2014 EMRA Rule Changes

[Ryno]

I'm not sure where the chest protector came into play, but if that was mandated I would like to vote that it be phased in. Not because the cost is high for the protector but because more than a hand full of riders have custom suits and im guessing in some cases a chest protector was not part of the measurements. I for one am happy with just the back protector being mandatory

 

[sand.man]

Do pushups, free chest protector. Or Timbits.

 

[M87]

Colin is right. Anyone with a custom suit won't be able to fit one unless they go on a diet.
Did you have one on in Utah Colin .
Another thing is what standard do we use?
CE approved?
Knox is approved many Alpinestars are NOT some Dianese are and so are SOME RStaichi. Not all just some.
The ones that Colin Edwards and Nicky Hayden used for years are NOT.
But it won't be a problem really because I think suits with airbags should be mandatory.
Let me know if anyone has an argument supporting chest protectors that doesn't apply to airbags. And price is not an issue since, as Colin pointed out if your suit was custom made or not designed for chest protection you need a new one.

 

[Jason Henton]

Am I missing something? I thought costs (fees) would be going up due to a need for airfence, and increase in track rental costs, and possible lower numbers due to people not wanting to race at Castrol? I dont see how eliminating or combining race classes, adding mandatory new parts, and forcing people to volunteer will help anything? Having racers forced to volunteer will reduce the number of entries at that race, which will reduce income, and reduce track time for people who want to ride.

If fees go up $25 a day, and you have to add $100 in parts, and take 2 days off work to volunteer, and drive further to get to the track, etc. etc. all of the sudden maybe you cant make the last round or 2. If this happens to %25 of the membership, how much does it cost the club?

What are the problems the club will be facing?
Lack of participants - Try to cater to as many classes of machines\racers as we can?
Lack of volunteer hours for setup/tear down - Can we hire people to help? Offer free gate pass\dinner or reduced membership costs to those who do help?
Increases in rental costs - Reduce costs elsewhere or increase fees, bring back membership renewal fees?
Need for airfence - Again, increase fees or add donation options (For those who have an extra $500 laying around)
Shorter allowable rental time - Combine grids to reduce session numbers while still allowing people more track time.

Guess I would just rather see people spend money towards the club and air fence than at a dealership on parts.

 

[Goatse]

I can't wrap my head around how anybody would be against a brake lever guard. It's such a cheap part that protects from one of the worst types of crashes.

Also, I'd bet a larger percentage of the riders have less of a drive to Castrol than they did to Stratotech.

 

[the_fornicator]

Having racers forced to volunteer will reduce the number of entries at that race, which will reduce income, and reduce track time for people who want to ride.

Why? You say it will, but never gave any reasons why. I can easily make the claim, "forcing racers to volunteer will increase the number of entries." See how that works? If you want to ride, you'll make it work. Why? Because you have no other option. There's nowhere else to race in Edmonton and Calgary.

If fees go up $25 a day, and you have to add $100 in parts, and take 2 days off work to volunteer, and drive further to get to the track, etc. etc. all of the sudden maybe you cant make the last round or 2. If this happens to %25 of the membership, how much does it cost the club?

Drive further for who? It took me 40 minutes to drive to Strato before. Now, it'll only take me 15 minutes. I already had the part so it costs me nothing. Having enough volunteers means that you can split shifts and work around your racing schedule. You're complaining again.

Lack of participants - Try to cater to as many classes of machines\racers as we can?

Having more classes means that you have to feather more races amongst a fixed amount of time. So, this might mean that when everybody has to pay, say, $400 to register, you might only get one or two races in a day due to the club having to accommodate so many more race classes. It doesn't necessarily mean you're increasing the number of races a person can register in. You talked about losing riders? This will definitely do it. I imagine that one of the goals to restricting races would be to maximize the value of racing for the dollar; that is how you get racers on the grid. Decreasing the number of races they can register in and increasing the rates is one sure-fire way to reduce your entries.

Lack of volunteer hours for setup/tear down - Can we hire people to help? Offer free gate pass\dinner or reduced membership costs to those who do help?

So, you don't want to shell out $70 for a brake lever guard but you want the nonprofit club to fork out money for something that can be had for free by volunteers? i.e. something that you have no interest in doing. That's awfully hypocritical. So, you want the club to shoulder all the costs? They're non-profit you realize?

Increases in rental costs - Reduce costs elsewhere or increase fees, bring back membership renewal fees?

Weren't you complaining about a $70 part?

Need for airfence - Again, increase fees or add donation options (For those who have an extra $500 laying around)

Did you think racing was cheap? If people have $500 laying around to donate, the club will happily accept it. That's nothing new.

Shorter allowable rental time - Combine grids to reduce session numbers while still allowing people more track time.

That's... that's what they're trying to do. There goes your suggestion to max out the number of classes. This also becomes a safety issue as well -having too many people on a track of various skills and speeds. How much fun would it be for a racer to be constantly held up by slower racers because the track was trying to make it all about money by maxing out the number of registries?

Guess I would just rather see people spend money towards the club and air fence than at a dealership on parts

Didn't you just write this previously??

Lack of volunteer hours for setup/tear down - Can we hire people to help? Offer free gate pass\dinner or reduced membership costs to those who do help?

Hiring people costs money yet you'd "rather see people spend money towards the club and air fence". If you really had the interest of the club in mind, you would understand that the brake lever guard (again, a $70 part) is for safety (not even theirs -yours). Moreover, you would rather see people spend money towards the club and air fence yet you sound adamantly against volunteering.

How, pray tell, do you think the track is prepped and readied for racing when you arrive to a track? Do you think magical little bunnies come out and sweep the tracks, move pylons, wave flags, plan grids, clean the garbage leftover by spectators, etc.?

When you leave the track, who does the tear down? Who collects all the pylons, flags, boards, chairs, etc.?

It sounds like you want to party, but you have no interest in staying and cleaning up.

The club is moving to a less accommodating track that has higher fees and that's something you cannot change. Help the forward motion of the club by complaining less.

 

[Goatse]

Ya know I am not as embarrassed about my rants any more.

But his made sense.(Fornicator's)

 

[Spooner]

For the most part (really 90% of this thread) I like where this is going. I think the verbal sparring is unwarranted in this thread however.

Few points that need to clarified and gone over.

All fee's and any extra associated costs are Still TBA. The voted in Exec members with input and assistance from the membership will be outlining the new fees once everything has been laid out before us. Ie. a finished track. Complaining about rise in costs to race, is kinda a waste until you have an actual number to complain about. Talking hypotheticals is just that... So yes, please prepare yourself for a increase of cost in some sort. Don't just complain about increases in pricing when in the land we live in, the costs of everything always goes up. Racing is no exception.

As for rule changes here are a few issues that can and will be brought forward for discussion at the AGM.

Shark Fins (chain guards),
Hand brake covers,
Chest protectors,
Changing of some of the class structures; As this has already gone over, but no one yet has offered a actual direct thought to do. Other than 600 riders want more races with only 600's.

A few thoughts of my own.

Senior Open, Change it to 40 years from the 35. Possible rename to Formula 40. Leave it as an open class still.
Sportsman, I like to see the age of the bikes brought down. 10 years to 7 or 5. Leave it as an open class still.
Formula 1.05, Renamed to whatever we think is best. Won't be until possibly the first day of racing...
Brake guards, (as Dana said No brainer)
Shark Fins, (I also think its a no brainer)

~S

 

[Goatse]

I'll use smaller words next time so you underst... you compre... you um. You know what I mean.

Lol, well played.

 

[Schramm]

It will be no problem to have the appropriate lap time determined by the first round for the 1:05 race. Great work as always Jon.

We can just let Steve Wilson out there and what he runs as fastest set that as the Formula 105 time Steve was crazy consistent to 1:05 at strato

 

[sand.man]

With a change in venue, presumably a larger venue with potentially more exposure for sponsors... Are we doing anything to seek out additional sponsors?

It sounds like in the past the sponsors the club has had have been pretty loyal in continuing their support. Could we shift some focus towards appealing to additional sponsors to offset the costs of additional air fence and estimated increase in the cost of each event?

I see a trend, money seems to be a predominant topic of debate for our upcoming year.

We all want racing to be fun, and fair, and safe... But I think above all of that, we all want to race. Period.

I know class structures are pivotal in the success of a racing schedule, but if we could focus less on minor details like superstock vs. supersport legalities and focus more on how to make it work without the club losing money so that we can just go and ride our bikes and have fun together like we have in years past... I think we'll be okay.

We've all passively taken Stratotech for granted when it comes to how easy it was for our club to host an event there, compared to what it could be like at Castrol until we have developed a rapport with that facility and have a feel for how to make things run smoothly.

I think we all know that it will take more work not only for our executives, but for each of us that just show up to race, and I have faith that the majority of our membership will step up and contribute whatever it takes to make racing at Castrol a success.

Sorry for the gentle rant, just some thoughts floating around my head.

 

[M87]

Reading Scott's post got me thinking.
People don't want to race against 1000 with 600s because the speed difference is more dangerous at this track?
That's a question, is that right or wrong.
Because of this people want somewhere else to race 600's but, they want it to be in a class where they don't have to race fast 600's because this will be a horsepower track and on it power can trump skill.
That is an assumption not a question, why else would you want another class.
So here is something completely out of left field.
I will buy a speed gun, they use them in baseball and you can get one on ebay for a hundred bucks. I'll use the money I've saved on a chest protector.
Why? You ask.
During our first race weekend/trackday we can establish a base line for top speeds in various classes.
While top speed is not a direct correlation with horsepower they are very closely linked and there is some math out there proving this. For example, all other things being equal, a difference of 1 mile an hour in the quarter mile translates to about 2 horsepower on a bike. And all you guys who drag race know that, while ET may differ with a bad launch there is only a small difference in speed at the end.
Where am I going here?
Lets say the average top speed in intermediate 600 supersport is 200kmh, and you go over that by 10 kmh. That means you must have too much horsepower so next race you are moving to another class. It is just as though you failed a dyno test.
I know what you are thinking "Why Mike thats brilliant, but what about guys who brake early? Aren't they going to have lower top speeds even with more horsepower?"
Well, if they brake early they aren't using all that power and you should blow by under braking with you superior skill.
I'm just trying to think a little out side the box here. I could see this opening the door for big twins racing 600s head to head.
Think about it, with similar top speeds where is the advantage.
We don't have to do this constantly we can just spot check, people are basically honest.
Now you may begin pointing out what is wrong with this.
GO

 

[Ryno]

With a change in venue, presumably a larger venue with potentially more exposure for sponsors... Are we doing anything to seek out additional sponsors?

It sounds like in the past the sponsors the club has had have been pretty loyal in continuing their support. Could we shift some focus towards appealing to additional sponsors to offset the costs of additional air fence and estimated increase in the cost of each event?

I see a trend, money seems to be a predominant topic of debate for our upcoming year.

We all want racing to be fun, and fair, and safe... But I think above all of that, we all want to race. Period.

I know class structures are pivotal in the success of a racing schedule, but if we could focus less on minor details like superstock vs. supersport legalities and focus more on how to make it work without the club losing money so that we can just go and ride our bikes and have fun together like we have in years past... I think we'll be okay.

We've all passively taken Stratotech for granted when it comes to how easy it was for our club to host an event there, compared to what it could be like at Castrol until we have developed a rapport with that facility and have a feel for how to make things run smoothly.

I think we all know that it will take more work not only for our executives, but for each of us that just show up to race, and I have faith that the majority of our membership will step up and contribute whatever it takes to make racing at Castrol a success.

Sorry for the gentle rant, just some thoughts floating around my head.

That is a excellent point Ryan. I am going to put my name forward to run for the exec again next year to continue the work we started this year on re organzing our sponsorship package. It is no secret and the membership will see at the AGM that our sponsorship numbers were down this year. But like I had outlined at the begining of the year, this would have been a rebuilding year as far as promotion. I would like to see promotions done more as a promtional team type of effort, much like the WMRC does it. I think we can attract new sponsors that arent just dealership orientated. The dealerships have been our bread and butter on promotions for many years. But just as LACUSTOMS came in at the end of the year for our last event, I believe we can attract outside sponsors to help cover inflating costs. Anyone who may be interested in joining the promotional team next year should this idea go ahead, please PM me and we can start getting this sorted before the AGM

 

[Goatse]

On a drag strip everyone starts from the same place and at the same speed (zero).

On a road course a rider can start accelerating from many different points. Then even before that, his corner speed before accelerating could be even higher than the next guy. So lap times and rider skill will have a lot more to do with it than they would in drag racing.

And as far as the 600SS vs 600SBK rules go, I'm not too stubborn to admit when good points are made. I don't think there's anything wrong with leaving the 600SS rules just as they are.

 

[DEFBOY35]

My questions in regards to why you wouldn't want the extra protection of a chest protector was in regards to m87 to ask why he felt they were useless. I wasn't under the impression they were up for debate as becoming mandatory. But I do support anything that would make us safer. Of course. I already wear one and understand the point Colin brought up.
I'm not so worried about the shrapnel as it were as I would be coming down hard onto the tank or bars or tumbling with the bike. I don't recall the exact number of force that it takes to stop a heart, or deflate a lung. And not sure how many people here have ever been hit in the chest hard enough to seperate ribs from your sternum or crack your sternum. But it does not feel to good. Lol
But that's just my reasonings as to why its a good idea to have any extra protection possible. But to each there own I don't care one way or the other if they are made mandatory as I choose to wear one.

I don't see the big fuss over helping out with set up and tear down. As well for the novice promotion. Either you volunteer your time. Miss a weekend or two of racing. Which sucks yes. But you don't pay to race that weekend. Or get a family or friend to fill your spot. Pay them if you have to. And still get to race the weekends.

Dean. How much has having people help set up or tear down air fence for a weekend hurt membership? Does the wmrc do the volunteer hours to promote? Has it deterred anybody from wanting to race in your opinion with your club?

 

[macbayne]

i am glad you guys brought up sponsorship. i was avoiding the subject because i didn't want to shake the hornets' nest. stratotech was not promoted, plain and simple. an overwhelming majority of people in the city have never heard of it. castrol is known throughout the city and people like JB's power centre sponsor street legal drags, so if cards are played correctly, the club can network a little bit to bring in help.


with that out of the way, i would like to remind everyone not to get too caught up in class definition. thoughts of dynos and speed guns are too rich. you can build the shit out of a bike and get 40% more hp, but good luck with you rebuilds every round. sure there are guys who do buil their engine a bit, but imposing an hp limit will affect maybe 5 guys. the existing rules regarding bike specs are good. enforcing quickshifter rules will make a huge difference at castrol.

as for chest protectors, i think that is best left alone for now and maybe brought in in 2 years. i have been known to do pushups, and after my crashes this year, a chest protector would have reduced some trauma.

 

[M87]

On a drag strip everyone starts from the same place and at the same speed (zero).

On a road course a rider can start accelerating from many different points. Then even before that, his corner speed before accelerating could be even higher than the next guy. So lap times and rider skill will have a lot more to do with it than they would in drag racing.
.

I actually think thats a plus not a minus.
You come out of the turn at 70k and get to 220 I come out at 60k and get to 225 then I must have more power and, maybe, an unfair advantage.
Same scenario but I only get to 220. I am still behind you and all my cheatin horsepower was not a factor. Two turns later your gone and I'll never catch you.
Because better riders are be more consistent they will define top speed. It just may take some tweaks.
Again I'm just hoping to add some new ideas. I like things the way they are but I have a fast legal bike under the current rules.

 

[Goatse]

I actually think thats a plus not a minus.
You come out of the turn at 70k and get to 220 I come out at 60k and get to 225 then I must have more power and, maybe, an unfair advantage.
Same scenario but I only get to 220. I am still behind you and all my cheatin horsepower was not a factor. Two turns later your gone and I'll never catch you.
Because better riders are be more consistent they will define top speed. It just may take some tweaks.
Again I'm just hoping to add some new ideas. I like things the way they are but I have a fast legal bike under the current rules.

You keep bringing up "legal bikes", engine mods, etc. But that was literally dropped pages ago. Nobody is even fighting for the Superstock rule anymore, so why continue to bring it up? I think the big want here is for the 600SBK race. The 600 Superstock was just a suggestion but after some quick points it was obvious our Supersport rules are just fine for our local riders. So really, it's just beating a dead horse and is a moot point.

600SS (current rules) and a 600SBK
Open Sportbike (current rules) and Open SBK

Sounds fine to me, and talks of dynos and speed guns isn't necessary.

 

[M87]

My questions in regards to why you wouldn't want the extra protection of a chest protector was in regards to m87 to ask why he felt they were useless. ?

I didn't want to debate this again but I may not have been clear, I don't think chest protectors are useless.
I think they will decrease bruising and maybe broken ribs. Would I like broken ribs, not so much, I'm not even that keen on bruising but I do not believe chest protectors will save my life.
I don't want to be morbid but google the racing deaths over the last five years and you will see a lot of those riders were wearing chest protection. They got hit very hard by other bikes or hit the ground/stationary objects with considerable force.
In my opinion if you get hit hard enough that a chest protector will make a difference between life and death you will sustain other injuries that will prove to be deadly. That being said without a helmet even a small fall can kill you and without leathers even a short slide might prove fatal. Same for a back protector.
Those things save lives and should be mandatory, but when we don't control the quality of impact absorption in our leathers and even a manufacturer like AlpineStars doesn't bother to get their chests protectors CE approved why do we mandate them.
In some cases I can see how it might reduce your pain.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSXjZ-QFvIw but only if you are wearing the right one.
Yeah I did some research on this.
So, in short, even though I am considering a chest protector, I don't think the EMRA should go where others, including the AMA, have not and make them mandatory.
And there is nothing you can say that will cause me to comment on this subject again.

 

[DEFBOY35]

I didn't want to debate this again but I may not have been clear, I don't think chest protectors are useless.
I think they will decrease bruising and maybe broken ribs. Would I like broken ribs, not so much, I'm not even that keen on bruising but I do not believe chest protectors will save my life.
I don't want to be morbid but google the racing deaths over the last five years and you will see a lot of those riders were wearing chest protection. They got hit very hard by other bikes or hit the ground/stationary objects with considerable force.
In my opinion if you get hit hard enough that a chest protector will make a difference between life and death you will sustain other injuries that will prove to be deadly. That being said without a helmet even a small fall can kill you and without leathers even a short slide might prove fatal. Same for a back protector.
Those things save lives and should be mandatory, but when we don't control the quality of impact absorption in our leathers and even a manufacturer like AlpineStars doesn't bother to get their chests protectors CE approved why do we mandate them.
In some cases I can see how it might reduce your pain.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSXjZ-QFvIw but only if you are wearing the right one.
Yeah I did some research on this.
So, in short, even though I am considering a chest protector, I don't think the EMRA should go where others, including the AMA, have not and make them mandatory.
And there is nothing you can say that will cause me to comment on this subject again.

that was another part of my original question that was not previously answered, have they been implemented as mandatory in other organizations. and you do have a valid point in regards to, they would require having to meet some sort of standard, ie. ce
either way as said, does not matter to me if it is implemented or not, i choose the extra protection anyways. lol

merely a discussion on a topic that was brought up in the thread. which i believe is what the point is, lol.

on to next topic, ha

on the math Jon, i am curious as to how everything was factored in? the number i have heard floating around has been 10g a day for castrol.
14 race sessions? then are we factoring in say 3 groups 2 practice sessions each in the morning, bringing it to 20 sessions so 500$ per session, if we could get 25 riders for fast 25 say, would be at 20 a piece
but i would suggest that it is actually 19 sessions to do the math with as the club pays out 500$ for the fast 25 but does not recoup the race fees, as they are distributed to the top 3. which adds a additional 26.31 (526.31)to the other 19 sessions to cover the fast 25?


if this is something you would rather leave off here , please send me a pm, just would like to know how the break down goes. thanks.