No coment

Hmm! lol

901

901 Has already had the new RCE for this year......

LOL i like the way its decided tilters are rubbish because the won nout at Brum, yet a tilter has won 1xbritish championship, 1x Irish open 1x nationals 1x uk open 2 x central league finals AND TELL ME ITS NOT A GOOD CAR!!

now dont get me wrong a randalls a good car and that one that turruckki has is possibly the best ever. But its still not symetrical so that rule is pointless!

And how may i ask does the tilters being banned help Bill when he himself has one that will have to be scrapped?!! do ANY of you think befor you post?!

I know i try... i might not be a brain box but im no idiot!

do ANY of you think befor you post?!

Does this mean we are all a bit thick on here as you type in caps (ANY OF YOU)?

Some of us on here do take the piss out of people dont we Bump, Sovpres lol

Caps = emphasis on the ANY

So we'll put that down as a yes then........not like you to be shy and quiet is it ??

instead of banning the tilters would it not be better to have a limit on left side weight?it wouldnt be hard to have a set of scales at a meeting.the formula one cars do it.

This is something I have suggested before, but it gets shot down in flames because of the number of meetings and the widespread track locations.
It's easy for F1 as they only ever have one meeting in a day so they only need the one set of scales.
F2 would need a minimum of 4 sets, and even then it would be a logistical nightmare making sure that a set made it to every meeting.

Pity though, because it would be a great idea and would stop a lot of the arguments.


And while I am on here a little message for Spikey.
Read back through the posts without your southwest blinkers on and you will realise that nobody said the tilters were rubbish - all there was was a tongue in cheek post about the lack of results at Brum on Saturday.

The 'symmetrical' rule was probably taken out because people argued it to a ridiculous degree as has been done on this thread. Obviously the cars were never going to be 100% symmetrical due to exhausts, air filters, etc. (even signwriting if you want to be totally pedantic), but this wasn't really what was meant by the rule. The rule was basically written to stop people building offset chassis and the original meaning was the main chassis and the cage had to be symmetrical. Unfortunately, a lot of the rules were written in the days when people read the rules and abided by the 'spirit' of them and are therefore now worthless because every car builder is trying to find the grey areas to exploit in order to gain an advantage. No different to any other sport these days, just a shame that a 'hobby' has come to that.

Rant over - everybody feel free to tear it to pieces.

As you keep going on about it, the symetrical rule is aimed as follows. If a mirror were placed along the centre line the resulting image would be effected thus...

\ becomes \|/

---- becomes --|--

I.e. both images would be symetrical in relation to angle, and not reversed. It would be near impossible to make a car truely symetrical. To coin a phrase, the tilting cars were not "within the spirit of the rules"

It's at times like these that even you oh Spikey one, must realise that what goes around comes around. It was oh so funny before, yet now you're upset.

For the record, I along with many others believe these cars SHOULD be legal and not banned, as it is about bringing inovation and forward thinking into the sport. The main constraints have always been and will always continue to be the engine and tyres, the rest of it should in my opinion be reasonably open. With enough rules in place to stop people from spending mega bucks on such things as active suspension, carbon fibre chassis and the such.

At the end of the day, if it can be made with easily accessible tools and equipment, using little more than a heap of steel and a welder in the main, then as far as I am concerned it is still pretty much a stockcar, as it is able to be manufactured by just about anybody who can build a "normal" stockcar. Just because somebody is able to come up with an improvement, that does not, in my opinion make it the wrong way for the sport to go.

If people want to see a "normal" stockcar, they can watch them in growing numbers when the heritage cars are racing. These are great at being "normal" and I enjoy watching them, because they are back to basics, and remind me how far we have come.

the scales are easy to sort out,every promoter has a set.i am sure each promoter could hire a set if they didnt want to buy one.

All I can say is maybe those of you that are entitled to be at the agm should be there and put some of the suggestions forward. There is an agm this year, even me being me thinks that the promotors having or hiring a set of scales is a good idea.

That would be no good because they would all weigh differently.
Or should I say the driver would say that at say Buxton the car weighed X at Northampton it weighed Y.
Simple answer pay a bit more moneY then those who have been elected to do there job COULD

When Spikey says ANY of you he means exactly that because he knows he is different from the rest of us, if you don't believe me have a read through his website or his Bebo , he is one of a kind, special, mummies little treasure they threw the mould away after Spikey.
As for me thinking before I post I always try to avoid it at all times

AS for being outside the spirit of the rules what does that mean, the rules should be written clearly without ambiguity, why is innovation such a terrible word . How far back do you have to go before car builders tried to exploit and push the boundaries, before my life time, isn't that the whole point. Set the parameters, control the costs with material usage etc and then see how clever some of these boys can be. If you rule the innovation out then what incentive is there for the truly creative talents such as Dave Rce , Bumble Batten and Daz Kitson to stay in the business. look at the way the Higmans and Randalls have evolved to keep up.
Currently we have some fantastic cars with great variation being driven by the cream, with results shared and no total domination , why change a winning formula if that side of the sport is not broke? Amen