over due clean-up of a poorly written rule
the suggested change seems like an over due change to a poorly written rule. poorly written rules that are not enforced are clearly in no one's best interest except the seller of non-compliant parts! well prepared Ford 711M crankshafts are widely/universally viewed as marginal at best solutions at 6800rpm and higher. well prepared compliant aluminum cylinder heads, intake manifolds, and Weber's will clearly produce competitive power at engine speeds above 6800rpm. that being the case, competitors needing to operate their engines above 6800rpm to remain competitive must currently either operate their engines at risk with Ford factory crankshafts or purchase in my view non-compliant (ie: with the rule as currently written) aftermarket crankshafts in the hope that the rule will continue to not be enforced. does anyone actually believe that factory Ford crankshafts require modification of either the original or updated cylinder block to be installed? therefore it's intuitively obvious, at least to me, that crankshafts requiring modification of the cylinder block for installation are NOT compliant with the "original Ford Kent AND SCCA dimensions and weight". compliance with SCCA dimensions is NOT sufficient since the rule as currently written says "original Ford Kent AND SCCA dimensions and weight"!!!
the proposed removal of the word "cast" would provide competitors a permissive (ie: vendor independent) opportunity for an easily verified compliant aftermarket crankshaft solution. while I think a cast billet steel crankshaft "meeting the Ford Kent dimensions and weight" (who knows what the SCCA dimensions are or what value their inclusion in the rule brings) would be compliant, why should a competitor wishing to run a black & white compliant engine be forced to accept the compliance and monetary risk of having a reliable crankshaft made to compete at the front of FFord fields??
Art
artesmith@earthlink.net
Or Perhaps Help One Get There
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Daryl DeArman
Yep, alternatively people can just stick their head in the sand and pretend it isn't happening or not a problem until it is.
I'm guessing that will happen as soon as there isn't a Honda on the top step of the podium at the RunOffs.
And when was the last time that a Kent was on the podium, particularly the top step? F2000 Pintos get a new cam, new carb, longer rods and a weight advantage to help compete and when was the last improvement that a Kent received to help competitively? I see the Honda is receiving a new ECU, who will confirm that it provides no competitive advantage? Will it simply be rubber stamped into use with a promise, from a few that have a vested interest, that everything is equal? If you want higher car counts you have to give people a fighting chance to compete and running a cast crank at the ragged edge, in order to keep up, is not the way to attract competitors. The dimensions of the SCAT crank is another issue, but related, only because I don't want people running it to be protested and lose that elusive podium.