2006 Colorado Karting Season

Home Forums General Discussion 2006 Colorado Karting Season

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 41 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #41204
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Well Supernats is over, the banquet is in the books, so should we begin to look at next season??

    So just to get the ball rolling?.. this upcoming year, what are the plans?

    o Any thoughts on Greeley’s proposal?
    o Is CSC staying with SKUSA?
    o Will there be any new classes, and if so will it take a place of a current class?
    o Brad, when is the big meeting?
    o And of course, is “The Track” actually gonna happen in 2006?

    #51955
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I imagine the powers to be need time to relax, re-fresh and re-flect on the 2005 season before gearing up for the 2006 season. They did one heck of a job!

    Admire your enthusiasm though.

    IMI meeting is always near the end of January.

    #51956
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I love the term “always,” you must of already forgotten all about last year’s “big meeting” and the delay. And regarding the rest of your post, well it must be nice to be in a well defined karting class….. 😥

    #51957
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Your right I don’t remember it because I was out of town.

    Get in a kart and come run with us Tag Masters.

    Seriously, the leaders need a break. Hopefully, they learned from last yr and will have things worked out before. If not we will cut their salaries!

    #51958
    Angie MacEwen
    Participant

    the “leaders” or “powers that be” may be taking a brief break, but now would be a great time for the racers to put in their 2 cents.

    I planned, started, but never finished creating, a survey for the racers. I think I will still do that, and send it out. So, what questions should I ask you guys and gals? What are the important things that the track owners need to hear before making any decisions?

    I know that much will be discussed here, on the forum, but I would like to send something out and give everyone a chance to respond.

    :idn:

    #51959
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    angie,

    *tire issue: Would like to see CSC get a package deal on tires; reduced a bunch; as to type I don’t care just cheap; spending $1,300 on tires last yr too much.
    *CRE needs to be in the CSC series: hear this George!!
    *Review weight issue based on results from 2005 and dyno tests
    *discount structure for early payment of registrations (club/skusa/CSC); tracks benefit by interest on money over time.
    *financial records of CSC published?
    *Classes: how many don’t increase; maybe cut some or run classes together

    that’s all for now!

    #51960
    Mike Jansen
    Participant

    My two cents for next season as I see it:

    Rich, I honestly don’t see a “real” discount on tires. Slim profit margin as I see it in its current condition.

    Consolidate the poorly attended classes. How many shifter classes do we need or can’t they run together? What classes these would be I don’t know since I didn’t look at the CSC results before writing this. I know Ellie Mae would like to run the 4 strokes again. What was IMI’s turnout for such a class?

    Flaggers, still need improvement to make them the best that they can be.

    Finally, get the races started on time and finished within a reasonable time. I think overall the season went well in this category.

    Have the meeting in January as soon as possible to see what direction we’re taking and we can all start adjusting to the possible changes.

    Angie, if you can get a poll out via mail to find out what classes people are heading to we might have an idea in advance of consolidation etc…

    And another thing… No two day events. Steamboat is the only race that should have that distinction… Father’s day race is fine, mother’s day isn’t…

    And 20 lap mains in Tag Viagra is just fine in my books 8)

    #51961
    cgordon
    Participant

    I’d like to see the CSC stay with MG Yellow tires, unless there’s a compelling reason (like sponsorship money) to change. It needlessly costs money every time you change tire specs. You have to go testing to understand a new tire and that costs a lot of money when you add up track time, fuel, and burning up at least one new set of tires. Besides, I think the MG Yellows were very good.

    I’d like to see the rules and schedule finalized by early January. We need time to adapt to any changes. Also, planning any family events that require a long lead time (like vacation reservations) is difficult when you don’t know the schedule.

    Overall, I was pretty happy with the CSC this year. In TaG Master, the weight rules seemed pretty fair and the racing was very even. The fuel/oil requirements were also fine.

    I think the races were run as quickly and efficiently as we can expect. The only realistic way to shorten the days would be fewer classes. Two-day events also could shorten the days, but I don’t think those are desirable, for a number of reasons.

    Charles

    #51962
    Kyle Ray
    Participant

    I think they should combined some of the shifter classes to create more competition, having 3 classes with the exact same rules for ICC is kind of foolish. maybe just an Pro class, masters class and a novice class, no semi pro.

    KR

    #51963
    Rodney Ebersole
    Participant

    I agree with Kyle about the shifter classes. I still disagree with mixing the motos and icc’s like was done in every shifter class last year.
    If you don’t think it was a bad idea, just try mixing stock icc’s with the s-3 class and see what it does with that growing class.
    I don’t really see a need for an age requirement that a Masters class ussually gets. With the limited numbers of shifter pilots a sort of a weight breakdown is more important. Even with that said, I don’t think there needs to be a break down to light, medium and heavy either.
    I guess we will still have to have the name “Pro” or “Super Pro” or “Joe Pro” thing even though I really dought a single one of them made money racing last year. Maybe the three classes could be called: Pro, then over paid pro “heavy” and then poor pro “S-3” Or we could call them what they really are. Light, Heavy and stock.

    #51964
    cgordon
    Participant

    One other thing I’d like to see for the TaG classes is a restriction that only one motor type can be used by a competitor for the entire CSC series. Whatever you run in your first CSC race is what you’ve got to run in all the rest. So for example, if my first race is with my Rotax, that’s what I’ve got to run in all the rest of the CSC races.

    I think the mix of tracks we have now keeps things pretty even. The different types of motors have advantages at some tracks and disadvantages at others. A few people have run different motors at different tracks in the past seasons, but I haven’t seen anyone really try to press that advantage. If someone does, we’ll all end up having to buy multiple motors to stay competitive. We would all pay lots of $ and end up with a situation no better than what we have now.

    #51965

    @Kyle Ray wrote:

    I think they should combined some of the shifter classes to create more competition, having 3 classes with the exact same rules for ICC is kind of foolish. maybe just an Pro class, masters class and a novice class, no semi pro.

    KR

    I think you’re 100% right. Good idea Kyle.

    #51966
    Doug Welch
    Participant

    Charles brings up a very real and potential problem. We all know that certain motors are better at certain tracks. On the other side, I would hate to penalize the guy who bought the wrong motor and now he can’t switch. For example, a guy who buys a certain engine and then after the season starts he finds that it’s either unreliable or support is lacking, I would hate to force the racer to keep going with the same POS or quit.

    We should allow one change per season. After the switch, no going back.

    We clearly have too many shifter classes. I would break it down a little differently with 3 classes. For 2006, I would do one stock moto class at 375 or 385. One built moto/ICC class at the same weights. One heavy/old class at 410# with built moto or ICC. Last year we had 5 and that was 2 too many.

    I would also make the statement that the following year, 2007, there would still be only 3 classes, but heavy/old would move to stock moto also. In 2008, all shifter classes would be stock moto with 3 classes, novice, pro, heavy/old. ICCs and built motos would no longer be legal in any shifter class. Like FC engines of old, its time for them to go.

    One potential solution to the built motos would be to allow legacy engines. The main problem with converting a built moto back to stock is that the cases have most likely been modified. Any competitor with a built moto who wants to run in stock would have to do the following.

    1. Conform to all existing stock rules except for the modified cases. At worst case, the racer would have to replace cylinder, head, piston, reed cage and ignition. If he has an RS maniifold, he would have to remove the stuffers. Worst case costs, about $550 in parts.

    2. Register the serial number of the cases as a legacy motor at the start of the season.

    3. Run at a weight 10# over what ever the weight of the class is.

    4. Karts that run legacy motors must be at least the previous model year in age. No new karts built for legacy engines. The intent of the legacy designation is to give those racers who can’t afford new equipment or former racers or novice racer who bought used equipment a place to play.

    Many of the built motors also have modifed clutchs. While there no real power there, I would allow the legacy motors to run their modified clutchs. All motors not registered as legacy must be in full compliance to stock moto rules.

    With the drastic changes coming in the homologation rules in 2007, most likely existing ICC engines will no longer be competitive with the 2007 engines. In years past, the changes have been minor but major changes are slated for 2007. Its time to get rid of them once and for all so we can get shifter racing back on track and growing again.

    #51967
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    We would sure like to be able to compete in a Heavy Shifter class. Roman ran around 425-430 lbs. in G1 last year. How would this align with Skusa. We were bummed to sit out the shifter class for the Nations Cup last year. Pro Icc at our weight is not a great option, we feel we would be in the way and a safety concern. We would support a Heavy/Old class as Doug and Rodney mentioned.

    Freezeman, Building a stock moto? Got snow?

    Rick

    #51968
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I don’t like where the discussion on different motors for different tracks is going. :bs:

    We should be trying to keep karting costs down, not encourage it.
    😥 Yes different motors are better for different tracks but I am sure as heck not going out to buy a Leopard for Bandi and CRE while using my rotax for IMI and GF. :argue

    the motor you start the first CSC race is the motor type you run all year.

    If ya want to spend money go to the shifter ranks and stay out of the TAG classes. 👿

    As to the newbies who start, motors won’t matter :idn: to them they will have fun anyway you look at it.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 41 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.