PDA

View Full Version : headlight tape



Grumpa
10-29-2004, 02:31 AM
What is the logic behind taping glass headlights instead of removing and replacing with metal/composite panels? I was at MidOhio and witnessed a first lap, first turn, front of the field fandango between an ITB Rabbit and Volvo. The Rabbit lost both headlights and no doubt the majority of the field ran through the glass. From a safety and expense ($200 tire) standpoint, I don't comprehend the club's logic as to the headlight tape rule. Enlighten me, please.

Bill Miller
10-29-2004, 06:16 AM
I don't know the real reason, but if I had to guess, I'd say it's a throwback to the 'dual purpose' nature of IT cars, which officially went by the board 4 or 5 years ago.

Now here's something that would make the transition between IT and Prod easier. Darin, are you listening???? http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

dickita15
10-29-2004, 06:28 AM
is there a concern that removing headlights would allow you to change airflow?
dick

Diane
10-29-2004, 07:30 AM
My IT car doubles as a backup street car for me, I would not want to lose my headlights. Besides, I like to color-coordinate my lights with the tape. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/cool.gif


Diane
<got the IT car back on the street last week yay! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif )

racer-025
10-29-2004, 07:34 AM
Here in Atlantic Canada, we race under ARMS sanctioned events and we use SCCA's GCRs for IT competition. Our rules are identical except for some minor allowances. The removal of headlights is allowed as one of these. Yes, we don't want glass on our tracks either. This has been working out for over a decade. When we race south of the border, unfortunately we have to put them back in.

RSTPerformance
10-29-2004, 12:30 PM
racer-025-

When you take out the headlights do you need to replace them with metal or some other material to restrict the airflow?

Raymond

bldn10
10-29-2004, 01:06 PM
"the club's logic"

oxymoron

Renaultfool
10-29-2004, 01:09 PM
Dickita15,
I layer my duct tape over my headlights from bottom to top for the slight airflow advantage I get from the resulting positive angle of the tape surface.

That was a joke, ok?
NASCAR doesn't even worry about aero at the speeds we go in IT. I'm sure that you would not notice any performance advantage.

It would seem to me that not having glass on the track would make it safer for all of us.

Geo
10-29-2004, 01:13 PM
We could allow headlight removal on safety grounds. Perhaps we could use vinyl fake headlights. Then we can make a case to remove the factory glass and replace it with Lexan on a safety basis. Then we could make a case to allow full tube framed funnycar chassis on safety grounds as well. Then, as long as we're doing that, we may as well allow FWD to RWD conversions.

Yeah, that's it.

The fact is, IT is still a production based category and as such, some things must remain. Besides, there are plenty of pro class race cars that make no pretention of being dual purpose that still retain their headlights. I wouldn't hold your breath on this argument.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

Grumpa
10-29-2004, 02:36 PM
Thanks, George. I wasn't trying to push buttons. Being a newbie to IT, I was just curious about the glass tape.

Geo
10-29-2004, 03:38 PM
Originally posted by Grumpa:
Thanks, George. I wasn't trying to push buttons. Being a newbie to IT, I was just curious about the glass tape.

You're not pushing my buttons. Not by a long shot. I was being naughty.

But the basic premise is correct. We can come up with a plethora or reasons to justify a great many things that would turn IT into Production in a hurry.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

dickita15
10-29-2004, 04:28 PM
Originally posted by Renaultfool:

NASCAR doesn't even worry about aero at the speeds we go in IT. I'm sure that you would not notice any performance advantage.


ok i guess i should have been clearer. some cars have carb/FI intake behind the headlight. would one reason no to tamper with headlights is some people would worry airflow to the engine being altered.
dick

Bill Miller
10-29-2004, 05:00 PM
Originally posted by Grumpa:
Thanks, George. I wasn't trying to push buttons. Being a newbie to IT, I was just curious about the glass tape.


Grumpa,

Don't worry, George can't help himself.


------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

RSTPerformance
10-29-2004, 05:20 PM
Dick-

I was with you, thats why I asked my question http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

Raymond

racer-025
10-29-2004, 09:36 PM
RST,

we have to install metal in the exact configuration as the headlights. Check out a photo of one of my CRX's;

http://www.geocities.com/mcnuttracing/blackcrx.jpg

hornerdon
10-31-2004, 09:29 PM
Originally posted by Geo:
We can come up with a plethora or reasons to justify a great many things that would turn IT into Production in a hurry.

Yep, and this isn't one of them. Production allows the use of the former headlight locations for air intake; IT could prohibit that, and require a flat metal cover on cars with exposed headlights, which would eliminate any aero advantage. For those who still want to drive their cars on the street, or run night time enduros, unscrew the covers and re-install the headlights. Big deal. The question was legitimate -- why require the taping of headlights if it doesn't always work? Duh...



------------------
...Don

Marcus Miller
10-31-2004, 10:46 PM
Originally posted by hornerdon:
The question was legitimate -- why require the taping of headlights if it doesn't always work? Duh...


That's very poor rationale.
Why require a roll cage? It doesn't always work.
Why require seat belts, they don't always work?

That said, I agree with the original poster, I'd prefer to see headlights gone.

MM


[This message has been edited by Marcus Miller (edited October 31, 2004).]

racer-025
11-01-2004, 11:10 AM
ARMS made this revision to the IT rules as a total common sense rule change only. The metal headlight cover has to be of the same profile as the existing headlight (take a look at the photo). This rule has worked for us for years without any issues, ie: no performance gains, really. This actually "lowers" the cost for IT racers by allowing them not to have to buy expensive headlight replacements as well as no glass on the track in the event of an incident. It just makes good sense.

apr67
11-01-2004, 11:31 AM
Originally posted by racer-025:
ARMS made this revision to the IT rules as a total common sense rule change only. The metal headlight cover has to be of the same profile as the existing headlight (take a look at the photo).

What if you don't have glass headlights? Do you still have to do this? How much fabrication does it take to match the composite headlight designs on new cars?

Seems like a can of worms.

racer-025
11-01-2004, 12:26 PM
ARMS doesn't make you remove the headlights. You don't have to do it. It's just an option. The steel panel formation also doesn't have to be perfect - but close. Tech has the final say to your fabrication. I can form just about any headlight mould from card board. Then I use the card board cut-out to make my steel panel.

RX7's & Miata's have it easy as they are allowed to remove their headlights without having to make any steel panels.

racer_tim
11-01-2004, 04:35 PM
And while we're at it, what about the heater core? Yes, I do realize that some of you race where you might need the defroster, but if the car can make weight, why not loose the heater core?

We lost the passenger seat a few years ago, maybe now it's time to ask to remove the glass and ..................

If you don't ask, you'll never get told no.

Knestis
11-01-2004, 06:11 PM
No. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

If it isn't dangerous enough to require SS and Touring cars to remove headlights (or heater cores), then it isn't sufficiently dangerous to warrant us doing so...

K

Geo
11-01-2004, 07:31 PM
Originally posted by racer_tim:
And while we're at it, what about the heater core?

Yes. And then the windshield washer bottle. Then all the glass to be replaced by Lexan. Oh, and why do we need those silly dash boards? Hmmm.... I'm sure there are more things we can do without just the the big boy Production cars. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

Oh, I know! We can get rid of those unsafe plastic tail lights and replace them with little disco tracer lights....

OK, OK, I'm being naughty again. Just for Mr. Bill. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

racer-025
11-02-2004, 10:57 AM
easy now....all we did was remove the headlights. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

Geo
11-02-2004, 11:39 AM
Originally posted by racer-025:
easy now....all we did was remove the headlights. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif



Today, the headlights....

Tomorrow, the washer bottle! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif



------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

GKR_17
11-02-2004, 06:31 PM
Originally posted by Geo:
Tomorrow, the washer bottle! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif


Are you implying that they aren't already gone?

DavidM
11-05-2004, 07:46 PM
I'm new to this stuff, so take it easy on me. Are catalytic converters required in IT? I haven't read through the rule book yet, but I get the impression they aren't from discussions here. If they aren't then.....

I live in the metro Atlanta area where we get inspections every year and are required to have catalytic converters on our cars. So by removing the catalytic converter to make a race car I no longer have a street legal car. Now, I could leave the cat on, but I'd be making way less horsepower. So if I no longer have a street legal car anyways why not remove all the "street" stuff I no longer need.

Ah, but I can't because the rules don't allow it. It seems that many of the IT rules are there to allow someone to actually drive their race car to the track. I'm not sure how often this occurs, but ok. I've seen it mentioned several times, however, that just because you can compete does not guarantee you'll be competitive. It seems unfair for all the cars to have to be held to the "street legal" standard just because the class allows for people to drive their cars to the track. To me, it would make sense to allow people to remove certain things from their cars if they wanted (or replace them with a metal plate in the case of headlights). That list of things would have to be determined of course, but that's why there's a rules body. And I don't buy the one thing leads to another argument. Determine the list and re-evaluate it every so often.

Just trying to learn the ropes.

David

Diane
11-05-2004, 08:17 PM
Originally posted by DavidM:

I live in the metro Atlanta area where we get inspections every year and are required to have catalytic converters on our cars. So by removing the catalytic converter to make a race car I no longer have a street legal car.

If IT was conceived pre-mid-70's, cats were not common anyway. I'd bet the majority of cars first classed never came with cats anyway. I'd also bet removing cats was a common "street tuner" mod back in the day, as it is now, though highly illegal.

Easy solution if you need to get your car inspected. Pull off your street exhaust and save it for when you need to go through inspection. On the Escorts, replacing the exhaust from the header back is easier than swapping the suspension out for the winter, a task I am currently avoiding.

My .02

Diane
ITB Escort GT
NER #21



[This message has been edited by Diane (edited November 05, 2004).]

Knestis
11-05-2004, 09:41 PM
Originally posted by DavidM:
... It seems unfair for all the cars to have to be held to the "street legal" standard just because the class allows for people to drive their cars to the track. To me, it would make sense to allow people to remove certain things from their cars if they wanted (or replace them with a metal plate in the case of headlights). ...

Another way to look at it is that "fair" is averyone adhering to the same set of rules - regardless of what they are.

A lot of the push for removal of things like washer bottles is - I think - driven by some sense of what a race car is "supposed to be." Real race cars don't have rear wipers so we should all be allowed to take them out, etc.

The point is that, while it is completely arbitrary that headers are OK but you have to keep your side window glass, it is a set of rules that we can all follow. If the line defining the IT preparation level is moved incrementally closer and closer to, say Production, then it gets incrementally more and more expensive to stay with the state of the art.

I like my headlights and I might be less likely to crash into the back of someone else's car if I still have them installed. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gif

K

DavidM
11-08-2004, 03:43 PM
I definitely like the idea of "fair" being everyone adhering to a certain set of rules, but I find some of the rules, shall we say, quirky.

For instance:

- You have to retain the stock dash, but you can remove every other interior panel as well as the seats
- You can do various things to the engine like "alter" ECUs, swap carb jets, and overbore (on some cars), but you have to retain the stock headlights, water bottle, heater core (at least I think it was implied this had to be kept), and various other extraneous things

I personally like things simple. So the more crap I don't need that I can take off the car the better. It's less stuff to get in the way. Removing stuff is mostly free, so it doesn't add much if any cost. I say mostly, because you may incur some costs for things such as metal panels for the headlight openings and other odds and ends. As for making the car more "race car" like......It IS a race car. It may not be an F1 car, but the intention is still to race the car on a track.

I'm sure there are reasons behind every rule (maybe only historical in some cases), but some of the rules sure seem weird to someone new to the class.

David

jc836
11-08-2004, 03:57 PM
For those wondering-a Catalytic Convertor of the aftermarket "high flow" variety is very efficient and does NOT reduce horsepower output as much as some might think. Many years ago Hot Rod Mag ran a series of tests to determine what exhausts would work best and found that the cat only robbed 2HP on a small block Chevy. Just a thought....

Now to removing it for the track-that is a reasonable idea. For those who drive the car there-don't do it. I elected to leave the cat on the CRX as it benefits me as to dB level. In addition, the car was street legal when the race exhaust was fabricated.
I believe, as do others, that the class was created for those who wanted to use a street legal car on track in a competitive environment. The reality is that many cars become trailered as mine is now. One needs a consistent, long term set of rules or the class will be useless in the end. The IT rules as written are easily followed even if we disagree with what they are. Sure I want to rid the car of the washer bottle and rear wiper-but the rules say stock so that is how it is. Here in the North East on a cool morning the heater can be helpful-but not in 90 degree summer weather-but the rules say leave the core alone.
Just my 2 cents

------------------
Grandpa's toys-modded suspensions and a few other tweaks
'89 CRX Si-SCCA ITA #99
'99 Prelude=a sweet song
'03 Dodge Dakota Club Cab V8-Patriot Blue gonna tow

Knestis
11-08-2004, 06:28 PM
I'm thinking that a "racing" cat is going to end up being my only "muffler" on the Golf, since I want to maintain its multi-purpose qualities. It also saves me having to diddle with o2 sensors...

K

Geo
11-09-2004, 01:51 AM
Originally posted by DavidM:
I personally like things simple. So the more crap I don't need that I can take off the car the better. It's less stuff to get in the way. Removing stuff is mostly free, so it doesn't add much if any cost. I say mostly, because you may incur some costs for things such as metal panels for the headlight openings and other odds and ends. As for making the car more "race car" like......It IS a race car. It may not be an F1 car, but the intention is still to race the car on a track.

Not to be a smarty pants, but it sounds like Limited Prep Production would be ideal for you then.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

Geo
11-09-2004, 01:54 AM
Originally posted by jc836:
For those wondering-a Catalytic Convertor of the aftermarket "high flow" variety is very efficient and does NOT reduce horsepower output as much as some might think. Many years ago Hot Rod Mag ran a series of tests to determine what exhausts would work best and found that the cat only robbed 2HP on a small block Chevy. Just a thought....

Sport Compact Car tested a Nissan 240SX with a Random Technology cat and with a "test pipe." They found absolute NO change in hp, and max torque actually decreased one ft/lb with the "test pipe."


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

dickita15
11-09-2004, 09:51 AM
while not in favor of rules creep I agree thet simple is better. I really think the dual purpose excuse is overstated, the number of streetable IT cars is small and the number of fully preped streetable cars is even lower. I would not to make the rules more coplicated that they have to be to make these few cars street legal.
dick

cherokee
11-09-2004, 10:56 AM
We started asking about tape and I need to tape up the lights on my Opel...even though they are hidden. What do you use. On the MR2 I used some 3M stuff (I don't remember what) that got flakey and cloudy after a little while. What do you guys use that will not turn yellow-ish after a couple of weekends in the sun.

badal
11-09-2004, 11:50 AM
Originally posted by cherokee:
We started asking about tape and I need to tape up the lights on my Opel...even though they are hidden. What do you use. On the MR2 I used some 3M stuff (I don't remember what) that got flakey and cloudy after a little while. What do you guys use that will not turn yellow-ish after a couple of weekends in the sun.
Vinyl tape like the sign makers use is great and won't degrade and give you the "mummy look" that duct tape will.

BTW only "exposed"lights must be taped, so the hidden lights are OK.


------------------
"Bad" Al Bell
ITC #3 Datsun 510
DC Region MARRS Series

ITANorm
11-09-2004, 01:01 PM
Originally posted by badal:
BTW only "exposed"lights must be taped, so the hidden lights are OK.

Oh, gee - that means I've got an extra .5 oz. of extra weight on the front of my MR2. No wonder it's slow! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif

Grumpa
11-11-2004, 11:53 AM
I started this string, so I'll throw some more fuel on the fire. The Rabbit I bought had been raced in CenDiv the previous year, so it had a tech sticker. As purchased, the washer bottle is out of the car and the motor mounts are urethane. How illegal is the car? Also, in reading the GCR, it states that the seat shall be firmly attached to the structure of the car. Is the cage considered to be a part of the structure of the car? I mounted my seat to the cage, my twisted logic in this case being that in the event of a hard driver side impact, I would prefer to move with the cage, as opposed to the cage moving into me. I also see modified front drive spindles with oversize bearings advertised for sale for VW IT cars. If VW did not manufacture these pieces, how are they legal in IT? My pea brain has a hard time processing some of the nuances.

Geo
11-11-2004, 12:49 PM
Originally posted by Grumpa:
I started this string, so I'll throw some more fuel on the fire. The Rabbit I bought had been raced in CenDiv the previous year, so it had a tech sticker. As purchased, the washer bottle is out of the car and the motor mounts are urethane. How illegal is the car?

Well, the car is illegal in at least two ways.


Originally posted by Grumpa:
I also see modified front drive spindles with oversize bearings advertised for sale for VW IT cars. If VW did not manufacture these pieces, how are they legal in IT? My pea brain has a hard time processing some of the nuances.

Those would not be legal.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

shwah
11-11-2004, 03:08 PM
Originally posted by Grumpa:
I also see modified front drive spindles with oversize bearings advertised for sale for VW IT cars. If VW did not manufacture these pieces, how are they legal in IT? My pea brain has a hard time processing some of the nuances.

VW changed the front wheel bearing/carrier size mid run on the A2 cars (1989 I think). I imagine that this is what is being sold (OEM replacement parts), and it is perfectly legal.

Geo
11-11-2004, 05:33 PM
Originally posted by shwah:
VW changed the front wheel bearing/carrier size mid run on the A2 cars (1989 I think). I imagine that this is what is being sold (OEM replacement parts), and it is perfectly legal.



Oh, please DO explain.

It is NOT legal. First of all, aftermarket replacement parts are not currently legal (but will be next year). Second, parts from an A2 absolutely CANNOT be legally used on a A1 car.

Unless of course I've missed something in the ITCS. Please do cite your references on how this is legal.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

Bill Miller
11-11-2004, 07:08 PM
Originally posted by Geo:
Oh, please DO explain.

It is NOT legal. First of all, aftermarket replacement parts are not currently legal (but will be next year). Second, parts from an A2 absolutely CANNOT be legally used on a A1 car.

Unless of course I've missed something in the ITCS. Please do cite your references on how this is legal.




George,

If your first statement is true, probably 95% (maybe more) of the cars on the grid are illegal.

And how about if some of the A2 parts are the same as the A1 parts, would they be legal then? Sorry, couldn't resist! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

Geo
11-11-2004, 07:56 PM
Originally posted by Bill Miller:
George,

If your first statement is true, probably 95% (maybe more) of the cars on the grid are illegal.

Then they are illegal. Maybe it's time for some ITB and ITC folks to write some paper.


Originally posted by Bill Miller:
And how about if some of the A2 parts are the same as the A1 parts, would they be legal then? Sorry, couldn't resist! http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif



Duh. (sorry, couldn't resist). http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

Grumpa
11-12-2004, 02:05 AM
George,
Ok, the mounts are illegal - so I'll paint 'em black. Sorry, couldn't resist. I have also seen diesel mounts offered for sale. Again, illegal, unless one is racing a diesel, correct? The modified spindles are offered for A1 VW's as I recall. Last, but not least, I assume my "cage as structure" interpretation is correct, Si?

Geo
11-12-2004, 02:41 AM
Originally posted by Grumpa:
George,
Ok, the mounts are illegal - so I'll paint 'em black. Sorry, couldn't resist. I have also seen diesel mounts offered for sale. Again, illegal, unless one is racing a diesel, correct?

Correct.


Originally posted by Grumpa:
The modified spindles are offered for A1 VW's as I recall.

Doesn't matter. If they didn't come on the car from the factory and/or are not a supersession part, they are illegal.


Originally posted by Grumpa:
Last, but not least, I assume my "cage as structure" interpretation is correct, Si?

Haven't really thought about it much. Perhaps someone else will have a better answer than I would.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

apr67
11-12-2004, 12:29 PM
Originally posted by Grumpa:
As purchased, the washer bottle is out of the car and the motor mounts are urethane. How illegal is the car?


Minorly illegal. Especially since its gonna be darn near impossible for a A1 vw to win in ITB. Both of those are pretty common problems.

Heres a question. If you use your washer bottle as your oil catch can, is everything still kosher?



<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\"> Also, in reading the GCR, it states that the seat shall be firmly attached to the structure of the car. Is the cage considered to be a part of the structure of the car? </font>

It should be legal. But it is hard to do legally in small cars without creating additional mounting points (exceeding the 6 + 2). Not impossible, and it really is the best way to install a seat.


<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">I also see modified front drive spindles with oversize bearings advertised for sale for VW IT cars. If VW did not manufacture these pieces, how are they legal in IT? </font>

Not legal, nor required in my experience. A good set of german hubs and bearings, properly maintained on a A1, go about 14 weekends or so. I never broke one on my A1, and it was not a slug (4th and 5th at the ARRC, won the enduro, back in the late 90's).

shwah
11-12-2004, 01:26 PM
Originally posted by Geo:
Oh, please DO explain.

It is NOT legal. First of all, aftermarket replacement parts are not currently legal (but will be next year). Second, parts from an A2 absolutely CANNOT be legally used on a A1 car.

Unless of course I've missed something in the ITCS. Please do cite your references on how this is legal.




Brain fade, forgot we were talking about a Rabbit. My point was that advertisements for big bearing hub carriers are likely referring to the later stock A2 setup, which is legal on A2 cars. Much safer too since the hub is a weak point, and failures can have nasty results.

But my comments were not valid for the car in discussion. Sorry.

Chris

Geo
11-12-2004, 02:29 PM
Originally posted by apr67:
Minorly illegal.

Yeah. It's like a little bit pregnant. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif



------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

apr67
11-12-2004, 04:59 PM
Originally posted by Geo:
Yeah. It's like a little bit pregnant. http://Forum.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif



To me, bogus motor mounts or lack of Winshield washer bottle should not get you bounced, it should be noted and fixed before the next event.

Now, add an extra cylinder and we have a problem.

JMHO, of course.