SCSA Rumour

[Snapper Baz]

Heard at Rockingham that it could be possible that a "normal race circuit" COULD be introduced possibly next year on the SCSA fixture list. This was only a rumour though...asked 2 drivers and one said the cars couldn't be changed and a seperate car would be needed to be built whilst another top driver said it should be no problem in changing the set-up on the car-you never know!!!

[Mackmot]

it isnt a problem to run on a road course in one of those cars

[Alan Green]

From the endless conversation about this on the SCSA forum, it is a huge problem, and the cars cannot run as they are, or be changed simply (or cheaply) to run on road courses.

The future of the series is in ovals (rockingham, lausitz, and other european circuits currently in progress). Getting more into the series to start with is the current issue, then expand to other ovals, then maybe other types of circuit.

Small steps at a time.

Al.

[Mackmot]

Why not, I worked on them at Xcel when my dad was engineering them and they can be set up easily to run 4 wheels in the same direction and symetrically. The only problem is that they are not Touring cars and would therefore be a right handful for the driver and make for an interesting race. The only people who would be complaining are the drivers.

[thepits!]

The 2005 SCSA regulations provide that it "it may be possible to run a 'wet race' on a suitable road course if it is available"
This "rule" was in existance previously but has never been used.

I understand that SCSA cars have been tested on rain tires, on a road circuit in (very) wet conditions, but only time will tell if we ever see them race in the rain!

[Mike Holmes]

Problems are that SCSA cars don't have any provision for wipers and demisting! they have been run in wet conditions and Avon have been asked to look at providing a suitable tyre. The teams are very aware that they need to put on a good show and are looking at ways of getting more cars out this year but the current situation at Rockingham is not helping as people are proving unwilling to commit to something that may not be there too long in the future. I think we got some good racing at the weekend (if rather confusing at times) and that the future is good if only there is a long term plan from Rockingham circuit management to continue.

[Snapper Baz]

Iv'e got to say that the 1st race last sunday was probably the worst race I have ever seen in the series-from a spectators view. I couldn't here the speakers and got completely lost as to who was where and why with single cars driving throught the pits and the pace car waving some cars past and not others-strewth! The worst part however was the constant pace car laps with the field plodding round. It was no way to treat future would be spectators-if they wanted to excite the crowd then they failed badly. It should have been red flagged for lengthy clearing-up. And back to flat-out racing. The rain tyre thing...I can't see (excuse the pun!) how a group of oval race cars flat out would be able to see anyway with bad spray...it would be too dangerous to pull out off line to try passing even if the rain tyres would work so that would never work in my mind. One driver told me they thought it would be perfect if sponsors would commit to 4 or 5 year deals but with so much uncertainly around nobody wants to do it. Lets hope that the series can get the support it deserves and can flurish big time.

[Mike Holmes]

I can understand your frustration Baz, I work for a team and even we had a hard time working out what was going on, as for the second race i guess everyone was wondering why black flags were shown to Michael and why he did not respond, the mags will be interesting this week!

[Snapper Baz]

I had to leave straight after the 1st race to cover a few races at Silverstone-sounds like race 2 had its moments then!

[Cynic]

I suspect this will be better covered on the Circuits website, but basically during the second race there was a caution during the pitstop window which meant the pit-lane was closed. They were then supposed to do two green flag laps before pitting. Four cars - Vergers, Richardson, Mickel (I think) and one other pitted a lap early and were given drive-throughs. Vergers and Mickels refused to serve them and finished second and third. what the fallout from this is I don't know.

Personally, I thought the whole situation was a complete farce. After the first race everybody should have been aware of what the rules were. Someone has cocked up big time and if they want to keep the crowds this has got to be sorted out. I also felt they should have red flagged the second race when it became clear what a big clean-up was needed.

Back on topic, I'm speaking out of ignorance here, but surely it can't be that difficult to convert the cars for a road course? From what I've seen of the construction of the cars, it would only require the ability to change the camber and toe-in settings on the suspensions, and straightening the rear axle (longer tie rods?). I suspect the biggest problem would be the drivers. If they were interested in road courses they wouldn't be in SCSA. I also heard a rumour that refuelling during pitstops is also under consideration. Anyone know if there is any substance in this?

[JohnMiller]

As a minor point Michael and John finished first and second and race control admitted that they read their own rule book wrong with regard to when you should pit.

[Snapper Baz]

I hope the refueling thing doesnt take-off for two reasons-it will be huge extra expense for teams...new fuel tanks(?), new fuel equipment, safetyware for pit crews which will add thousands I'm sure to a teams budget and also with all that fuel laying around surely spectators which enjoy the meetings currently watching near/above the pitlane will be moved out of the area completely as they will be overlooking/close to the refueling area...keep it in NASCAR but not in SCSA! I wonder how many of the weekends new spectators will be keen to come back to see more...paying to see cars behind a pace car lap after lap will not have helped.