How did the voting go?

[StevenMosley]

Thanks

[Darryl]

The voting results from Wednesday’s meeting are as follows.

The Met Council Rules Committee met on Sunday Dec 1, 2002. Attached are the proposed rule changes for 2003. MAC will address these rules and vote on them at the January meeting. Each proposed rule change must be voted on as written.

Each club's Met Council representative will bring the results back to the Met Council. The Met Council will accept or reject the changes based on the votes from the clubs. The accepted changes will be incorporated into the 2003 Rules by the end of February.


Proposed Changes to the Met Council Autocross Rules for 2003


1. 8.2.6.c. Slotted and/or drilled rotors may be used in STREET PREPARED provided they are the same size as the original equipment rotors for the particular car.
YES

2. Add the following Section to SECTION 8.2 STREET PREPARED:
8.2.12 Cars meeting the requirements of STREET TOURING, using DOT “R” compound tires may compete in the appropriate STREET PREPARED class. Vehicles may not combine STREET TOURING and STREET PREPARED modifications
YES


3. Return to two Modified Classes: Class A (A Mod), and Class B (B Mod). Class definitions to remain as published in the 2002 rules.
YES


4. Eliminate Section 8.5 STOCK STREET TIRE CATEGORY.

Move Paragraph 8.5.2 (definitions of Street Tires) to Section 8.6 STREET TOURING CATEGORY and identify it as part of 8.6.

Change Section 8.6.1 to read as follows:
8.6.1 A car may compete in the STREET TOURING category if it has been modified in excess of the modifications permitted under the STOCK category, and does not exceed the following….
The remainder of the paragraph remains in force as written.
NO


.
5. Eliminate SPECIAL INTEREST (SI) class. Novices will be annotated as such in their appropriate class and encouraged to seek mentoring from more experienced competitors. After the third event for novice competitor, the “Novice” designation will be removed.
NO

Darryl

[StevenMosley]

Thanks for the reply.

I was really hoping we would get rid of the SI class so when it was my
turn to drive that I would not have to worry that a class full of rookies
would be working the course. Nothing wrong with rookies, but it seems
logical to have a mixture of experienced autoxers and newbies
together.

Steven

[phile]

Originally posted by StevenMosley


Thanks for the reply.

I was really hoping we would get rid of the SI class so when it was my
turn to drive that I would not have to worry that a class full of rookies
would be working the course. Nothing wrong with rookies, but it seems
logical to have a mixture of experienced autoxers and newbies
together.

Steven

I think the answer to this is let the SI people run in different run groups. I believe the rules allow us to do this:
=========
9.3.7 It is recommended that the run order be very flexible for SI entrants.
=========

There seems to be some confusion about the Special Interest class in general. Perhaps it would help if we looked at the entire rule. Here it is from 2002:

========

9.3 Special Interest class (SI) will exist in its own category. It is meant as an alternative, low-pressure class.
9.3.1 SI class will be available at all events. SI is not involved in any bumping to other classes or categories, regardless of the number of SI entrants. SI entrants will not affect regular-class sizes or trophy calculations in any way.
9.3.2 A trophy will be awarded for first place, and first place only, if there are at least three SI entrants.
9.3.3 SI class is open to any driver who has never received an SI class first-place trophy, regardless of previous autosports experience or awards. Drivers are not required to state their reasons for entering SI. A driver may run in SI indefinitely, unless awarded a first-place SI trophy.
9.3.4 Any vehicle licensed for street use may be used in SI. SI entrants must run on DOT-approved tires. No adjustment or handicap will be made on account of the car's regular class. Safety and noise considerations shall follow Sections 3 and 4, as usual.
9.3.5 Different drivers, regardless of rule 3.2 may enter a vehicle in both SI and its regular class. The three permissible drivers may be split between SI and the car's regular class in any combination. Protests of vehicle legality or classification in its regular class shall not affect the SI entrant.
9.3.6 The SI class designation should be on the car. See rule 4.1.
9.3.7 It is recommended that the run order be very flexible for SI entrants.
9.3.8 No Met Council Autocross Series points are to be given for SI. As the intent is low-pressure, it is recommended that clubs give points only for club participation awards and not for club competitive awards.
9.3.9 SI class is not intended to affect clubs' entry-fee policies in any way.
========

Phil Ethier

[psundberg]

There was healthy discussion regarding the pros and cons of SI but I believe SI would have been eliminated if it weren't for the requirement to designate a novice for three events. As written, the change would have been too difficult to administer so it was voted down.

Phil Sundberg

[washburn]

Note also that I think there will be a better effort made to split them up into other run groups now that Phil has clarified the rule for those of us that didn't know. (Thanks Phil)

[MNbiker]

Question

Is MAC going to add STX for 2003? It seems to be growing quickly in popularity, and it looks like most/all of the SCCA venues will be running STX this year.

If not, I guess I can run in ESP and get stomped by the ponycars with Hoosiers....:p

-Steve
'02 WRX Wagon

[StevenMosley]

Phil, (Civic)

Thanks for the update. I think next year if I atttend the rules meeting we will have to be a little more careful when writing the rules. On another note So are you going to run the Si in CSP this spring?



Phil, (Lotus)

I think the idea of having SI people running in different groups will be a tough thing to pull of. Remember they are new and how will we run the event and know who is in what run group when they are all in the same class. Maybe someone can come up with a better idea.

[applebit]

I'm mad.

I never tried to go into SI...

I thought I would save it for a rainy day with a terrible car...

Now I may never get that chance...

[miata#37]

Would it be possible to split the our run groups up based on numbers?
1-50 in group 1
51-100 in group 2
etc...

Might help mix up the field for experienced/inexperienced workers. Or would it just be a timing and scoring nightmare?

[rdub]

not a good idea to run by car #, conditions of weather,and course condition,change over the day and
classes need to run together for this reason alone.

[StevenMosley]

I agree with Randy on that. SCCA-La Crosse runs the numbers in order. It is not a good thing. Unless you like running in the rain when everyone else in your class gets a dry track. :) (Autoxing in the rain is so much fun.)

Vent Mode on!

I do think it would be a good idea to think of things that we would like to change for 2004.

Ideas that I have are:

1. Eliminate Si. (or) and have SI drivers run in the X (Exhibiton) Class.
Read Section 9.5
Change 9.5.3 to state that times are not recorded, posted, or published.

2. "Stock Race Rubber" cars must be in a class of 3. If the bumped Stock Street Tire class doesn't equal three or greater, then require them to run in another class. (Pro, Street Prepared. or any other optional class)

3. Cop cars must run in Pro and have PAX of ".6".

Another thing that I would have loved to see for this season is a better place to play. Midway is ok (better then nothing), Dakota was fun, St. Cloud is fun, Hennipin Tech sucks, and All-Right Parking would have been a big improvement over Midway.

Vent mode off!

Steven

[Dave Kral]

We still have to wait for the meeting of the Met Council to find out which of these rules will be implemented and which won't.

When is their meeting?

Dave

[phile]

Originally posted by Dave Kral


We still have to wait for the meeting of the Met Council to find out which of these rules will be implemented and which won't.

When is their meeting?

Dave

I thought it was two days ago.

Phil Ethier

[washburn]

Originally posted by StevenMosley

Another thing that I would have loved to see for this season is a better place to play. Midway is ok (better then nothing), Dakota was fun, St. Cloud is fun, Hennipin Tech sucks, and All-Right Parking would have been a big improvement over Midway.

Vent mode off!

Steven


Just so you know, one of the things we decided at the meeting is to have the "Bob Wheel" brought out to the lot and have it measured up. I will input into my CADD system and we will have a scale map we can use in course and logistics planning. Given the amount of red tape we may have to cut through, we thought this might be a worthwhile effort since we don't really know how usable the space is.

If the space lends itself well not only to course layout, but safety and paddocking, then we can go ahead with efforts to get use of it. No sense putting all the work into getting it, and then finding out it is too narrow.

I agree with Steve on the site issues in general and have been harping on it at every opportunity for years. The future of the club depends on good sites. The search continues.....

Pat

[miata#37]

Could someone post the outcome of the rules voting at the Met Council meeting?

[weidnerpaul]

Hey Miata:
The first page of this thread has that info.
Paul

[Darryl]

Paul,

That was how we voted at the last MAC meeting. The MET council meeting was Monday the 3RD, I think.

Darryl

[applebit]

go on the website under rules....

[phile]

Originally posted by applebit


go on the website under rules....


Looking at the website, the rules section implies that Met Council vote agreed with the MAC vote.

The classes section still shows 2002 data. Most notably, the Modified section is all wrong.

I'm sure the Met Council Rules Chair will straighten this out shortly.

Phil "ask me about permanent numbers, not rules" Ethier

[Drew]

The Met Council vote turned out the same as the vote results for MAC. The first three proposed changes passed. The last two proposed changes (elimination of street tire and SI classes) did not pass.

Drew Baumbach