| KC | 06-18-2004 12:36 PM |
Fastrack for AWD Cars (Street Touring Category)
�
�
Yes, this is a new thread. Because it's new information I think that warrants discussion.
Someone brought this to my attention in the wording of the Fastrack that can cause a BIG problem.
[QUOTE]ITEM 8) Effective 1/1/2005, move all AWD vehicles to STX.[/QUOTE]
Let's look at something here.. the word 'ALL'.
What does ALL mean to you? Are there not cars in STU (Part of the ST [I]category[/I]) that would now be eligible in STX because they've now been INCLUDED via a rule, even if the rule excluding cars for displacement limits exists to disallow the EVO/STi?
Doesn't that now change the scope of the suggested change?
To me, it does.
--kC
Someone brought this to my attention in the wording of the Fastrack that can cause a BIG problem.
[QUOTE]ITEM 8) Effective 1/1/2005, move all AWD vehicles to STX.[/QUOTE]
Let's look at something here.. the word 'ALL'.
What does ALL mean to you? Are there not cars in STU (Part of the ST [I]category[/I]) that would now be eligible in STX because they've now been INCLUDED via a rule, even if the rule excluding cars for displacement limits exists to disallow the EVO/STi?
Doesn't that now change the scope of the suggested change?
To me, it does.
--kC
| Scooby South | 06-18-2004 12:49 PM |
Good catch....however doesn't the PEB have STU 'because' of the engine limit?????So that would make Those Cars Ineligable according to their 'own' rules...(Also note that the EVO isn't mentioned in ANY of the Classifications....
ESP yes...not STU...
So...next question....Could you Build a EVO to RUN in STU???? .
I See the demise of STU somewhere down the road....unless the PEB has some outstanding agenda on the table that we don't know about...
Again..I will voice my opinion to Have a Reclassing Structure...
Bill
ESP yes...not STU...
So...next question....Could you Build a EVO to RUN in STU???? .
I See the demise of STU somewhere down the road....unless the PEB has some outstanding agenda on the table that we don't know about...
Again..I will voice my opinion to Have a Reclassing Structure...
Bill
| dwx | 06-18-2004 12:55 PM |
You are reading too much into that. The exclusion list and other rules preclude that statement. I know you know that's not what they meant at all.
| KC | 06-18-2004 01:19 PM |
If I knew the answer, I wouldn't be saying this.
I don't think I'm reading too much into it. The Solo-II rules are inclusive, not exclusive, meaning they show what is allowed, not what isn't allowed (except in extreme circumstances).
By including something in a ruleset, the inclusion overides the exclusion.
Example: Included cars in STS like the Audis, Volvos, VWs etc, on the "inclusion" list for being turbo powered cars (something not generally allowed in STS)
[QUOTE]Vehicles for this category include all coupes/sedans with a minimum of four seats, four seat belts; that are not sports car based, with a maximum engine displacement of 3.1 liters, normally aspirated and certain small displacement turbocharged sedans. No limited slip differentials are permitted except for factory standard viscous coupler type units. [/QUOTE]
Since the cars had to be included without a certain displacement limit (keeping the WRX out of STS)... it allowed the cars in the list.
Since they were allowed via a rule, that supercedes any other rules banning them.
Since there would be a rule stating "ALL" AWD cars, it would overrule the exceptions, IMHO. For the proposed rule change, the wording would have to be cleared up yet again beofre it was implemented.
--kC
I don't think I'm reading too much into it. The Solo-II rules are inclusive, not exclusive, meaning they show what is allowed, not what isn't allowed (except in extreme circumstances).
By including something in a ruleset, the inclusion overides the exclusion.
Example: Included cars in STS like the Audis, Volvos, VWs etc, on the "inclusion" list for being turbo powered cars (something not generally allowed in STS)
[QUOTE]Vehicles for this category include all coupes/sedans with a minimum of four seats, four seat belts; that are not sports car based, with a maximum engine displacement of 3.1 liters, normally aspirated and certain small displacement turbocharged sedans. No limited slip differentials are permitted except for factory standard viscous coupler type units. [/QUOTE]
Since the cars had to be included without a certain displacement limit (keeping the WRX out of STS)... it allowed the cars in the list.
Since they were allowed via a rule, that supercedes any other rules banning them.
Since there would be a rule stating "ALL" AWD cars, it would overrule the exceptions, IMHO. For the proposed rule change, the wording would have to be cleared up yet again beofre it was implemented.
--kC
| Warp3 | 06-18-2004 01:44 PM |
Yes, but remember the EVO and STi are also explicitly excluded from STX due to their presence on the STX exclusion list.
Yes, they didn't word it correctly, but you are reaching here. ;)
Shane -- SM 729
Yes, they didn't word it correctly, but you are reaching here. ;)
Shane -- SM 729
| KC | 06-18-2004 01:46 PM |
I don't feel I am reaching.
I think it just needs to be cleaned up a little bit. Something like "All AWD not on the STX exclusion list" or something.
If I'm confused, a n00b would be even more so.
Them: "But it says I can!"
Classing Help: "But there it says you can't"
Them: Grumble grumble "SCCA sucks" Grumble
--kC
I think it just needs to be cleaned up a little bit. Something like "All AWD not on the STX exclusion list" or something.
If I'm confused, a n00b would be even more so.
Them: "But it says I can!"
Classing Help: "But there it says you can't"
Them: Grumble grumble "SCCA sucks" Grumble
--kC
| wrx2.0 555 | 06-18-2004 02:40 PM |
Given its a "rule", I have to agree with KC.
Its like a double standard subject to too much interpretation.
Nothing in the "rule book" should be subject to any interpretation. It should all be point blank, no opinions necessary.
Scott
Its like a double standard subject to too much interpretation.
Nothing in the "rule book" should be subject to any interpretation. It should all be point blank, no opinions necessary.
Scott
| ratt_finkel | 06-18-2004 02:44 PM |
So is this to keep "us" RS ownes out of STS?
And what's the deal with STU? Doesn't it just allow wider rims? But still limited to 245 tire width?
And what's the deal with STU? Doesn't it just allow wider rims? But still limited to 245 tire width?
| KC | 06-18-2004 02:54 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by ratt_finkel[/i]
[B] So is this to keep "us" RS ownes out of STS?
And what's the deal with STU? Doesn't it just allow wider rims? But still limited to 245 tire width? [/B][/QUOTE]
Not just the RS, but any AWD cars out of STS.
STU allows higher HP engines. AWD you're still limited to 245 tires. FWD or RWD, 275.
--KC
[B] So is this to keep "us" RS ownes out of STS?
And what's the deal with STU? Doesn't it just allow wider rims? But still limited to 245 tire width? [/B][/QUOTE]
Not just the RS, but any AWD cars out of STS.
STU allows higher HP engines. AWD you're still limited to 245 tires. FWD or RWD, 275.
--KC
| ratt_finkel | 06-18-2004 03:39 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by KC [/i]
[B]Not just the RS, but any AWD cars out of STS.
STU allows higher HP engines. AWD you're still limited to 245 tires. FWD or RWD, any.
--KC [/B][/QUOTE]
What other AWD cars are allowed in STS?
So what does STU allow that the other ST classes don't?
[B]Not just the RS, but any AWD cars out of STS.
STU allows higher HP engines. AWD you're still limited to 245 tires. FWD or RWD, any.
--KC [/B][/QUOTE]
What other AWD cars are allowed in STS?
So what does STU allow that the other ST classes don't?
| KC | 06-18-2004 03:48 PM |
Audi, VW, Mazda, Volvo to name a few.
STU is more about displacement than mods. I don't think there are any mods that aren't allowed in STX. (This is not to be confused with some regions that have been running a different class tcalled STU)
--kC
STU is more about displacement than mods. I don't think there are any mods that aren't allowed in STX. (This is not to be confused with some regions that have been running a different class tcalled STU)
--kC
| leecea | 06-18-2004 04:08 PM |
IMHO that line from Fastrack just a statement of what they intend to do, rather than the actually wording that will be used. Presumably the rule itself will be written as an exclusion such as "no AWD allowed in STS".
This whole thing is so hard to understand. What's next on the agenda - no turbos in STX because the WRX is winning too many events?
This whole thing is so hard to understand. What's next on the agenda - no turbos in STX because the WRX is winning too many events?
| KC | 06-18-2004 04:24 PM |
actually.. the rule proposed is as it should appear in the book verbatim. We're commenting on the rule. If they change it at the last second, it could change the meaning and have other implications.
--kC
--kC
| dwx | 06-18-2004 05:03 PM |
What they have in that Fastrack is not going to be printed in a rule book. What kind of rule is "move all AWD cars to STX". The rule in the 2005 rulebook, like someone else stated, is going to be under the STS rules section and say something like "Excluded: AWD vehicles". That's a proposal for comment, not a changing of the current rulebook.
If it were a current rulebook change it would say something like "Add line 12.5c to read "Exclude all AWD vehicles". I've seen that syntax used in a FasTrack before to denote a rule change, what you have pasted is not that.
I'd just close this thread as it's really really really far reaching.
If it were a current rulebook change it would say something like "Add line 12.5c to read "Exclude all AWD vehicles". I've seen that syntax used in a FasTrack before to denote a rule change, what you have pasted is not that.
I'd just close this thread as it's really really really far reaching.
| KC | 06-18-2004 06:04 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by dwx[/i]
[B]
I'd just close this thread as it's really really really far reaching. [/B][/QUOTE]
How can you say for certain that this applies to only STS. You can't other than what's been said on the web. However, what is said in the fastracks/rulebooks is the gospel.
The request for member input on this suggested rule change is misleading and unclear at best. We all ASSUMED it was about moving all cars out of STS. After reading this again, it can be INFERRED that the input they are requesting can also apply to the currently STX excluded cars to be included via this change.
The input being requested (as it is written) applies to the WHOLE ST category.... not just STS.
You may not agree with that synopsis that I have come up with, and if you're reading it one way, and I'm reading it another, it means there really is a problem.. that it's not clear.
However, if it said (which I still don't agree with the actual proposal) "Move all AWD cars out of STS" then I wouldn't have an issue and it would sort itself out... then it goes back to the original.. the AWD cars in STS right now are just competitive at best.
--kC
[B]
I'd just close this thread as it's really really really far reaching. [/B][/QUOTE]
How can you say for certain that this applies to only STS. You can't other than what's been said on the web. However, what is said in the fastracks/rulebooks is the gospel.
The request for member input on this suggested rule change is misleading and unclear at best. We all ASSUMED it was about moving all cars out of STS. After reading this again, it can be INFERRED that the input they are requesting can also apply to the currently STX excluded cars to be included via this change.
The input being requested (as it is written) applies to the WHOLE ST category.... not just STS.
You may not agree with that synopsis that I have come up with, and if you're reading it one way, and I'm reading it another, it means there really is a problem.. that it's not clear.
However, if it said (which I still don't agree with the actual proposal) "Move all AWD cars out of STS" then I wouldn't have an issue and it would sort itself out... then it goes back to the original.. the AWD cars in STS right now are just competitive at best.
--kC
| Jaxx | 06-18-2004 07:28 PM |
this rule make me cranky .. and i drive a SM car
| kiko seibt | 06-18-2004 07:52 PM |
However, if it said (which I still don't agree with the actual proposal) "Move all AWD cars out of STS" then I wouldn't have an issue and it would sort itself out... then it goes back to the original.. the AWD cars in STS right now are just competitive at best.
--kC [/B][/QUOTE]
I agree with KC leave STS cars along that are very competitive class.
about the fast track .....That is an open door for interpretation.
ITEM 8) Effective 1/1/2005, move all AWD vehicles to STX.
--kC [/B][/QUOTE]
I agree with KC leave STS cars along that are very competitive class.
about the fast track .....That is an open door for interpretation.
ITEM 8) Effective 1/1/2005, move all AWD vehicles to STX.
| DrBiggly | 06-18-2004 10:08 PM |
Good thing I'm prepping for STX anyway! Apparently I'd be there whether I wanted to or not. :rolleyes:
| MNbiker | 06-18-2004 10:20 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by kiko seibt [/i]
[B]ITEM 8) Effective 1/1/2005, move all AWD vehicles to STX. [/B][/QUOTE]
The "Car to Have" for STX in 2005: ;)
[IMG]http://www.pictures-of-cars.com/image/img_000045.jpg[/IMG]
[B]ITEM 8) Effective 1/1/2005, move all AWD vehicles to STX. [/B][/QUOTE]
The "Car to Have" for STX in 2005: ;)
[IMG]http://www.pictures-of-cars.com/image/img_000045.jpg[/IMG]
| DrBiggly | 06-18-2004 10:42 PM |
:lol: :lol:
Good idea! :devil:
Good idea! :devil:
| ChrisW | 06-18-2004 11:31 PM |
So here is a simple yet unanswered question..
how are the following cars going to be competitive in STX
a) the Audi 1.8T
b) an oldie but goodie, the Mazda 323 GTX (1.6?? turbo w/AWD)
I think this rule change is another knee jerk reaction to the complaints by the 2WD folks :mad:
If they do enforce the change, then I want all non-AWD cars excluded from STX. It's only fair right? (this after watching a frankin civic in STS trim kick STX butt at the Atwater national tour)
how are the following cars going to be competitive in STX
a) the Audi 1.8T
b) an oldie but goodie, the Mazda 323 GTX (1.6?? turbo w/AWD)
I think this rule change is another knee jerk reaction to the complaints by the 2WD folks :mad:
If they do enforce the change, then I want all non-AWD cars excluded from STX. It's only fair right? (this after watching a frankin civic in STS trim kick STX butt at the Atwater national tour)
| DrBiggly | 06-18-2004 11:58 PM |
Yeah, those 2WD cars are overdogs for STX!
If both of those things happened, the STS crowd losing all AWD vehicles and the STX crowd kicking out the 2WD people we might end up with the STS folks going faster than STX.
If both of those things happened, the STS crowd losing all AWD vehicles and the STX crowd kicking out the 2WD people we might end up with the STS folks going faster than STX.
| afpdl | 06-19-2004 01:50 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by KC[/i]
[B]
STU allows higher HP engines. AWD you're still limited to 245 tires. FWD or RWD, any.
--KC [/B][/QUOTE]
Did they just change the rule? The original rules read STU tire limit is 275 but awd cars are limited to 245's.
[B]
STU allows higher HP engines. AWD you're still limited to 245 tires. FWD or RWD, any.
--KC [/B][/QUOTE]
Did they just change the rule? The original rules read STU tire limit is 275 but awd cars are limited to 245's.
| KC | 06-19-2004 06:41 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by afpdl[/i]
[B] Did they just change the rule? The original rules read STU tire limit is 275 but awd cars are limited to 245's. [/B][/QUOTE]
Oops, that is correct. I thought it was any tire for FWD/RWD.
[B] Did they just change the rule? The original rules read STU tire limit is 275 but awd cars are limited to 245's. [/B][/QUOTE]
Oops, that is correct. I thought it was any tire for FWD/RWD.
| StuBeck | 06-19-2004 07:50 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by KC[/i]
[B]Them: "But it says I can!"
Classing Help: "But there it says you can't"
Them: Grumble grumble "SCCA sucks" Grumble[/B][/QUOTE]
But I thought it already does? :p
I'm just happy that I probably won't be racing my subaru next year, this and another stupid ass rule mean I can't be in stock anymore. Some of the classing things that take you out of stock are just beyond dumb. 0h n0s, y0us debadg3d!
[B]Them: "But it says I can!"
Classing Help: "But there it says you can't"
Them: Grumble grumble "SCCA sucks" Grumble[/B][/QUOTE]
But I thought it already does? :p
I'm just happy that I probably won't be racing my subaru next year, this and another stupid ass rule mean I can't be in stock anymore. Some of the classing things that take you out of stock are just beyond dumb. 0h n0s, y0us debadg3d!
| jcroy66 | 06-21-2004 10:30 AM |
Well, I asked Jeff Brown (STAC member) about this this weekend. He'd brought up the AWD to STX proposed move, so I brought up that they now have people wondering if the Evo8 and STi were being moved back to STX as well. (FWIW, Keith is not the only one who's concerned about this. I had a local (non-NASIOC) guy bring up the exact same possibility this weekend.) While of course Jeff's comments aren't official, they should lend some light to the "intent" of the rule change.
1. The cars on the STX-exclusion list (Evo8, STi, etc) would continue to be on the exclusion list. They would NOT be moved from STU to STX.
2. All member comment thus far on the proposed rule change has been negative (i.e. everyone has said "don't do it!!").
So keep sending letters, folks! :)
1. The cars on the STX-exclusion list (Evo8, STi, etc) would continue to be on the exclusion list. They would NOT be moved from STU to STX.
2. All member comment thus far on the proposed rule change has been negative (i.e. everyone has said "don't do it!!").
So keep sending letters, folks! :)
| trhoppe | 06-21-2004 11:26 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by jcroy66[/i]
[B]
2. All member comment thus far on the proposed rule change has been negative (i.e. everyone has said "don't do it!!").
[/B][/QUOTE]
Sweeeet. I just got my notification from doug that my letter was "logged" this morning.
-Tom
who would love it if the STi was allowed in STX ;)
[B]
2. All member comment thus far on the proposed rule change has been negative (i.e. everyone has said "don't do it!!").
[/B][/QUOTE]
Sweeeet. I just got my notification from doug that my letter was "logged" this morning.
-Tom
who would love it if the STi was allowed in STX ;)
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét