Winter tqs

Cincy Dirt Bowl · 10/29/09, 8:12 AM

yep, been in the rule book since 1961.

TQ97 · 10/29/09, 8:26 AM

And has been discussed every couple years about whether to change or not. Please.....don't come in here, run a few races and act like you know everything that's gone on with TQ's. This is my last post on this subject.

Cincy Dirt Bowl · 10/29/09, 8:49 AM

I have never claimed to know everything that has gone on in TQs. Just pointing out how some of those FL cars are set-up. This is my 3rd post on this subject

Shawn · 10/29/09, 10:12 AM

Alright, I see some sarcasm going around, so let me steer clear of that. No offense, Cincy, but I'm guessing that you're meaning the "setup" that you used at Lawrenceburg? I feel like it was a "jab" (that you brought it up as being "scary") at those that had an issue with it at that race. Not to mention that it was against the rule book, but allowed anyway. It should be a closed situation and not allowed, but from what I hear, there might be a change for next year, which is unfortunate. There's a lot to lose by allowing this, but not a lot to gain.

I just don't see the point in changing the rules for it. The rules are in place for a reason and I feel were perfectly fine and didn't need to be bent. Especially for a car that had already ran with a Honda motor. The change in rules won't benefit competition. This is a major issue, which I hope is discussed with the series officials, owners and drivers before next season, which I'm sure it will be.

This is my opinion, no offense intended to anyone. Sorry, if it comes across as anything other than trying to be constructive!
:2:

STP · 10/29/09, 7:30 PM

Last year, MTQRL allowed an experimental car at two racetracks last year. We have no plans to change our rules except something pertaining to safety. The goal of our series is to keep with the traditions of TQ racing such as racing at fairground tracks, maintaining its low cost, and keeping it a sport of the working person.

I believe our officials have spoken with Cincy and I hope have let him know what changes need to be made to make his car fit our rules.

TQ29m · 10/29/09, 9:06 PM

Jen, thanks for so many things, you, Mark, and the rest have done, and many thanks for clearing the air on this subject, you've just anchored the ship, now we know where it's headed, more fun racing, and no big changes, that would turn the ship loose again. Much appreciated! Bob

slide22 · 10/29/09, 11:31 PM

I'm not real familiar with TQ's, but whats the problem with a car having a transmission?

Cincy Dirt Bowl · 10/30/09, 7:09 AM

There is no problem with a car having a transmission. TQ's are ran like that all over the country.
There is also no problem with sticking with the rules as they are.

The problem is the President and Tech Dir. from the MTQRL gave me permission to build a car with a transmission, I did, and NOW it's not legal. The racers were informed of my car at Greensburg and were told this was being done. The racers were asked at the drivers meeting if anyone had a problem with it and nobody said a thing, and I was allowed to race. 1 week later at Lawrenceburg it didn't work out the same, and I was told just before hot laps that I couldn't race. Now I find out through this thread that my car is not legal.

Very professional guys. Very professional. What a waste of my time and money.

Carl Cruse

SP Motorsports · 10/30/09, 8:12 AM

I have no opinion on this matter of whether the car should be legal or illegal.

But there are a couple comments I have for clarification purposes.

At Greensburg, when it was discussed at the drivers meeting, it was explained that it was an experiment. It was also said that the car would start last in all races. It was pointed out at that time that the car did not meet the existing rules and it was part of some experimenting that was being done. Drivers and owners were encouraged to go look at the car, which many did, and give their feedback to the officials.

I can not speak for what happened as Lawrenceburg as I was not their.

I thought this clarification may be helpful for those not involved.

Shawn · 10/30/09, 8:43 AM

I agree with Bob, once again. More great fun and no big changes. After a great first year, I can't see anything that needs tweaked, even a little bit!

Finally, there's nothing wrong with experimenting and testing new things. However, at the same time, not everything can be legalized. So, if you're one to build something experimental, it should be realized that it might not become legal. I'm sure that there's a lot that will be learned from this and will only help in the future.

10/29/09, 10:12 AM	#14 RE: Winter TQ's
Shawn Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 452	Alright, I see some sarcasm going around, so let me steer clear of that. No offense, Cincy, but I'm guessing that you're meaning the "setup" that you used at Lawrenceburg? I feel like it was a "jab" (that you brought it up as being "scary") at those that had an issue with it at that race. Not to mention that it was against the rule book, but allowed anyway. It should be a closed situation and not allowed, but from what I hear, there might be a change for next year, which is unfortunate. There's a lot to lose by allowing this, but not a lot to gain. I just don't see the point in changing the rules for it. The rules are in place for a reason and I feel were perfectly fine and didn't need to be bent. Especially for a car that had already ran with a Honda motor. The change in rules won't benefit competition. This is a major issue, which I hope is discussed with the series officials, owners and drivers before next season, which I'm sure it will be. This is my opinion, no offense intended to anyone. Sorry, if it comes across as anything other than trying to be constructive! :2: _________________________________________________ Last edited by Shawn; 10/29/09 at 10:14 AM. Reason: Typo

10/29/09, 9:06 PM	#16 Re: Winter tqs
TQ29m Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 6,258	Jen, thanks for so many things, you, Mark, and the rest have done, and many thanks for clearing the air on this subject, you've just anchored the ship, now we know where it's headed, more fun racing, and no big changes, that would turn the ship loose again. Much appreciated! Bob __________________ "Being old, isn't half as much fun, as getting there"! Ole Robert I!

10/29/09, 8:12 AM	#11 Re: Winter tqs
Cincy Dirt Bowl Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 81	yep, been in the rule book since 1961.

10/29/09, 8:26 AM	#12 Re: Winter tqs
TQ97 Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 1,008	And has been discussed every couple years about whether to change or not. Please.....don't come in here, run a few races and act like you know everything that's gone on with TQ's. This is my last post on this subject.

10/29/09, 8:49 AM	#13 Re: Winter tqs
Cincy Dirt Bowl Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 81	I have never claimed to know everything that has gone on in TQs. Just pointing out how some of those FL cars are set-up. This is my 3rd post on this subject

10/29/09, 11:31 PM	#17 Re: Winter tqs
slide22 Senior Member Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 350	I'm not real familiar with TQ's, but whats the problem with a car having a transmission?

10/30/09, 7:09 AM	#18 Re: Winter tqs
Cincy Dirt Bowl Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 81	There is no problem with a car having a transmission. TQ's are ran like that all over the country. There is also no problem with sticking with the rules as they are. The problem is the President and Tech Dir. from the MTQRL gave me permission to build a car with a transmission, I did, and NOW it's not legal. The racers were informed of my car at Greensburg and were told this was being done. The racers were asked at the drivers meeting if anyone had a problem with it and nobody said a thing, and I was allowed to race. 1 week later at Lawrenceburg it didn't work out the same, and I was told just before hot laps that I couldn't race. Now I find out through this thread that my car is not legal. Very professional guys. Very professional. What a waste of my time and money. Carl Cruse

10/30/09, 8:43 AM	#20 RE: Winter TQ's
Shawn Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 452	I agree with Bob, once again. More great fun and no big changes. After a great first year, I can't see anything that needs tweaked, even a little bit! Finally, there's nothing wrong with experimenting and testing new things. However, at the same time, not everything can be legalized. So, if you're one to build something experimental, it should be realized that it might not become legal. I'm sure that there's a lot that will be learned from this and will only help in the future.