Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Received this email from the organisers of the Festival of Sporting Cars which has run an easter event for the last couple of years:

Overwhelmed as I am by the expressions of thanks and support, it has been suggested (but only by one participant to date) that FoSC owes a full explanation of the reasons for our withdrawal from Bathurst.

To put it as simply as possible: I am peeved that I am not at liberty to provide the full explanation I would wish you all to have, because so much of the problem is shrouded in the Bathurst Regional Council’s assertions that their communications with us are ‘without prejudice.’ Our legal advice is that this is nonsense, because there are no legal proceedings on foot, and nothing to be ‘prejudiced’ – but we will treat their letters as confidential, at least for the moment.

This much I can say: it is plain that, for whatever reason, Bathurst Regional Council does not want our event. It has no problem denying Bathurst businesses the $5.5-million we bring to the city every Easter. It has no problem devaluing the multi-million dollars investment made by government in the circuit, and is perfectly prepared to see it stand idle. The BRC resembles nothing so much as a dog in the manger.

You will recall that we negotiated a contract in 2008 that provided for Mercedes Benz to share the hire period and thus underwrite the cost of our inaugural event, to the benefit of all concerned. The then BRC loved it. In 2009, the event was varied by mutual consent – there was no new model launch, and FoSC struggled to pay the astronomical hire fee. This year, the event was another variation – still no third party to share the cost, but the regularity carnival certainly helped us out.

The fatal problem has been that BRC, which has had a remarkable change of heart, still blockheadedly insisted that our contract for 2011 requires us to stage a Mercedes Benz product launch! This, despite the variations of the past two years... words fail me! Have they been asleep for two years?

At the heart of the problem is a very vague contract. Although we had been able to function under its terms for three years, there have arisen conflicting interpretations – so we asked BRC, months and months ago, to clarify the ambiguities and uncertainties before we nailed down the 2011 event. They simply won’t do it. The consequence of their intransigence is that we were denied any clear statement as to whether the events we wanted to program for 2011 would be permitted by the controller of the circuit. How could we possibly proceed on that basis? The threat was that we would plan and program certain aspects of the event, accept entries (and money) accordingly, and then be told – literally at the last moment – that BRC considers such elements of the 2011 to be contrary to the agreement. The consequence of that would be financial ruin for FoSC and an outraged paddock full of entrants.

To keep faith with you, the participants in FoSC events and the reason for its existence, we had no choice but to accept the legal advice we have been given: that BRC is obviously hell-bent on driving us away from Mt Panorama, and that to become trapped in a will-they-or-won’t-they dragging-out of the contractual negotiations was only going to leave us without any venue or prospect of staging our event next Easter. And we weren’t going to let that happen!

We hope to see you all at Eastern Creek.

My Best Regards

Charles Jardine

FoSC Event Director

I can't stand these little tinpot dictatorships that masquerade as local councils, they seem hellbent on doing everything possible to annoy their residents.

So very sad. It's awful to see what scarce few motorsport facilities we have left in this state (and this country) being managed so poorly. On the one side you have an organisation representing a cross section of motor sport enthusiasts who are looking to participate in and pay for a fantastic event at our most loved circuit. On the other side a council being charged with the duty of managing a facility that is at least in part paid for by tax payers and at the same time supposedly representing their constituents interests who I'm sure would welcome the boost in trade in their community and the direct injection of funds that the event hire fee brings.

So whose interest is being served here? Not the motor sport enthusiasts who want to compete. Not the locals of Bathurst who are supposed to have their interests represented by their council. Certainly not the tax payers who funded works on Mt Panorama who are now effectively being denied access to a facility they paid for.

Unfortunately openly bagging the council won't improve things, they need to try and understand the motivation behind these problems. I for one cannot see what it could be, but it needs to be understood so that a solution can be found.

We have so few motor sport facilities left in NSW and Australia as a whole and the restriction of access to the few remaining places is a serious problem.

I guarantee clubs in Germany booking track days at the Nurburgring Nordschleife don't have these kind of problems. There is undoubtedly one fee for all and you pay it and run your event and actually have fun. Not that it matters too much anyway as in good weather and when the track is free of bookings they hold tourist sessions anyway so you can rock up and do a few laps as you wish (wouldn't that be nice to see at Bathurst??).

In Europe clubs can even have access to F1 circuits like Spa Francorchamps (I know, I drove at a private track day there last month). Even circuits like Monza are available for relatively trouble free hire by clubs.

We have a lot to learn.

Also, how is it that as time goes on facilities for motor sport in NSW actually get fewer in number? Not so long ago we had Oran Park, Amaroo Park, Eastern Creek and Wakefield Park to chose from. Now 2 of those have made way for 'affordable' housing the third is located closer to Canberra than Sydney and Eastern Creek is now left as the only "Sydney" circuit. This means clubs and organisations have to compete fiercely just to get a booking at all. And it means no variety for us drivers or spectators.

PS, there are many other tracks I'm sure that have gone by the wayside (Catalina, Warwick Farm for starters) but Amaroo and Oran Park were two that I spectated and drove at many times and felt their loss acutely.

Also, how is it that as time goes on facilities for motor sport in NSW actually get fewer in number? Not so long ago we had Oran Park, Amaroo Park, Eastern Creek and Wakefield Park to chose from. Now 2 of those have made way for 'affordable' housing the third is located closer to Canberra than Sydney and Eastern Creek is now left as the only "Sydney" circuit. This means clubs and organisations have to compete fiercely just to get a booking at all. And it means no variety for us drivers or spectators.

PS, there are many other tracks I'm sure that have gone by the wayside (Catalina, Warwick Farm for starters) but Amaroo and Oran Park were two that I spectated and drove at many times and felt their loss acutely.

i fear this will be the dimise of motorsport over the next decade or so. V8s will go to street circits and only the elite few tracks. bathurst PI, ect will stand but being able to get a car on them will no doubt become harder and harder.

in Tassie we have just had a new wave of harsher penalties for hooning on our streets but in the same breath cams and the track owners are making it increcingly harder and more expensive to hit the track at all.

i fear this will be the dimise of motorsport over the next decade or so. V8s will go to street circits and only the elite few tracks. bathurst PI, ect will stand but being able to get a car on them will no doubt become harder and harder.

in Tassie we have just had a new wave of harsher penalties for hooning on our streets but in the same breath cams and the track owners are making it increcingly harder and more expensive to hit the track at all.

i agree

if they eliminate where people can race, keep changing the rules so the lower and middle class cant afford to race, the end result will stop enthusiasts doing up cars which will hurt the performance industry, or people will "hoon" and race illigally because they have no where else to race, followed by police issuing more fines, impounding and auctioning off cars all to raise revenue, its all politics and money

It wont hurt the performance industry one bit. Young people will mod cars just as they have been for 20-30 years.

It will simply buff the Gov't coffers, and that's all the new laws are designed for... Oh... and winning minority votes

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Ah right. Maybe my rb just loves chewing through batteries lol.
    • On the R34 can't you just unplug the IACV? This is the way I've always done it on the R33. Disconnect IACV, get it idling around 650rpm, and then do a power reset on the ECU to get it to relearn idle (factory ECU).   The big reason no one has touched on as to why you'd want to get the base idle right, is that it means the computer needs to make smaller adjustments to get a good idle at 700-750rpm.   Also, cleaning the IACV won't normally make the car suddenly idle lower or higher. The main issue with the IACV gumming up is that the valve sticks. This means the inputs the ECU gives, aren't translating to changes in air flow. This can cause idle choppy ness as the ECU is now needing to give a lot of input to get movement, but then it moves too far, and then has to do the same in reverse, and it can mean the ECU can't catch stalls quickly either.
    • 12.8 for a great condition, fully charged battery. If the battery will only ever properly charge to about 12.2V, the battery is well worn, and will be dead soon. When I say properly charge, I mean disconnect it from the car, charge it to its max, and then put your multimeter on it, and see what it reads about an hour later. Dieing batteries will hold a higher "surface charge", but the minutest load, even from just a multimeter (which in the scheme of things is considered totally irrelevant, especially at this level) will be enough over an hour to make the surface charge disappear.   I spend wayyy too much time analysing battery voltages for customers when they whinge that our equipment (telematics device) is causing their battery to drain all the time. Nearly every case I can call it within about 2 months of when the battery will be completely dead. Our bigger customers don't even debate it with me any more ha ha ha. A battery at 12.4 to 12.6 I'd still be happy enough with. However, there's a lot of things that can cause a parasitic draw in a car, first of which is alarms and immobilisers. To start checking, put your multimeter into amps, (and then connect it properly) and measure your power draw with everything off. Typical car battery is about 40aH. Realistically, you'll get about half this before the car won't start. So a 100mA power drain will see you pretty much near unstartable in 8 days.
    • Car should sit at 12.2 or more, maybe 12.6 or 12.7 when fully charged and happy. If there is a decent enough parasitic load then it will certainly go lower than 12.2 with time. You can't beat physics.
    • Ok guess I can rule out the battery, probably even the starter and alternator (maybe) as well. I'm gonna clean those leads and see what happens if it's still shit I might take it to an auto electrician. Unless the immobiliser is that f**king heavy, but it shouldn't be.  If I start the car every day, starts up perfectly never an issue. Isn't 12v low, shouldn't it be around 12.5v?
×
×
  • Create New...