Protest

Okay - start the complaints.

On July 15th at Grattan Raceway Park a protest was filed in the Heavyweight Superstock class of the Bridgestone/WERA National Endurance Series. The protest was filed by Team Velocity Racing against Arnchu Racing and 5150 Racing for running Brembo master cylinders rather than stock. Arnchu racing was running a Brembo 19x18 and 5150 was running a Brembo 19x20.

The rule in question reads as follows: "l) Steel braided or Kevlar brake lines may be used. Brake pads may be changed. Brake rotors may be changed to OEM spec steel rotors. No carbon fiber, cast iron or other exotic materials unless stock. No oversized rotors. Master cylinders may be replaced with exact replica master cylinders (this means same bore and stroke and exactly the same fluid displacement)."

The Brembo masters are not exact replicas of the stock. While the bore is the same (.749 inches for all 4 we measured) the stroke is not the same (.382 inches for stock and .365 inches for both Brembo's). However the main issue is the design of the piston which is drastically different and does increase the performance of the brakes when compared to the stock master cylinder.

While we do not feel the teams in question were actively attempting to cheat and were misled to an extent, the parts are still not legal and we have had to disqualify them.

 

Stock -



Brembo -

 

Yes for this round.

 

Not sure what you feel is being a smart ass - every time there is a protest people ask about points and finishes for prior rounds. I answered your question and future questions as well.

 

Matt - what in the hell are you talking about?

 

Yep, it would be.

 

Attack had a more measurable offense because the only place the gained anything with that particular modification was in the pits. And a one lap penalty per stop was a given that it was more than they gained.

In this case I have a performance advatage I can't quantify in any way so I have no other choice.

 

The exact bore and stroke and exact fluid displacement portion is just an example of what would make a master illegal. Especially given the intent of the rule to allow for replacements that were not OEM but were the same brand. I was worried that riders would accidently get a 3/4 bore Nissin instead of a 5/8 so I added an example to make sure they understood they had to check the parts they ordered. It doesn't cancel out the exact replica portion at all, if it did we'd allow the radial style masters on bikes that came stock with a regular style one. How do I know these increase performance? Because of first hand testimony by the riders on the teams protested. The original excuse to run them was "safety" because they don't fade like the stock brakes. Then there is one simple fact - the machines being raced came with stock master cylinders, why were they changed? I don't think you'll find anyone dumb enough to argue they are not a performance advantage.

If I knew the legality of the Brembo's one way or the other I'd have made a ruling at the track. What I was waiting on was someone with a stock setup finally wondering for themselves if the Brembos were legal or not. I found out this morning the answer is they are not. I've saved both of these teams from protests earlier this year and while I'm sorry I couldn't do so again they are the people who chose not to measure or examine the parts they put on their machines, so trying to put the blame on me is a bit silly.


If you can I'd love for you to find anywhere I've said the Brembo's are legal.

The rules were enforced, however that is what you seem to have a problem with. We have thousand of riders who read those same rules and understood them perfectly and are not running illegal parts. While I do not feel the teams did so actively they still did not follow the rulebook and because of that they are being punished. So pick one - do I enforce the rules or do I ignore them? I'm also curious, what is your dog in this fight? You are obviously attached in some way to one of the teams.

Again I must ask you to choose one - either it's not a performance increase or it is. There are as I said earlier many riders running quite safely on stock brakes. There are Endurance teams running stock brakes. You can change the lever on the stock master to allow for more adjustability - totally legal per the rulebook - so that excuse doesn't work either.

Ahhh, now we get closer to the crux of the matter. Have you been around this long enough to remember way back in 2005 which team won the championship? I'll give you a hint, they have the number 1 on their bikes. They are oddly not yellow but blue machines and they lodged the protest - rightly so as we know now. I find it funny that people feel there is collusion between the team that won the series just last year and the team that everyone feels is the overdog. However you're all wrong - just as a point of fact we disqualified a team in the early 90's for running an illegal tailsection. Again a simple mistake and not one that truly made a difference, I'd actually rule differently now however the decision was made based on the feelings of the officials at the time. That ruling cost the team a championship in Heavyweight Production. The team name was Competitive Edge, it was owned and ridden on by Mark Junge, his co-rider was Brian Lantz - Evelyne's son. So explain to me how we play favorites and make rulings to help anyone out.

While I appreciate your sentiments about "my" leadership of this roganization I don't think for a second I lead anything, Evelyne owns and leads WERA. However I don't see any need to change my position within this organization given that none of your reasoning holds water. If you can come up with logical reasons why anything I've done is wrong I'll gladly listen to them.

 

Actually Robbie the team owner was notified the appeal was denied. I believe via email. In your case there was no point in an appeals board, the penalty would not get better only worse and there was no way to debate that the fender was blatantly illegal. Raising the fender would not have been legal either. Since you still don't get it I'll explain again - you have to run stock bodywork in Superstock as the rulebook clearly states. Your team did not, that is illegal. If you actually were to read the rules you'd understand it better I'm sure.

I could have easily just DQ'd you for the obvious performance advantage. I felt that docking a lap per pit stop was a better penalty. I had no way to verify how many times you changed tires or what else you did during each stop - and the penalty needed to be more than just putting you back to where you'd be if you were legal. If you wnated to be disqualified that could have been arranged, next time talk to your team owner. Of course running legal machinery would be my personal first choice.

Quite simply if you're not legal there has to be a penalty. I'm not sure why this concept is so hard for some people to grasp but it's reality. Not penalizing someone for being illegal makes absolutely no sense. Attempting to penalize them just what they gained by the illegality is just as ridiculous - why would anyone stay legal if the only penalty is being moved back to where you would have been? We try to make the penalties fit the level of illegality however there are times where that cannot be determined and a DQ is the only answer.

It's also very very simple to keep us from having to make this choice that no one is ever happy with - run legal equipment. Once you choose to break the rules someone is going to get pissed off and I can guarantee it won't be me. I much prefer everyone running legal.