REVISING THE "REVISED SLALOM RULES"

Voted on right or wrong. If you are going to re-re-look this let's re look the Awards committee also.

George Camp

we'll see what happened this year with modified, if indeed there is a need for 2 classes, it can be changed next year. if there are only 2 or 3 cars, since it's an open all out class, it's better the way it is...

We need a revised entry form to list possible modifications with check boxes... such as :

_ Ignition mods
_ Air Filter
_ Shocks
_ poly bushings
_ torsion bars / springs
_ brakes
_ Cams
_ other engine mods
_ Wheels (size ________)
_ Tires (size _________)
_ roll cage

and whatever I missed. HAve the slalom entrant fill this out on their entry form, add a line where the entrant sign that the info is true. this will allow the slalom steward to decide and if we gather this data, it will give us an idea of what people run. Right now, we don't know... we don't even know how many of the current Modified class competitors will be left in modified!!!!

Pascal Gademer

Here are my opinions regarding the AGM's slalom decisions:

a. I am comfortable with the AGM decision to require all slaloms to be run in the same direction. With times running so close, like .15 sec between Art and me, it's probably best to all run the course in the same configuration.

b. "Appropriate to the class" might have been better said;"appropriate to each model within the class", to avoid the improbable situation of MK-9 wheels on a MK-4 saloon. (not that anyone would ever do it) We certainly should understand that Art was referring to the situation of a 1993 XJS on 235-60 x 16s, competing against a 1976 XJS running on 215-70 x 15's. (stock class)
The AGM confirmed Art's requirement that the stock classes run on "street tires". I can't imagine anyone feeling "disenfranchised" by the committee's being allowed to reassess the tire wear rating that would classify tires as such.

c. The AGM OK'd equivalent sized radial tires fitted to all cars. I agree, since anyone who regularly drives an older Jaguar on the street, is already on radials, and would not slalom without this approval.

d. I am very much in favor of (2) Street Prepared classes, as were the AGM delegates. Again, I feel that they approved the concept of SP classes, and wouldn't have hurt feelings if some changes were made in their rules prior to the season.
I am against expecting slalom stewards/tech inspectors to determine classifications, as it's too time comsuming and complicated. WE MUST KEEP THIS SIMPLE! My observation is that we tech inspectors have been doing a less than adequate inspection/classification job under CURRENT rules. I suggest that the committee develop a checkoff list for the entrant to use in determining his own class, subject to verification at any time the steward feels it prudent. The entrant would classify himself, and certify that the vehicle is properly prepared to enter the event.
I feel that combining classes H & I, the light and heavy fully modified cars into one class was unnecessary, and should have been referred back to the slalom committee for consideration. That was my fault as Chairman of the meeting.
I have more to say, but am interested in hearing your opinion first.

Gary Hagopian

This is not a specific slalom concern, more of a general philosophy, but don't we have too many trophies already? I mean you could conceivably have 90 cars at a concours and give them all trophies.

This is not Under-8 soccer where everyone should get a "participation" trophy just for showing up. Well, at least I don't think it is. Perhaps other people think that should be the case. For the last three years, I don't think anyone has gone away from a JCCA concours empty handed.

If we have a class in any competition that has only a half-dozen cars continent-wide, should it really be two divisions with only three cars each, or four and two? How valuable is a trophy when the classes have been so narrowly defined that you have little, if any, competition? I would think that in the "super" modified class the goal is to get the fastest time - period.

Would it be fair to say, Gary/Art/any other mod-competitors, that winning the lightweight/heavyweight modified class is by far less important than having the fastest overall time of any car at any JCNA slalom for the year?

If so, then I think that answers the question about whether it should be one class or two.

The amendment was made, seconded, and seriously considered by the delegates. Unlike some other proposals, there was nothing difficult to grasp. No one spoke against it. The vote was unanimous, or nearly so.

I disagree with Gary that it should have been referred to committee. If there was some valid disagreement with it, some ongoing debate pro and con, then a motion could have been made to refer it to the Slalom Committee. None was. Everyone was on the same page as far as I could tell.

The vote should stand.

It will give us a year to see how the combined class works. If, after this trial, there is sufficient reason to have the class split, the arguments should be presented to the Slalom Committee and presented at the next AGM.

Mark Stephenson
Jaguar Club of Central Arizona