex - 11:1 hp) -to add parity for the older cars

4b - The new cars need a higher TQ:WT ratio (ex - 10.5:1hp) -to add parity for the older cars

 

5 - Splitting the class is a dumb dumb idea

 

6 - Choosing an inexpensive & long lasting tire will help all racers currently running AI.

 

So that being the case:

A - give the S197's a weight penalty

B - Give cars with ABS a weight penalty, regardless of year/make/model

C - Make Dean start from the back of the field regardless of qualifying - only kidding....actually you should start from pit lane.

D - Burn Todd at the stake

E - Improve the car counts nation wide by having a steady ruleset where any given car can win on any given weekend. This includes applying different rules for different chassis/years/components.

 

It seems to me, and I may be way off base here but E is the real goal that needs to be given to the rules guys. We all know that the guys making the rules are in a bad spot, they need to make everyone happy (that is not going to happen, ask me about approved frame notches for an IRS one year and illegal the next) and keep the class growing.

 

We need more racing and less bitching. I am all for weight penalties for winning until the field is equalized but my biggest issue is the tire rule.

 

I want a tire that lasts, have a marginal drop off in performance (to keep everyone from having stickers every weekend to be competitive) an a rule-set that doesn't change year to year.

 

Give me all the things in the sentence above and i'll figure out how to make an older car competitive and i'll be happy.

 

Brian, I like it. I think you have some damn good comments and suggestions. But Dean should start from the paddock.

 

A couple questions:

You made no mention or distinction for the FR ABS vs any stock unit. Thoughts?

 

Also, what are your thoughts about the weight penalty for ABS while racing in the rain. Extra weight will have little to no negative effects while racing in the rain, but an ABS is a huge advantage in the rain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Warning: Unpopular post - Items in this post are closer then they appear

 

I asked myself, "How did a thread about rule changes have to do with argueably the best car prep and pro driver in AI"

My conclusion, it has nothing to do with him or anyone persoally, but people just can't get past that. All of the issues are with the cars and the lack of equallity in the cars, not the drivers. No one should have any issues with any of the drivers who choose the new cars and new stuff. It's the best thats available, hands down. Put these cars is very capable hands and it's nearly (I said NEARLY) impossible to beat.

 

However, "the car", (Boss/Grand Aam/WC/ Mustang Challenge) whatever you want to call it has been very benificial to a select few. The changes have made, firstly the Grand Am and Mustang Challenge cars legal in AI, and now the new Boss R legal. Who has benifited from that ?? How many new cars have been built by only a very small select shops? Who has rented out many of these cars over the last few years? A car that dominates makes for a good selling point / rental ?? Winning makes for good business. Now this car, which is basically a Grand Am car that was engineered, developed, and built by Ford Racing to win in Grand Am is not an OEM mass produced car. Its been in a wind tunnel, four 4 post shacker, and every other pro develpment tool that money can buy. The BS about falling behind in technology is so silly, STOP with the AS comparison. Its rediculious.

So, how does a Pro car built for Pro series get made legal for AI? Simple , just change the rules to allow it. And there is a pretty long list, and some changes were needed to be made within a weeks notice, or cars would not have been legal for Nationals. Thank god we altered the rules so a few extra guys (driver in question included) could be legal. Interesting president. Never seen it happen before or since. Maybe there will be an eleveth hour rule change to allow something for a 3rd gen F body. It could happen ?? Pretty easy to see where the "Love affair with Ford" statement is based on. You can expand on that statement and include, "a love afair with Ford and its' affiliates"

If any of you guys think these changes had anything to do with what Ford was producing on the assembly line, your wrong. Every other AI legal platform car had to build a street car into a race car, K members, brakes, control arms,,etc... However, the pro developed Grand Am is a large check away from hitting an AI track near you, which would be fine, if the rules weren't changed in order for it to be legal . By the way the rest of us did it the correct way and we built our car to be legal, not the other way around. Not one single GM car on the podium at Nationals for 6 years, any help for GM cars from AI rules guys? Nothing? (Just an example, don't go crazy with reasons why, there are other relevant examples, as well).

Sorry for the re-hash, just get on a roll. This has been going on for close to 6 years, and nothing, not one single change, adjustment, re-adjustment to level the playing field. This year is my last attempt, so I'm going out in flames. My fear is that the powers to be, just don't get it, which seems crazy. The only other option is, they get it, and that's just the way it's going to be.

 

1. Actually, thier all legal for AI no matter who makes them. Maybe some of the parts dont fit the rules, but, they are legal and would be regardless

 

2. Did the GM guys ask for rule exceptions?

 

3. ABS Comes on all Mustangs, so, yes they come from the factory (software may vary)

 

4. 14 Inch brakes are assembly line pieces

 

There should be concessions to keep the older cars competitive (although TJ seems to do just fine) Allow the upgrades, dont go backwards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Warning: Unpopular post - Items in this post are closer then they appear

 

This year is my last attempt, so I'm going out in flames. My fear is that the powers to be, just don't get it, which seems crazy. The only other option is, they get it, and that's just the way it's going to be.

 

Dave Algozine,

Just give up and come to CMC. Me and Tommy did.

Its over man, AI is gone Dude,,,,,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gentlemen,

 

This is a getting a little bit crazy. I just bought an FR500S - it's NO FASTER THAN MY 1997 COBRA. I bought it because I was tired of sorting out an old race car and thought something new would make life easier and racing more fun. Great class that I can make this choice and still race with the same great AI crew. Truthfully, I bought the car after I finished ahead of Rich at Homestead and was within a couple tenths the race before so it was no surprise that I would be playing catch-up. At Nationals, he finished on the podium in his new Boss 302 - I finished somewhere north of DFL, but not a lot.

 

Fact is, the S197 car weighs 3,600+ lbs and MUST have terrible aero due to the frontal area of a freight train. The rotor rings alone cost TEN TIMES plus what a 13" rotor cost. With the current 3v, it's well over 200 lbs heavy and down 20+ lbs of torque. And what about this airbox/dyno/hood open issue I could only keep up with guys at Nationals when it was raining and the track was wet. My open diff and 250 degree temp issues didn't help but whatever, the front runners have better prepped cars and more experience in the chassis and/or on track. I'm not blaming the rule book and I'm still having fun trying to figure out how to catch Chris, Robin, Brett and crew with another used race car. Boss or stroker motor required? It's always something!! BUT, I just can't believe that a 3,500-3,600 lb car with parts like a anvil like heavy steel and rubber bushed 3rd link (one of the only suspension parts I've actually touched) are deemed so far superior to dedicated, light weight SLA equipped fox bodies. It's still the same 4 rubber patches.

 

Yes, ABS kicks ass in the wet, allows dive bombs without as much risk of centerpunching someone, saves scrub drivers from flat spotting, and keeps crash damage costs down. This is racing, but it ain't F1. I don't care if I have ABS or not, but if I don't, then I want my old car back!

 

To me, a properly prepped early car of whatever flavor can be competetive. Lighter, cheaper parts. No question. Not many of those except TJ's at Nationals. Jay's car would have been right up there. Giving the old cars track width or whatever may be a good answer. We already have power to weight. Trying to discourage a "factory" Boss 302 type car from racing in AI seems counterproductive at best.

 

The bar has been raised by better competitors in new cars that are fast out of the box. They are new and more reliable. That's a big attraction. Not everyone has the time to do what it takes to maintain an older car. I'm not sure what's wrong with these new, heavy, and fast cars other than the rest of us need to step up AND the tire situation, at least to me, is a problem. I realize my "new" heavy car is going to eat more expensive tires in order to keep up with the 2,900 lb fox body. But, by the end of this year, I will have spent as much in tires for 4 weekends as I sold my old AI car for. I'm a big boy, and if I can't afford it, then I'll either have to make more money or go back to an old car

 

If I don't like it, I can go CMC or spec miata or hopefully be able to make the choice to go "lo buck" with TOYOS and chase around guys who are more dedicated or more willing to spend money (or both) - they deserve the wins. This is racing.

 

Again, my suggestion: Find a durable tire with great contingency

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am going to speak for Dave for a second. I don't know him and I think I understand where he is coming from.

He has a very well built 4th gen that would be impossible to backpedal.

He needs to race it in AI, with the old ruleset he would have been happy to do this.

Now with all of the concessions given to the s197 he feels that he is at a disadvantage (I believe he is and all of you s197 owners who keep saying that your underprepped cars are no advantage are at best being disingenuous, what happens when you get one down to fighting weight?)

I believe all he is really looking for is something, anything that would say hey Mr. Non s-197 owner here is a bone. We (NASA national) have given all these concessions for car A here are a few for you.

Instead all he gets is "try harder"

This is a joke and the only ones who don't get it are NASA national and the current s197 owners, which when you think about it is a good thing . They will both get what the wanted, mustang challenge, NASA style.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am going to speak for Dave for a second. I don't know him and I think I understand where he is coming from.

He has a very well built 4th gen that would be impossible to backpedal.

He needs to race it in AI, with the old ruleset he would have been happy to do this.

Now with all of the concessions given to the s197 he feels that he is at a disadvantage (I believe he is and all of you s197 owners who keep saying that your underprepped cars are no advantage are at best being disingenuous, what happens when you get one down to fighting weight?)

I believe all he is really looking for is something, anything that would say hey Mr. Non s-197 owner here is a bone. We (NASA national) have given all these concessions for car A here are a few for you.

Instead all he gets is "try harder"

This is a joke and the only ones who don't get it are NASA national and the current s197 owners, which when you think about it is a good thing . They will both get what the wanted, mustang challenge, NASA style.

 

If you think that, than you need to go back an reread the posts

 

 

OK, Tires Tires Tires

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am going to speak for Dave for a second. I don't know him and I think I understand where he is coming from.

He has a very well built 4th gen that would be impossible to backpedal.

He needs to race it in AI, with the old ruleset he would have been happy to do this.

Now with all of the concessions given to the s197 he feels that he is at a disadvantage (I believe he is and all of you s197 owners who keep saying that your underprepped cars are no advantage are at best being disingenuous, what happens when you get one down to fighting weight?)

I believe all he is really looking for is something, anything that would say hey Mr. Non s-197 owner here is a bone. We (NASA national) have given all these concessions for car A here are a few for you.

Instead all he gets is "try harder"

This is a joke and the only ones who don't get it are NASA national and the current s197 owners, which when you think about it is a good thing . They will both get what the wanted, mustang challenge, NASA style.

 

If you think that, than you need to go back an reread the posts

 

 

OK, Tires Tires Tires

 

So Tim, what concessions, exactly, has NASA offered to help bring the other cars up to speed? Give me one, you cannot do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Tim, what concessions, exactly, has NASA offered to help bring the other cars up to speed? Give me one, you cannot do it.

 

Where is the GM and Mopar factory backing for these grassroots racers?!?!?! Oh wait, there isn't any! Why penalize the Ford supporters when the other manufacturers don't/won't step up to the plate with a program!!?!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am going to speak for Dave for a second. I don't know him and I think I understand where he is coming from.

He has a very well built 4th gen that would be impossible to backpedal.

He needs to race it in AI, with the old ruleset he would have been happy to do this.

Now with all of the concessions given to the s197 he feels that he is at a disadvantage (I believe he is and all of you s197 owners who keep saying that your underprepped cars are no advantage are at best being disingenuous, what happens when you get one down to fighting weight?)

I believe all he is really looking for is something, anything that would say hey Mr. Non s-197 owner here is a bone. We (NASA national) have given all these concessions for car A here are a few for you.

Instead all he gets is "try harder"

This is a joke and the only ones who don't get it are NASA national and the current s197 owners, which when you think about it is a good thing . They will both get what the wanted, mustang challenge, NASA style.

 

If you think that, than you need to go back an reread the posts

 

 

OK, Tires Tires Tires

 

So Tim, what concessions, exactly, has NASA offered to help bring the other cars up to speed? Give me one, you cannot do it.

 

 

Your correct. So the issue should be talking to NASA about rule changes for the older cars as some had asked early in the thread, not about penalties for those who meet the rules. I came in after the changes were initiated, my car was built to the rules as much as anyone here. As my car gets older, I expect I will have to update from time to time. And let me make something clear, I am far from well to do.

 

That being said, NASA should be very careful about any changes. It would not be helpful to swing the pendulum to one side or the other. And, I do understand the perception is they have done that with the SN197.

 

Driver ability, car preperation and data collection all play as much into results as platform. Take a well prepped 4th Gen, a Foxbody and a SN197, put them in the hands of one driver, one track on the same day and see what the results bring. Make adjustments from there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Tim, what concessions, exactly, has NASA offered to help bring the other cars up to speed? Give me one, you cannot do it.

 

Where is the GM and Mopar factory backing for these grassroots racers?!?!?! Oh wait, there isn't any! Why penalize the Ford supporters when the other manufacturers don't/won't step up to the plate with a program!!?!!

 

And Bruce has a point as well. Although new to NASA, I have raced for a long time. I remember going through junkyards for parts as my GM counterparts picked up a catalog with superior parts. I got no sympathy from The GM boys. Apparently, those shoes fit differently now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your correct. So the issue should be talking to NASA about rule changes for the older cars as some had asked early in the thread, not about penalties for those who meet the rules. I came in after the changes were initiated, my car was built to the rules as much as anyone here. As my car gets older, I expect I will have to update from time to time. And let me make something clear, I am far from well to do.

 

That being said, NASA should be very careful about any changes. It would not be helpful to swing the pendulum to one side or the other. And, I do understand the perception is they have done that with the SN197.

 

Driver ability, car preperation and data collection all play as much into results as platform. Take a well prepped 4th Gen, a Foxbody and a SN197, put them in the hands of one driver, one track on the same day and see what the results bring. Make adjustments from there.

 

Tim constantly asking for rule changes will put us in the boat that ASedan is in, a car that hasn't been updated in 5 years is ancient. Rules creep sucks and it's one of the reasons we're at this point.

 

I don't want a major rules change that costs me money to "catch up" to the S197, I just want the allowances reeled back in a little bit. When people start building S197s to the level of race prep where they are only legal in AI, the performance gap will be even larger. Dean's car had some bolt-on stuff to make it better for AI that was removed before the GA race at Mid-O the next weekend. No cage set back, battery still over the RF tire, no extra weight reduction, etc. Rehagen is building some great cars that are running fast in AI. I'm just really worried about what happens when someone reads the AI rule book and optimizes the car to the extent of the rules then throws a hot shoe in it.

 

As far as data collection, the Directors put loggers on certain cars for the Championship race. I know my car had one, not sure who else. See if they will publish the data, they have some.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your correct. So the issue should be talking to NASA about rule changes for the older cars as some had asked early in the thread, not about penalties for those who meet the rules. I came in after the changes were initiated, my car was built to the rules as much as anyone here. As my car gets older, I expect I will have to update from time to time. And let me make something clear, I am far from well to do.

 

That being said, NASA should be very careful about any changes. It would not be helpful to swing the pendulum to one side or the other. And, I do understand the perception is they have done that with the SN197.

 

Driver ability, car preperation and data collection all play as much into results as platform. Take a well prepped 4th Gen, a Foxbody and a SN197, put them in the hands of one driver, one track on the same day and see what the results bring. Make adjustments from there.

 

Tim constantly asking for rule changes will put us in the boat that ASedan is in, a car that hasn't been updated in 5 years is ancient. Rules creep sucks and it's one of the reasons we're at this point.

 

I don't want a major rules change that costs me money to "catch up" to the S197, I just want the allowances reeled back in a little bit. When people start building S197s to the level of race prep where they are only legal in AI, the performance gap will be even larger. Dean's car had some bolt-on stuff to make it better for AI that was removed before the GA race at Mid-O the next weekend. No cage set back, battery still over the RF tire, no extra weight reduction, etc. Rehagen is building some great cars that are running fast in AI. I'm just really worried about what happens when someone reads the AI rule book and optimizes the car to the extent of the rules then throws a hot shoe in it.

 

As far as data collection, the Directors put loggers on certain cars for the Championship race. I know my car had one, not sure who else. See if they will publish the data, they have some.

 

I dont think you can stop rule creep. Maybe symantics but, I dont see creep as a bad thing. Inciuates slow, small steps in rules. Maybe more importantly, NASA should look to the reason for the creep. Is it to keep up or, just to improve an aspect of something already allowed (ABS vs Racing ABS) Technology will continue to move forward and so will the rules. Rule leep would be a vey bad thing for everyone involved and, some may say that is what happened with some of the changes that have happened thus far. Hopefully, the dataloggers will give a direction based on data and not emotion and feeling. Im with ya TJ, I want to be competative and beat you because I drove a better race, not because of the car I drive.

 

EDIT: I should add, if its the car that beat you, It should be the variables as in tire pressures, alignment ect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your correct. So the issue should be talking to NASA about rule changes for the older cars as some had asked early in the thread, not about penalties for those who meet the rules. I came in after the changes were initiated, my car was built to the rules as much as anyone here. As my car gets older, I expect I will have to update from time to time. And let me make something clear, I am far from well to do.

 

That being said, NASA should be very careful about any changes. It would not be helpful to swing the pendulum to one side or the other. And, I do understand the perception is they have done that with the SN197.

 

Driver ability, car preperation and data collection all play as much into results as platform. Take a well prepped 4th Gen, a Foxbody and a SN197, put them in the hands of one driver, one track on the same day and see what the results bring. Make adjustments from there.

 

Tim constantly asking for rule changes will put us in the boat that ASedan is in, a car that hasn't been updated in 5 years is ancient. Rules creep sucks and it's one of the reasons we're at this point.

 

I don't want a major rules change that costs me money to "catch up" to the S197, I just want the allowances reeled back in a little bit. When people start building S197s to the level of race prep where they are only legal in AI, the performance gap will be even larger. Dean's car had some bolt-on stuff to make it better for AI that was removed before the GA race at Mid-O the next weekend. No cage set back, battery still over the RF tire, no extra weight reduction, etc. Rehagen is building some great cars that are running fast in AI. I'm just really worried about what happens when someone reads the AI rule book and optimizes the car to the extent of the rules then throws a hot shoe in it.

 

As far as data collection, the Directors put loggers on certain cars for the Championship race. I know my car had one, not sure who else. See if they will publish the data, they have some.

 

I agree with TJ on this....

 

At the Nats this year nobody's Boss was a full on AI car, mine still has the Motorcraft battery in the stock location...My ECU has not been tuned for AI.... Wait until somebody starts tinkering this winter...

 

IMO The sleeping giant is Brian F. He is a good young driver and as soon as he gets some experience we are all fuct.... The car is in a league of its own....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with TJ on this....

 

At the Nats this year nobody's Boss was a full on AI car, mine still has the Motorcraft battery in the stock location...My ECU has not been tuned for AI.... Wait until somebody starts tinkering this winter...

 

IMO The sleeping giant is Brian F. He is a good young driver and as soon as he gets some experience we are all fuct.... The car is in a league of its own....

 

Exactly, that's why I'm complaining about the FR parts allowance. The S197 in general doesn't even worry me as much as a 2700lb Fox with an aero package, the better ABS, an AL block SOHC 4.6L motor (or the new V6) with a Richmond RR 5-speed (lighter then a BOSS R1) and a drive-by wire tune that chops the HP out in the mid-range plus a 8000rpm redline. Think Pat Lindsey's old car with all the great parts from the Ford Racing parts bin.

 

It may seem like I whine a lot, but I don't hate Fords, Dean, or guys with money. I'm trying to keep this class from getting ridiculously out of hand. Everyone told me it was impossible to get a 3rd gen F-body under 3100lbs post-race without lexan, carbon, and a 150lb driver. I can be 2900lbs post-race with a 210lb driver, almost no composites, and an iron block engine. Anything is possible if you try hard enough. Wait until you get someone who wants it this bad and has a decent budget.

 

Back to watching V8 Supercars...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When we were "AI grassroots garage racers" we DREAMED of the series being recognized by Ford, Chevy & Dodge. A magazine ad or a Ford/Chevy parts catalog AI feature picture was always a goal. Best we could do was get the aftermarket guys like Griggs, Maximum and Global West, etc to recognize and boost the series. Today, 1 of the 3 auto manufacturers is very active in racing...American Iron Racing. GM is still a few years behind, but coming. Heck, we got a Big 3 contingency program!!! Yet, some suggest that Ford Racing not be here. Tsk...Tsk.

 

(Remember...this is about FUN!)

 

 

Section from 2011 AI rules:

1. Introduction

The American Iron Series is a series with 2 classes: American Iron (AI) and American Iron Extreme (AIX). The American Iron Series was created to meet the needs of domestic sedan racers looking for a series specifically tailored to accommodate modified vehicles that are currently relegated to racing in Unlimited or Spec-limited classes. This class is designed to field a large high-profile group of American Musclecars and will unify fields of cars that currently race in other sanctioning organizations. This large field/open modification concept will provide racers and vendors access to a promotional racing venue containing similarly prepared and appearing cars that can run nearly unlimited configurations.

2. Intent

The American Iron Series Rules encourage each competitor to create an aftermarket-sourced configuration that will make their car perform at an optimum level. The intent of the rules is to allow competitors to use a combination of parts that will increase the performance and competitiveness of the vehicle and create promotional exposure for vendors. It is the intent of the series to serve as a “showcase” for aftermarket tuners and manufacturers and to create tremendous exposure for their products and services while providing a friendly, accommodating, and challenging environment for the series drivers. This approach is intended to create a reciprocal relationship that will encourage the aftermarket tuners to give their full support and attention to the competitors in the series.

 

So which one of these is it ? Because they do NOT appear to be remotely similiar to me. I read "aftermarket" in one and "factory" in the other.

I see such a contridictioin in Todds statement. I don't know what to think. You can't list all the other stuff and then finish with.... "Remeber this is for Fun".

 

The masses wondered "Why oh Why do we not get national sponsorships or big company recognition!?!?!?"

I'd like to know if the "masses", repesents the majority of AI racers, or just a select few? OR just ONE? How many AI racers are really conserned about this?

 

If we are chasing the factories , notoriety, and fame then you need to make that clear, because that will lead to some real spending. Becasue the factories love to come out with new stuff every year, regardless if it's one manufacturer or all three. Then watch the spening go crazy to keep up.

Sooner then later, I sinerely hope that there is some detailed clarification about the intent and future of the class.

 

Once the trend of making rule changes for the new stuff started, there needed to be some type of checks and balance system to keep it a level playing field. Not unlike ST or west coast Outlaw. And should likely include platform specific adjustments, as well (such as CMC). I truely hope that is the plan, and I hope its a fair plan. If anything the pendulum should cleary swing back the other way

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When we were "AI grassroots garage racers" we DREAMED of the series being recognized by Ford, Chevy & Dodge. A magazine ad or a Ford/Chevy parts catalog AI feature picture was always a goal. Best we could do was get the aftermarket guys like Griggs, Maximum and Global West, etc to recognize and boost the series. Today, 1 of the 3 auto manufacturers is very active in racing...American Iron Racing. GM is still a few years behind, but coming. Heck, we got a Big 3 contingency program!!! Yet, some suggest that Ford Racing not be here. Tsk...Tsk.

 

(Remember...this is about FUN!)

 

 

Section from 2011 AI rules:

1. Introduction

The American Iron Series is a series with 2 classes: American Iron (AI) and American Iron Extreme (AIX). The American Iron Series was created to meet the needs of domestic sedan racers looking for a series specifically tailored to accommodate modified vehicles that are currently relegated to racing in Unlimited or Spec-limited classes. This class is designed to field a large high-profile group of American Musclecars and will unify fields of cars that currently race in other sanctioning organizations. This large field/open modification concept will provide racers and vendors access to a promotional racing venue containing similarly prepared and appearing cars that can run nearly unlimited configurations.

2. Intent

The American Iron Series Rules encourage each competitor to create an aftermarket-sourced configuration that will make their car perform at an optimum level. The intent of the rules is to allow competitors to use a combination of parts that will increase the performance and competitiveness of the vehicle and create promotional exposure for vendors. It is the intent of the series to serve as a “showcase” for aftermarket tuners and manufacturers and to create tremendous exposure for their products and services while providing a friendly, accommodating, and challenging environment for the series drivers. This approach is intended to create a reciprocal relationship that will encourage the aftermarket tuners to give their full support and attention to the competitors in the series.

 

So which one of these is it ? Because they do NOT appear to be remotely similiar to me. I read "aftermarket" in one and "factory" in the other.

I see such a contridictioin in Todds statement. I don't know what to think. You can't list all the other stuff and then finish with.... "Remeber this is for Fun".

 

The masses wondered "Why oh Why do we not get national sponsorships or big company recognition!?!?!?"

I'd like to know if the "masses", repesents the majority of AI racers, or just a select few? OR just ONE? How many AI racers are really conserned about this?

 

If we are chasing the factories , notoriety, and fame then you need to make that clear, because that will lead to some real spending. Becasue the factories love to come out with new stuff every year, regardless if it's one manufacturer or all three. Then watch the spening go crazy to keep up.

Sooner then later, I sinerely hope that there is some detailed clarification about the intent and future of the class.

 

Once the trend of making rule changes for the new stuff started, there needed to be some type of checks and balance system to keep it a level playing field. Not unlike ST or west coast Outlaw. And should likely include platform specific adjustments, as well (such as CMC). I truely hope that is the plan, and I hope its a fair plan. If anything the pendulum should cleary swing back the other way

 

I highlighted the part you aparently missed that is totally consistant with Todd's remarks.

 

I have to give you credit, you at least admit you want to see the new cars gone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same old problems I see. Go run another organization and let this one die!

 

Warning: Unpopular post - Items in this post are closer then they appear

 

This year is my last attempt, so I'm going out in flames. My fear is that the powers to be, just don't get it, which seems crazy. The only other option is, they get it, and that's just the way it's going to be.

 

Dave Algozine,

Just give up and come to CMC. Me and Tommy did.

Its over man, AI is gone Dude,,,,,

 

I'm sorry I left you here by yourself( And TJ) buddy! I don't fear any driver or their pro team. I do fear rule changes that run everybody else off. There's more than a few s197 running cmc2 cars. They can build them down so can you!

 

Would they alter the rules if I showed up with a Pratt & Miller Stevenson Motorsports GS camaro in GS trim. No mustang even close to it. I don't think so!

 

Taking donations up to $200,000 for said car above!

 

They let every GM car leave the series, and had a good time doing it. FORD LOVE BABY!!!!

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i was over there a couple weeks ago. in fact i am going over there with my mustang tomorrow. do you want me to ask if they have a spare they want to sell?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i was over there a couple weeks ago. in fact i am going over there with my mustang tomorrow. do you want me to ask if they have a spare they want to sell?

Sure thing. So I can run it with the SCCA!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John,

 

I'm not sure you know what the content of a GS Camaro is, but it has a Bosch ECU and an ABS system with an 8-position calibration selection. I don't think either of those items are legal. I think there are a few other things on that car that are illegal for AI. Also, Pratt & Miller doesn't build the GS Camaro. Riley does. If you are really looking for one of those cars, I believe Momentum is selling one or both of their cars for significantly less. I can put you in touch if you are...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...