N2 split from WERA?

Chip said:
There is no intention of running sprints or competing directly with WERA, ASRA, PanAM, etc....

N2RA will be an Endurance Race Series. More info coming soon.
Click to expand...
So what will be the advantage to N2 or, more importantly, the racers, with the split from WERA?
 
JPG671 said:
Huh? 50 years ago it was ERA, not WERA. When I started racing with ERA (1976) it was run by Dr Peter Frank and his wife.
Click to expand...
What is your point? ERA became WERA, WERRA, WERA. etc. simple name changes to the same organization that has existed for a long time. I first raced with ERA, too and Peter's wife's name was Patty. Trivia time- Her name was Patty O'Brien Frank and her father was Dick O'bBien of H-D racing manager fame.
 
Razr said:
Thanks.....I think!
I guess it's been about 20 years since my first trackday with Nesba at Putnam Park.
Click to expand...
As you know the water is fine jump on in… grab a chair and yell at the kids to get off the lawn :D back in our day…
 
Gino230 said:
The problem is the way they wrote their software, the transponder is linked to the bike, so if you want to race 2 bikes you need 2 transponders. Some people don't recognize this and switch transponders between bikes, messing up the qualifying times. So if you run a LW race and a MW race, the system takes your MW time and uses it for the LW grid.

Perhaps it's silly, but it's annoying and I draw the line there. If that's the rule they want to go with, I'm only bringing one bike and they will miss out on 3-4 entries from me that weekend. Since they dumped all of their Florida racing, it's moot. We only have Daytona now and I'm not buying another transponder to use one weekend a year.
Click to expand...

Straight out of the ASRA rulesbook...

-If a rider has entered multiple machines in the event, it is the riders responsibility to either transfer the transponder between machines and assure that it is securely fastened, or to fit each machine with its own transponder. Failure to comply with this rule could result in disqualification at the discretion of the Race Director or Referee.-

As you stated above... the rule was intended to keep you from Qualifying on a bigger displacement bike and then moving that ESU to a lower class machine.

You can swap the ESU between bikes as long as the two bikes are classed together....
HW to HW, MW to MW etc...
 
Wheel Bearing said:
Tech is largely useless anyways. The amount of racers I've seen on any given weekend changing their oil, wheels, and brakes kinda makes safety wiring a moot point. Of course every racer has a different routine, but I've always gone through WERA tech with my worn ass take offs since I'm just going to swap the wheels right after anyways, but never have time after sitting in the registration line...
Click to expand...

Anything can change after inspection, the point is that before the bike is allowed on track the organization makes an effort to check it for safety compliance with the rulebook. Every racing organization from club racing to MotoGP does pre-race tech. Formula 1, NASCAR, you name it.

Aside from compliance there is a benefit, it makes the rider aware of requirements that they may not have known. And it provides the opportunity to educate riders on the proper way to do things like safety wire, transponder placement, etc. Class compliance can be checked and the rider can be advised of things that are illegal for their entries. It establishes a checkpoint in the event of an ontrack incident caused by mechanical failure. It's not useless.
 
tawzx12r said:
Straight out of the ASRA rulesbook...

-If a rider has entered multiple machines in the event, it is the riders responsibility to either transfer the transponder between machines and assure that it is securely fastened, or to fit each machine with its own transponder. Failure to comply with this rule could result in disqualification at the discretion of the Race Director or Referee.-

As you stated above... the rule was intended to keep you from Qualifying on a bigger displacement bike and then moving that ESU to a lower class machine.

You can swap the ESU between bikes as long as the two bikes are classed together....
HW to HW, MW to MW etc...
Click to expand...

Back in the Kevin Elliott days we did post-qualifying inspection of every bike in the Q session, if you didn't report directly to tech after coming off track your Q times were DQed. If your bike was illegal for the class you were DQed. Wasn't easy to cheat and didn't rely on grid marshals to recognize a bike not eligible for the class.
 
Mongo said:
I love this kind of stuff - what modern change is WERA missing? An app? What good would that do for us or our customers? The ASRA modernity hasn't worked for them...
Click to expand...

Wera is still in the dark ages killing trees with all the papaerwork.

Standing in two different lines waisting over an hour even if you pre register. Why? Because you're still using paper.

Often Wera doesn't have the personal available to even staff the two lines at the same time so why not eliminate one of them.
 
tawzx12r said:
Straight out of the ASRA rulesbook...

-If a rider has entered multiple machines in the event, it is the riders responsibility to either transfer the transponder between machines and assure that it is securely fastened, or to fit each machine with its own transponder. Failure to comply with this rule could result in disqualification at the discretion of the Race Director or Referee.-

As you stated above... the rule was intended to keep you from Qualifying on a bigger displacement bike and then moving that ESU to a lower class machine.

You can swap the ESU between bikes as long as the two bikes are classed together....
HW to HW, MW to MW etc...
Click to expand...
That rule is written to avoid a situation that rarely happens, and rarely happens intentionally, and could easily be remedied at track entrance- if its LW qualifying and someone rolls up to pit zero on a R6 track officials stop the rider and say WTF. And even if someone qualifies on their R1 for Middleweight Supersport who cares.

What they are missing here is that they are losing race entries with this. We have multiple class bikes we could bring any given weekend. I'm not going to buy a $500 transponder to run a couple more races.
 
Knarf Legna said:
Back in the Kevin Elliott days we did post-qualifying inspection of every bike in the Q session, if you didn't report directly to tech after coming off track your Q times were DQed. If your bike was illegal for the class you were DQed. Wasn't easy to cheat and didn't rely on grid marshals to recognize a bike not eligible for the class.
Click to expand...

This I liked.
It cut down on the amount of protests and removed the pressure of a fellow racer having to play police only to have the finger pointed back at them.
 
Knarf Legna said:
Anything can change after inspection, the point is that before the bike is allowed on track the organization makes an effort to check it for safety compliance with the rulebook. Every racing organization from club racing to MotoGP does pre-race tech. Formula 1, NASCAR, you name it.

Aside from compliance there is a benefit, it makes the rider aware of requirements that they may not have known. And it provides the opportunity to educate riders on the proper way to do things like safety wire, transponder placement, etc. Class compliance can be checked and the rider can be advised of things that are illegal for their entries. It establishes a checkpoint in the event of an ontrack incident caused by mechanical failure. It's not useless.
Click to expand...
I would add to this that even though the inspection doesn't guarantee that the bike will still be compliant by the time it gets to the grid, it helps distinguish a bike that can be compliant from one that can't. It's a lot easier to put safety wire back in after swapping wheels if the proper bolts are drilled than if they are not. You don't know who will do things by the book when they leave tech, but you sure know who won't.
 
I've heard that ASRA may be facing a lawsuit for the fatality at Summit. You can bet that pre-race inspection will be an important consideration if it goes to court.
 
voss555 said:
That rule is written to avoid a situation that rarely happens, and rarely happens intentionally, and could easily be remedied at track entrance- if its LW qualifying and someone rolls up to pit zero on a R6 track officials stop the rider and say WTF. And even if someone qualifies on their R1 for Middleweight Supersport who cares.

What they are missing here is that they are losing race entries with this. We have multiple class bikes we could bring any given weekend. I'm not going to buy a $500 transponder to run a couple more races.
Click to expand...

Again back in the Kevin Elliott days transponders were assigned to riders, not the bike. You could swap your transponder between your bikes and get scored correctly. You could not share your transponder with another rider.
 
Back to the original topic... what sucks for us is travelling 12 plus hours one way for 1 race. The current setup was really nice, if we weren't in a hurry we could run sprints on Sunday.
 
tawzx12r said:
Wera is still in the dark ages killing trees with all the papaerwork.

Standing in two different lines waisting over an hour even if you pre register. Why? Because you're still using paper.

Often Wera doesn't have the personal available to even staff the two lines at the same time so why not eliminate one of them.
Click to expand...

I pre-register for most races and have never waited more than 10 minutes, even at Mid Ohio in July when they had record turnout.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top