Quote
john vanlandingham

Quote
AnthonyLatham

Quote
JohnLane
Morten people's priorities change.... Things happen.... Rallying is a WANT.

You are looking at XR4Ti now...... In Canada wouldn't a GP-5 car have you stuck with a soda-straw or did those writing rules come to their senses?

Hi everyone,

Just to confirm, in Canada CARS has made MAJOR changes to the 2wd class structure for the national championship. In the new "Open 2wd" class, 2000 cc is the max displacement for turbo cars and these MUST now run a 32 mm restrictor. 3000 cc is the max displacement for NA engined cars in open 2wd but you are also limited to "a maximum of five cylinders" (!!!). Find the CARS rulebook here:

http://carsrally.ca/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=106%3A2013-cars-rule-book&catid=15%3Arules-a-regulations&Itemid=24&lang=en

Group 5 will continue in the Canadian Western Region Championship for the foreseeable future without turbo restrictors even though CARS national will not include it in the national series after 2014. I expect more news about this in the coming weeks.

Regards,
Tony

In before fawkin Morison comes and rants at length how they took 3 years to fuck up their rules and how it is a logical response to the stated problems of increase costs and speed in OPEN class and declining entries to limit "OPEN" 2wd with a 32mm restrictor and then allow "OPEN 4WD" have a bigger 34mm restrictor.

Idiots. Incomprehensible idiots... and intentional idiots too.
You know, you could see a total un-aware, no nothing about anything mechanical putz like Morison being able to be talked into some stupid ideas by some idiot tech guy who admitted openly he is just a hobby geek kinda interested"..
But,
a person's a priori failing or ignorance does not have to be an insurmountable problem......unless they are truly, unredeemably , thouroughly stupid...
Or dishonest

Or both.

No single thing since there was a SS.forum had more posts, huge amount here, huge amount on Ontario forum..

Stonewall.

Many of you guys say Moroison "is a real nice guy"... I don't know anything but his whiney, miss-the-point-entirely-and-rant-about-bagatelles droning writying style, but I'll concede maybe he is.

But you all have to admit his extensive "support" and "defence" of this idiotic
and PONTLESS and EXPENSIVE whim of a little gang of idiots means he is gets painted with the same brush as we paint those who,
FOR WHATEVER BULLSHIT "REASON"

cooked up, and pushed thru this scheme.



We all have stupid ideas, I get lots of stupid ideas daily..

The difference is I listen to wiser--clear voices.
Result: happiness.

Putting all of John's rudeness aside, I never understood the logic of the Cdn national class structure changes either. The idea that prospective 2 litre turbo class cars have to be protected from competing against a 2.3 litre turbo Volvo 240 in the same class seems laughable to me. Don't get me started about CARS decision to lump 6 cyl 2wd cars into the open 4wd class nationally, even if its only after 2014. That decision is just plain insulting to everyone running a 6 pot BMW, Porsche or Datsun. I have a theory why they did all of this though. It revolves around CARS attempts to secure series sponsorship by giving a prospective vehicle manufacturer what they want in return. We shall see if marketing announcements are forthcoming from CARS in relation to this. I hope that CARS has a firm grasp on who their customers really are. Manufacturer's interests in rally comes and goes but the club level competitors and volunteers are always needed. Let's not have the tail wag the dog.

Tony

---

2015 Subaru WRX
Traded the Audi for the above
Sold the 1993 Honda Civic EG w/B16A Conversion to the Raw Racing boys
6 bicycles because, you know, global warming and all

Quote
john vanlandingham
In before fawkin Morison comes and rants at length how they took 3 years to fuck up their rules and how it is a logical response to the stated problems of increase costs and speed in OPEN class and declining entries to limit "OPEN" 2wd with a 32mm restrictor and then allow "OPEN 4WD" have a bigger 34mm restrictor.

You do love distorting everything don't you John. It's stuff like this - intentional deception designed to discredit - that should land you in the sin bin. (which we know will never happen)

Nobody, but you, has ever said that the changes to 2wd classes have anything what-so-ever to do with the 'problem' of open class cars going too fast. That's your little conspiracy theory alone.
Yes, the original bulletin outlined the goals of the class revision committee and yes, reducing the cost and speed of open class cars was a part of that, as was reducing the overall class count. I still don't see how you, or anyone, connect the two.

Open class is proving difficult to deal with and little was done with regards to slowing down open cars. The board looked at moving to a 33mm restrictor for everyone - since FIA is now 33mm - but realized it would be better to move 32mm across the board so fewer people would have to change. THAT change would be best done when all sanctioning bodies in North America would agree to make the change.

Discussions of moving to a spec fuel are causing many to balk (you have to control all the fuel, not just the 'race gas') and the mere mention of going to 'pump gas' raises even more questions. (now you have to test everyone for additives and using the 'right' pump fuel.) There are some cross border issues with a spec fuel, but not insurmountable. It's still being looked into, but right now it looks like it might cost some of the competitors (those running 94 pump and a few with fuel sponsorships) more money - so it will likely die, even though there is sponsorship money attached to it.

Quote
john vanlandingham
...no(sic) nothing about anything mechanical putz like Morison being able to be talked into some stupid ideas by some idiot tech guy who admitted openly he is just a hobby geek kinda interested".

What makes you think I was 'talked into' anything? I didn't have a vote on the new classes, I barely had a voice in the discussion at the board level beyond talking about how I thought the classes would impact marketing the sport.

What I have done is defend the process, somewhat, when people dismiss the class changes as ill thought-out. I also expressed the reality that the board can and will listen to suggestions and complaints when they are properly and well presented. (With the caveat that listing to suggestions won't always mean agreeing with them or adopting them.)

At the end of the day, I expect more changes to come.

CARS is promoting 2wd more by dedicating more of the TV broadcast to 2wd, requiring 2wd podiums at national events, producing 2wd online videos (PN one should be out soon.) None of that can be seen as a bad thing.

Quote
AnthonyLatham
Group 5 will continue in the Canadian Western Region Championship for the foreseeable future without turbo restrictors even though CARS national will not include it in the national series after 2014.

At the moment I'd soften that statement to 'CARS doesn't intend to include it...'
The sentiment from the board has always been that if the class gains popularity as a national class that it would likely continue. It needs to be remembered that the class hasn't been awarded for about half of the years it's been recognized.

Quote
AnthonyLatham
I expect more news about this in the coming weeks.

I expect more news on this issue as well, but getting things done inside a volunteer association can be frustratingly slow. The right answer and the quick answer are often two different things.

---

First Rally: 2001
Driver (7), Co-Driver (44)
Drivers (16)
Clerk (10), Official (7), Volunteer (4)
Cars Built (1), Engines Built (0) Cages Built (0)
Last Updated, January 4, 2015

Quote
john vanlandingham
Blame is for idiots. losers.

Quote
AnthonyLatham

Quote
john vanlandingham

Quote
AnthonyLatham

Quote
JohnLane
Morten people's priorities change.... Things happen.... Rallying is a WANT.

You are looking at XR4Ti now...... In Canada wouldn't a GP-5 car have you stuck with a soda-straw or did those writing rules come to their senses?

Hi everyone,

Just to confirm, in Canada CARS has made MAJOR changes to the 2wd class structure for the national championship. In the new "Open 2wd" class, 2000 cc is the max displacement for turbo cars and these MUST now run a 32 mm restrictor. 3000 cc is the max displacement for NA engined cars in open 2wd but you are also limited to "a maximum of five cylinders" (!!!). Find the CARS rulebook here:

http://carsrally.ca/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=106%3A2013-cars-rule-book&catid=15%3Arules-a-regulations&Itemid=24&lang=en

Group 5 will continue in the Canadian Western Region Championship for the foreseeable future without turbo restrictors even though CARS national will not include it in the national series after 2014. I expect more news about this in the coming weeks.

Regards,
Tony

In before fawkin Morison comes and rants at length how they took 3 years to fuck up their rules and how it is a logical response to the stated problems of increase costs and speed in OPEN class and declining entries to limit "OPEN" 2wd with a 32mm restrictor and then allow "OPEN 4WD" have a bigger 34mm restrictor.

Idiots. Incomprehensible idiots... and intentional idiots too.
You know, you could see a total un-aware, no nothing about anything mechanical putz like Morison being able to be talked into some stupid ideas by some idiot tech guy who admitted openly he is just a hobby geek kinda interested"..
But,
a person's a priori failing or ignorance does not have to be an insurmountable problem......unless they are truly, unredeemably , thouroughly stupid...
Or dishonest

Or both.

No single thing since there was a SS.forum had more posts, huge amount here, huge amount on Ontario forum..

Stonewall.

Many of you guys say Moroison "is a real nice guy"... I don't know anything but his whiney, miss-the-point-entirely-and-rant-about-bagatelles droning writying style, but I'll concede maybe he is.

But you all have to admit his extensive "support" and "defence" of this idiotic
and PONTLESS and EXPENSIVE whim of a little gang of idiots means he is gets painted with the same brush as we paint those who,
FOR WHATEVER BULLSHIT "REASON"

cooked up, and pushed thru this scheme.



We all have stupid ideas, I get lots of stupid ideas daily..

The difference is I listen to wiser--clear voices.
Result: happiness.

Putting all of John's rudeness aside, I never understood the logic of the Cdn national class structure changes either. The idea that prospective 2 litre turbo class cars have to be protected from competing against a 2.3 litre turbo Volvo 240 in the same class seems laughable to me. Don't get me started about CARS decision to lump 6 cyl 2wd cars into the open 4wd class nationally, even if its only after 2014. That decision is just plain insulting to everyone running a 6 pot BMW, Porsche or Datsun. I have a theory why they did all of this though. It revolves around CARS attempts to secure series sponsorship by giving a prospective vehicle manufacturer what they want in return. We shall see if marketing announcements are forthcoming from CARS in relation to this. I hope that CARS has a firm grasp on who their customers really are. Manufacturer's interests in rally comes and goes but the club level competitors and volunteers are always needed. Let's not have the tail wag the dog.

Tony

Tony my dear tavarich, my rudeness is nothing compared to the rudeness of the process that the "comittee" has subjected even guys with 2,0 16v stock motor cars to by either forcing them to spend thousands to fuck up their cars and the willful dismissal of their concerns over their class.

My rudeness is in response to their effective rudeness. Their decisions, ignore the firesorm of protests and condemnation is rude to the idea of logic and reasoning.

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

Quote
AnthonyLatham
The idea that prospective 2 litre turbo class cars have to be protected from competing against a 2.3 litre turbo Volvo 240 in the same class seems laughable to me.

Rather than looking at this as a 2l turbo class, look at it as allowing forced induction and larger displacements into the 'Canadian Gr2,' which is 2400cc adjusted, and represents 3/4 of all of our 2wd entries.
(In the past decade I think there has been one, maybe two, turbo volvos run in Canada - is Topping's car turbo?)

Quote
AnthonyLatham
Don't get me started about CARS decision to lump 6 cyl 2wd cars into the open 4wd class nationally, even if its only after 2014.

I still expect the 5cyl limit will disappear.

Quote
AnthonyLatham
I have a theory why they did all of this though. It revolves around CARS attempts to secure series sponsorship by giving a prospective vehicle manufacturer what they want in return.

Not even a shred of truth to that.
Yes, we are talking with manufacturers and trying to get them involved. Yes, I HOPE I can make some announcements about new brands getting involved in the CRC and I expect that would bring contingency money to teams running those brands and support to the events and championship.
I wouldn't EVER campaign to change the rules to try and attract a manufacturer and I doubt the board would ever agree to it if it were proposed.
(Create a spec class, given enough support, or a brand 'cup' sure, but that's different. Bring enough money and we can have the Latham cup for rwd cars!)

Quote
AnthonyLatham
I hope that CARS has a firm grasp on who their customers really are. Manufacturer's interests in rally comes and goes but the club level competitors and volunteers are always needed.

Interestingly, both Subaru and Yokohama have been involved in the CRC much longer than most of our competitors and volunteers. But, you're right. The health and growth of the sport relies on the grassroots and growth at the club level. This is one of the reasons CARS has set the insurance levy for RallySprints at a loss but at a price point that makes holding sprints attractive.(IIRC, $30/car insurance for sprints, up to 30 km and an addtional $1/km after)

---

First Rally: 2001
Driver (7), Co-Driver (44)
Drivers (16)
Clerk (10), Official (7), Volunteer (4)
Cars Built (1), Engines Built (0) Cages Built (0)
Last Updated, January 4, 2015

Quote
john vanlandingham
Blame is for idiots. losers.

i just enjoy pushing the skinny pedal.

---

First Rally: 2010 First RallyX: 2004 (a bunch)
Driver (0), Co-Driver (7)
Organizer (3), Volunteer (3)
Cars Built (2.5), Engines Blown (2) Cages Built (0) # of rotations (3.5)
Last Updated, Apr 9, 2023

Hi Keith,

Thanks for chiming in on my concerns. I'm very glad to see such a positive and clear statement regarding my theory. I was hoping I was wrong. I'm not so egocentric as to fight for a Latham Cup for rwd though. I think the Retrogrouch Cup sounds better and it will include the 6 cylinder and front wheel drive folks as well.

Best regards,
Tony

---

2015 Subaru WRX
Traded the Audi for the above
Sold the 1993 Honda Civic EG w/B16A Conversion to the Raw Racing boys
6 bicycles because, you know, global warming and all

Quote
AnthonyLatham
I think the Retrogrouch Cup sounds better and it will include the 6 cylinder and front wheel drive folks as well.

And I was hoping for someting in a name that recognises the brute strength and focus it takes to manhandle 'classic' rally cars through the stages... perhaps the Athletic Cup...

---

First Rally: 2001
Driver (7), Co-Driver (44)
Drivers (16)
Clerk (10), Official (7), Volunteer (4)
Cars Built (1), Engines Built (0) Cages Built (0)
Last Updated, January 4, 2015

Quote
john vanlandingham
Blame is for idiots. losers.

Quote
Morison

Quote
AnthonyLatham
I think the Retrogrouch Cup sounds better and it will include the 6 cylinder and front wheel drive folks as well.

And I was hoping for someting in a name that recognises the brute strength and focus it takes to manhandle 'classic' rally cars through the stages... perhaps the Athletic Cup...

"For every mile of special stage there are two miles of ditches (gutters)

FOR ALL OUR SAKE KEITH, STAY OUT OF THE GUTTERS!!!

---

2015 Subaru WRX
Traded the Audi for the above
Sold the 1993 Honda Civic EG w/B16A Conversion to the Raw Racing boys
6 bicycles because, you know, global warming and all

'twas just a bit of jockularity...

---

First Rally: 2001
Driver (7), Co-Driver (44)
Drivers (16)
Clerk (10), Official (7), Volunteer (4)
Cars Built (1), Engines Built (0) Cages Built (0)
Last Updated, January 4, 2015

Quote
john vanlandingham
Blame is for idiots. losers.

Keith, not to beat a dead horse but the Canada 2wd rules discussion on SS left me with the following impressions as to the 'Whys' --- and this was an evolving and ever-moving set of reasons.... All of them were baseless.

1) There were concerns about the speeds and safety of some 2wd cars
Pure nonsense. Roads are your problem not 2wd power levels. They are traction limited--period.

2) There were concerns about encouraging greater participation/entries
No idea how banning certain cars would increase entries/participation

3) There were concerns about accommodating newer cars with smaller turbo engines (like 1.6L T)
Yes, courting manufacturers was implied in the discussion.

4) There were concerns about increasing performance potential parity between cars
Zero empirical evidence supports the implications of this assertion in any 2wd rally series

5) There were arguments that the big displacement and turbo cars don't really show up or matter anyway.
Hardly a good reason to ditch them -- See contradiction with item #2 above.

---

____________________________________________________________-

One. Class -- 2WD

www.quantumrallysport.com

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/pages/Quantum-Rally-Sport/281129179600?ref=nf

Quote
Josh Wimpey
Keith, not to beat a dead horse but the Canada 2wd rules discussion on SS left me with the following impressions as to the 'Whys' --- and this was an evolving and ever-moving set of reasons.... All of them were baseless.

1) There were concerns about the speeds and safety of some 2wd cars
Pure nonsense. Roads are your problem not 2wd power levels. They are traction limited--period.

2) There were concerns about encouraging greater participation/entries
No idea how banning certain cars would increase entries/participation

3) There were concerns about accommodating newer cars with smaller turbo engines (like 1.6L T)
Yes, courting manufacturers was implied in the discussion.

4) There were concerns about increasing performance potential parity between cars
Zero empirical evidence supports the implications of this assertion in any 2wd rally series

5) There were arguments that the big displacement and turbo cars don't really show up or matter anyway.
Hardly a good reason to ditch them -- See contradiction with item #2 above.

I see you and I are on EXACTLY the same page. I hope you make it out to Western Canada at some point. If you do, the first round at the bar is on me.

Tony

---

2015 Subaru WRX
Traded the Audi for the above
Sold the 1993 Honda Civic EG w/B16A Conversion to the Raw Racing boys
6 bicycles because, you know, global warming and all

Quote
Josh Wimpey
Keith, not to beat a dead horse but...

Trust me, I don't like the cosnstant re-hashing of this subject either. Problem is people spread untruths about what's happening and why. I trust you mean well with this but even your summary is full of wrong assumptions.

Quote
Josh Wimpey
All of them were baseless.

And some of them aren't accurate

Quote
Josh Wimpey
1) There were concerns about the speeds and safety of some 2wd cars
Pure nonsense. Roads are your problem not 2wd power levels. They are traction limited--period.

Speed and safety, tied-together, was never a concern for 2wd cars. The speed of open class cars is a concern because we are seeing max average speeds being broken at several events.
Saying the roads are the problem is true, but it isn't like there are roads growing between the trees. Finding slower roads is one thing, getting access to use them is another. For the most part, roads that are still in use are being straightened for commercial users and new roads are built straight right from the beginning.
So sure, the roads are the problem. They are also much a much tougher problem to solve.
We could go back and forth all day long on the 'traction limited' argument and never come to terms with it.

Quote
Josh Wimpey
2) There were concerns about encouraging greater participation/entries
No idea how banning certain cars would increase entries/participation

Agreed.
The original proposal did ban cars, that was recognised and Gr5 was given a reprieve for two years at least. Important context to that was the understanding of the board that the regions - where the cars are being seen in use - would continue to recognise Gr5 indefinately and have a generally more inclusive class structure. It was never intended that any car be 'sent packing' only that the classes recognised in the national championship be fewer. (RA doesn't recognise Open Light, PGT, GR2 or Production in their national championship I beleive)

Quote
Josh Wimpey
3) There were concerns about accommodating newer cars with smaller turbo engines (like 1.6L T)
Yes, courting manufacturers was implied in the discussion.

Again a case of someone reading something into actions that wasn't there.
The committee looked at the cars widely available today as well as the trend for future production of cars to make sure we could class cars reasonably in five or ten years. The example of how flawed the old classes were was that a new golf built for production classes would have found itself up against STis and EVOs.
Any concern about accomodating 1.6 turbos was trend driven, not as a direct tool to attract manufacturers.

Quote
Josh Wimpey
4) There were concerns about increasing performance potential parity between cars
Zero empirical evidence supports the implications of this assertion in any 2wd rally series

Again, we could argue this all day long and not come to agreement. One of the big factors that seems to be forgotten regularly in this is that the Canadian Gr2 is different than the US Gr2 and has a 2400cc adjusted displacement cap.

Quote
Josh Wimpey
5) There were arguments that the big displacement and turbo cars don't really show up or matter anyway.
Hardly a good reason to ditch them -- See contradiction with item #2 above.

Agreed. The cars should be allowed to run if they show up, and that will ALWAYS be the case. If there isn't any reasonable competition for the national title, at what point does it no longer make sense to have a national title?

---

First Rally: 2001
Driver (7), Co-Driver (44)
Drivers (16)
Clerk (10), Official (7), Volunteer (4)
Cars Built (1), Engines Built (0) Cages Built (0)
Last Updated, January 4, 2015

Quote
john vanlandingham
Blame is for idiots. losers.

Sorry Keith, the things that I have mentioned above all came from you, Darryl, or Jorge in the SS thread so you can't act like they weren't brought up as justifications for the rules.

On point #1 -- You talk about open class cars being too fast. Not 2wd (which I know are also technically open class). So why the rules to attempt to slow 2wd --If attempting to slow 2wd was a concern at all (more moving goalposts)?

On point #2 -- You can't seriously think that putting G5 cars in 4wd class for national events is really not the equivalent of banning them from national competition.

On point #3 -- I didn't bring up the manufacturer- -- You Jorge or Darryl did. Second, it is disingenuos to pick an oddity of Production Class rules (Golf vs EVO & STI example) to justify limitations to open 2wd (G2 & G5) cars. This is especially true if you are not trying to court manufacturers --- the only people who should be interested in production class.

On Point #4 -- You are simply flat wrong. In fact, the more open US G2 rules that you cite show as much and weaken your case, not strengthen it.

---

____________________________________________________________-

One. Class -- 2WD

www.quantumrallysport.com

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/pages/Quantum-Rally-Sport/281129179600?ref=nf

Bottom line, CARS can do whatever they want. It's not even (most of) our country... BUT a good organization would at least listen. They may have talked to a bunch of people bla bla bla, but when the new rules were announced it was a surprise to most of us. Some suggested we email the appropriate folks at CARS and I did just that in a very polite and respectful manner. I brought up most of the valid points spoken to here. No reply. There is an agenda somewhere. Got to be. Club rally is different things to different people, and as a result there is quite a number of cars out there that won't fit their new mold. And it's a shame. The little plan to keep a spot for G5 cars is just to quiet the yelling long enough for them to sink it in a couple years. And WHY? Who's really making money off Canadian rally?

Wasn't this thread supposed to convince me to keep the car?
I have a firm offer of $6k for everything provided I put the brake stuff back on the car (lines) and complete the fuel system (mounting cell, pumps, making lines, etc.) Sweet right, only a few days of work right? Well, those few days of work (combined with reinstalling body panels and such for shipping) make me start to wonder if I'm going to go through all that work, why wouldn't I just keep the car since then it's even closer to being back to driveable. Man I'm a spaz...

---

Grant Hughes