Teeeman wrote:Working with 2nd hand info has created some confusion, let me try to provide a summary:
Council race the past 2 years had breakaway cars and the time delta corresponded very well to the delta documented by Jobe and others as the difference in liquid vs dry lube.
This was the impetus last spring for a Council tear down, liquid was in use (I saw it) but only 1 car was DQ'd... not for liquids, but for bought (blunt end machined) axles. Frank and the others were not DQ'd.
These findings were communicated for months as a petition to District and Council the rule was unenforceable and needed to change.
Council and District refused to change the rule.
Head judge now is in the same situation as before, bad rule... only way to enforce is tear down.
Head judge knows some of the same folks we caught at Council will be at District, so he fairly warns with a sign that post-race tear down is possible (this was on the inspection tables). It was at this point those averse to tear down or to possibly being ruled illegal had the option to not enter the race.
Tear down occurred.
Head judge saw "side to side heavy clumps in the bores". His word. Nobody has further proof.
We have explored options as to how this could have happened legally in this thread, the conclusion is uncertain, there are many different opinions.
The rule violated was use of liquid lubrication and intentional formation of bushings. Use of water in the build is not illegal, but intentional bushings are.
Our judge said he was told that water was used in the build, but all he focused on was liquid and bushing... a graphite bushing that is not inadvertent is illegal per his discretion and he was in charge of rules interpretation and the committee has agreed this interpretation was correct (doesn't matter who else disagrees with that at this point).
The end to this is the DQs stand and the rules are changing so this won't repeat.
I would ask that anybody with a firm and publicly stated opinion the tear down was wrong please provide a solution to how the bad rule could have been gently but effectively enforced. That was the situation the judge was faced with, else run the risk of allowing a handful of folks to rob 120+ other kids of a fair chance to win.
-T
Teeman
My point was and still is that you have one parent saying that they didn't use water. The fact that a water/graphite mixture doesn't end up being that same thing that was seen doesn't seem to be a reason to dismiss what they are saying.
As I posted, if they were getting something similar to what I am seeing after just a few runs (small circular clumps) then they could be telling the truth. I know that I have taken cars apart in the past and have seen that same pattern vastly more prevelant in bores. I just clean it out and keep going. Usually it comes from repeated loading and running of graphite. To say that since the water/graphite mixture didn't come out as what they had saw so it must be illegal seems to me to be throwing the baby out with the bath water. From what has been posted, no one has tried running a car similar to the way that parent has stated what they have done to see if it causes what they had.
I state this as the boys are going to be labeled cheaters and they may not be. You have some who have admitted that they did use a method deemed to be illegal, that's fine. But what about the boy who didn't or at least thinks he didn't do anything wrong?
If I should mind my own business, just say so and I will not comment further. I just hate seeing someone labeled that way without knowing for sure they did it deliberate.