2006 GCR is out

[x-ring]

http://www.scca.com/_FileLibrary/File/GCR2006.pdf

[turboICE]

Yay and it isn't locked from copying to paste! Watch out for the stream of quotes from all the rules nerds - no more typing.

[gsbaker]

Kirk and Greg will be on a roll now. ;)

[Fastfred92]

Awesome ! The e36 BMW in ITS gets to ditch the SIR and the e30 gets it, WOW.

Must be a conspiracy :119:

[MikeBlaszczak]

Originally posted by Fastfred92@Dec 5 2005, 08:36 PM
Awesome ! The e36 BMW in ITS gets to ditch the SIR and the e30 gets it, WOW.


Seriously, is that a misprint? The E36 weight is still 2850 pounds, and the restrictor plate is gone.

Do I really end up getting the winter off?

[Fastfred92]

Originally posted by MikeBlaszczak@Dec 6 2005, 01:22 AM
Seriously, is that a misprint? The E36 weight is still 2850 pounds, and the restrictor plate is gone.

Do I really end up getting the winter off?

67411


I am pretty sure it is a misprint but man if I had a e36 ITS car I sure would print a copy of this and run my first race of 06 without the SIR!

[lateapex911]

First, an SIR and a plate restrictor are two very different things..the E36 runs a plate and NO IT car has ever run an SIR.

The E36 has been discussed, but as far as I know there has been no final decision.
(And of all the options, retaining the weight and dropping the restrictor...wasn't one of them...sorry!)

[zracre]

Ok...so I&#39;m building a SM....did I read it correctly that you cannot balance and blueprint a Spec Miata motor??? How in gods name are they getting the power out of them without that?? 5K for a motor???? fancy parts? hmmm <_<

[tnord]

Originally posted by zracre@Dec 5 2005, 11:36 PM
Ok...so I&#39;m building a SM....did I read it correctly that you cannot balance and blueprint a Spec Miata motor??? How in gods name are they getting the power out of them without that?? 5K for a motor???? fancy parts? hmmm <_<

67435


don&#39;t kid yourself, they are. they just do it via "parts bin blueprinting" instead of the typical machining method. unfortunately, the parts bin method results in "factory" 6000 motors. they do this by literally purchasing bins full of motor parts, and hand pick out the lightest and the ones that are the closest in weight.

i could go much deeper into how they&#39;re making power, but that&#39;s for another thread.

[zracre]

Originally posted by tnord@Dec 6 2005, 01:53 AM


i could go much deeper into how they&#39;re making power, but that&#39;s for another thread.

67437


If you do go deeper into it in another thread...dont leave me in the dust!!! I&#39;d like to know more as I would like to increase my chances as much as legally possible!!!! Thanks!! B)

[Knestis]

On the SM engine question, there&#39;s no published tolerence for the cam pulley keyways. Nudge, nudge, wink, wink.

K

[gran racing]

So, are these all of the changes for &#39;06? Any of the other adjustments that have been discussed will wait for &#39;07 (if they will happen at all)?

[Greg Amy]

Originally posted by zracre@Dec 5 2005, 10:36 PM
...you cannot balance and blueprint a Spec Miata motor???
67435
Evan, that is correct, you are not allowed to do so. However, as pointed out, it&#39;s being done primarily because it is totaly unenforcable. Machine work can be done in such a way as it looks factory (after all, the factory has to do it) and who&#39;s to say your engine didn&#39;t come from the factory that way?

Do a search on specmiata.com forums and you&#39;ll find SCADS of threads arguing these exact issues.

To the topic at hand: has anyone sent a note to the CRB to issue an Errors and Omissions on the E36/E30 spec lines? We&#39;re all talking about it, but I&#39;ve not seen where anyone has acted on it... - GA

[Fastfred92]

Originally posted by GregAmy@Dec 6 2005, 02:16 PM

To the topic at hand: has anyone sent a note to the CRB to issue an Errors and Omissions on the E36/E30 spec lines? We&#39;re all talking about it, but I&#39;ve not seen where anyone has acted on it... - GA

67449



I for one hope it does not get caught, it would be a interesting year on the forums to see the RX7 guys go nuts about this !



Just kidding :lol:

[tnord]

Originally posted by zracre@Dec 6 2005, 08:27 AM
If you do go deeper into it in another thread...dont leave me in the dust!!! I&#39;d like to know more as I would like to increase my chances as much as legally possible!!!! Thanks!! B)

67443


kirk is on the right track, using slop in various bolt holes in the water pump (i&#39;m not quite sure how this one works) and crank pulleys essentially allows you to alter cam timing a degree or two. as mentioned, balanced and blueprinted motors, REM&#39;d cranks, cams, gearboxes, rear ends etc is another. i&#39;ve heard whispers of people opening up the AFM (which is now legal) and not only adjusting the flap in there, but zapping some of the resistors with a laser to change something or other. removing a miniscule amount of material and polishing hub bearings on hubs repacked with low friction synthetic grease is another trick. ceramic coated pistons as well as the inside of a header are some others i&#39;ve heard of. fiddling with ECU&#39;s via a method i&#39;m not aware of.

i&#39;m sure there&#39;s more out there, i&#39;m just not exactly sure what they are.

[MikeBlaszczak]

Originally posted by lateapex911@Dec 6 2005, 04:18 AM
First, an SIR and a plate restrictor are two very different things..the E36 runs a plate and NO IT car has ever run an SIR.

The E36 has been discussed, but as far as I know there has been no final decision.
(And of all the options, retaining the weight and dropping the restrictor...wasn&#39;t one of them...sorry!)Do we have an ETA for accurate information?

[Greg Amy]

Originally posted by MikeBlaszczak@Dec 6 2005, 07:02 PM
Do we have an ETA for accurate information?

67478
For the BMWs? If that&#39;s what you mean, simply swap the notes lines for the E30 and E36, and that would be correct. This can be verified by following the 2005 GCR and the subsequent Fastracks; somethow those two got swapped when the &#39;06 GCr was written up. - GA

[zracre]

well the only stuff im going to do now is mill the head for proper comp ratio, install saferacer exhaust, new injectors, water pump, new timing belt with aforementioned slop for proper timing ;) then tune on a dyno doing as much as I can with the AFM adjustments and timing. I am curious how much power it will produce...stock 110k bottom end...

[charrbq]

Evan, I told you some Miatas were more speck than others. They usually run close to the back of the field.

[mikeblas]

Originally posted by GregAmy@Dec 7 2005, 01:54 AM
For the BMWs? If that&#39;s what you mean, simply swap the notes lines for the E30 and E36, and that would be correct. This can be verified by following the 2005 GCR and the subsequent Fastracks; somethow those two got swapped when the &#39;06 GCr was written up. - GA
So my race weight has gone down to 2750? Or are you saying just the "Notes" column? Then there is no race weight increase for E36es in the 2006 season?

[Greg Amy]

Nope, if it indicates a weight change then that&#39;s wrong too.

To be safe, use the &#39;05 GCR; there have been no specs changes to the E36 during &#39;05 that I&#39;m aware of. - GA

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by GregAmy@Dec 8 2005, 05:44 PM
Nope, if it indicates a weight change then that&#39;s wrong too.

To be safe, use the &#39;05 GCR; there have been no specs changes to the E36 during &#39;05 that I&#39;m aware of. - GA

67607



Guys, the 2006 GCR obviously has some misprints in it... There are still a list of things with the CRB that have yet to be implemented in the GCR for 2006... I&#39;m pretty certain you&#39;ll be notified via Fastrack over the next couple of months... The BoD/CRB meetings are being finalized now, so we should all be hearing something soon...

[MikeBlaszczak]

Originally posted by Banzai240@Dec 8 2005, 06:48 PM
Guys, the 2006 GCR obviously has some misprints in it... There are still a list of things with the CRB that have yet to be implemented in the GCR for 2006... I&#39;m pretty certain you&#39;ll be notified via Fastrack over the next couple of months... The BoD/CRB meetings are being finalized now, so we should all be hearing something soon...

67614

It might be obvious to you as an insider, but it certainly isn&#39;t obvious to the rest of us -- what the book says goes.

Do you have a specific ETA for correct information? I&#39;d like to get working on my car so I don&#39;t have to rush through the winter.

[Knestis]

Originally posted by MikeBlaszczak@Dec 9 2005, 03:51 AM
It might be obvious to you as an insider, but it certainly isn&#39;t obvious to the rest of us -- what the book says goes. ...


That&#39;s a good point. It seems like, particularly since it should be published identically other than each year&#39;s marginal changes, the official release of each years GCR could be goof-free. Every year though, something appears.

What&#39;s really funny is when nobody says anything the first year, the second year, the third...and the error ends up becoming a de facto new rule.

K

[Banzai240]

Originally posted by Knestis@Dec 9 2005, 12:37 PM
That&#39;s a good point. It seems like, particularly since it should be published identically other than each year&#39;s marginal changes, the official release of each years GCR could be goof-free. Every year though, something appears.

What&#39;s really funny is when nobody says anything the first year, the second year, the third...and the error ends up becoming a de facto new rule.

K

67694


Why don&#39;t you guys just call Jeremy at SCCA Tech... He&#39;s the one who will fix it...

Or, you could just add weight to your E30 and put a restrictor on it... Not sure how either would affect a winter build... :blink:

I don&#39;t really care if you E36 guys take the restrictor off or not... it isn&#39;t restricting anything anyhow... :P

[its66]

Originally posted by Banzai240@Dec 9 2005, 01:00 PM
Why don&#39;t you guys just call Jeremy at SCCA Tech... He&#39;s the one who will fix it...

Or, you could just add weight to your E30 and put a restrictor on it... Not sure how either would affect a winter build... :blink:

I don&#39;t really care if you E36 guys take the restrictor off or not... it isn&#39;t restricting anything anyhow... :P

67698


-----Original Message-----
From: Jeremy Thoennes [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 12:21 PM
To: Jim Cohen
Cc: John Bauer
Subject: RE: correction...ITCS

We will correct, thanks

-Jeremy


I already did thot for you guys...

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by MikeBlaszczak@Dec 9 2005, 02:51 AM
It might be obvious to you as an insider, but it certainly isn&#39;t obvious to the rest of us -- what the book says goes.

Do you have a specific ETA for correct information? I&#39;d like to get working on my car so I don&#39;t have to rush through the winter.

67689


It&#39;s true, but if you see something that is obviously in conflict with common sense, then it makes a tremendous amount of sense to ASK before you make a change...because if it is a mistake, it&#39;s going to cost you money for rushing to try and take advantage of an error.

I also don&#39;t see any weight misprints. The E30 is 2750 and the E36 is 2850...same as in 2005. What is the problem there?

Other than the removal or installation of a RP, there are no issues. What could be holding your off-season up? Seriously?

AB

[gran racing]

All of this goes back to my original question:
So, are these all of the changes for &#39;06? Any of the other adjustments that have been discussed will wait for &#39;07 (if they will happen at all)?

The way I&#39;m reading this thread, the published GCR is just a "draft"? The cars in various classes, rules, etc. are subject to change for 2006? I guess I simply do not understand. I thought that once the GCR was published, those were the rules for that year (excluding misprints). I thought the process for approved items was something like this: proposal to CRB board > fastrack > board approves > fastrack > big board > approves > GCR. I was previously told quite adimately by headquarters that just because it says it was approved in the Fastrack, do not make any decisions till you see it in the GCR. So how does this process really work?

[Greg Amy]

Originally posted by gran racing@Dec 9 2005, 08:06 AM
I thought that once the GCR was published, those were the rules for that year (excluding misprints).
67705
...and excluding changes published during the year via Fastrack. Changes in Fastrack will denote when they become effective, and they decisively DO NOT always apply only to subsequent years. If approved by the CRB, classification and specs changes can become effective immediately.


I was previously told quite adimately by headquarters that just because it says it was approved in the Fastrack, do not make any decisions till you see it in the GCR.You were misled; see above.

There is no requirement that rules changes be published in Fastrack for membership review and approval, that&#39;s simply the typical process. The CRB has the power to, for example, immediately disqualify your car without further membership comment or input (so you better get that body damage fixed pronto! ;) ) - GA

On edit: Dave, one thing I forgot to mention: all changes to the GCR must be published in Fastrack beforehand, and all Fastrack information becomes null and void in subsequent years, unless it is published in the subsequent year&#39;s GCR. Therefore, if you find a change in the GCR from a prior year, yet you cannot find where that change was published in a Fastrack, then it is invalid and needs to be addressed by E&O.

These "changes" to the E30 and E36 BMW are a case in point: these "changes" did not appear in a Fastrack in 2005, therefore they are considered typos and not valid.

Another example was the Miata hard tops; I noticed in the 2005 GCR that the hard tops in IT were changed from "must" to "may"; I could not recall seeing it in Fastrack thus I assumed it was an error. However, a quick note to Jeremy Thoennes confirmed that the change was indeed published in Fastrack in 2004 and was, therefore, legal and effective.

We&#39;ll make a rules nerd out of you yet... - GA

[Andy Bettencourt]

Dave,

Fast Track is just as important as the GCR. It serves as:

- Notification of many items
- Rules on Protests
- Rule changes and their effective dates
- Corrections and Ommissions
- Requests for input
- etc

It is an extension of the GCR. If you really wanted to be dilligent, you should have your GCR at every race PLUS the Fast Tracks from the entire previousl year and every one up to date from the current.

AB

[Greg Amy]

I download every Fastrack and use Acrobat to trim out the extraneous stuff (Solo, Rally, entry forms), then keep one PDF of everything from that year. I&#39;ve always got my notebook PC with me, so at anytime I can search for something that may have happened during the year.

As I did last year, I&#39;m making this PDF available for download for a limited time (1-2 weeks max before I delete it). "Save Target As..." this link and you&#39;ll have a PDF with all racing-related stuff from 2005.

2.3 MB

http://www.kakashiracing.com/temp/2005Fastrack.pdf

(On edit: see changes to my post above if you missed them. - GA)

[gran racing]

I just want to get this straight since it goes against what I was previously told and I don&#39;t want to provide others wrong info in the future.

For example: If a car show in the Fastrack as approved to be moved to X class effective 2006, it is a done deal?

This goes back to my prelude being reclasses last year. I saw it was in the Fastrack for 2005 (not proposed) but was told to sit tight, it still needed to be passed by the other "big board" before it is final.

Thanks for the clarification!!

[Greg Amy]

"I am a Bill, yes I&#39;m only a Bill, and I&#39;m sittin&#39; here on Capitol Hill..." - Schoolhouse Rock


Dave, all rules changes go through a process, typically from an individual member, to the respective committee (in our case, the ITAC), then to the Club Racing Board, then to the Board of Directors. With the exception of the first step (the ITAC), the minutes of those meetings are published in Fastrak. This is why you may see a proposed rule change 2-3 times in Fastrak before it becomes approved.

The key point is to read the Fastrak when it&#39;s published. All changes are published there, and it&#39;ll be your only opportunity to offer input before going up for review. When reading Fastrak, it&#39;s important to not just scan for "Improved Touring" but also to read UP from there to find out what section it&#39;s in. Some examples:

There&#39;s an inverse bold section labeled "CLUB RACING BOARD MINUTES". IN there you&#39;ll find the minutes of the CRB meeting. Within that are sections labeled:

- PROPOSED RULE CHANGES
- SUBMITTED TO BoD FOR APPROVAL
- RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BoD
- MEMBER ADVISORIES
- NEW CAR CLASSIFICATIONS
- REFERRED or TABLED
- NOT RECOMMENDED

The BoD stuff is what you need to pay attention to. That&#39;s what the CRB has agreed to and has submitted to the BoD for approval. It&#39;s VERY rare that the BoD does not approve CRB recommendations, so once it&#39;s gotten through the CRB it&#39;s almost a done deal.

Once the BoD reviews it, you&#39;ll see another inverse-bold area labeled "BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING MINUTES" and a section labeled "CLUB RACING BOARD"; following it will be the results of the BoD review of these recommendations. Once you see a rule within this showing "approved" it is effective on the date specified.

Another section to be ware of is "Technical Bulletins". This section is provided typically for E&O and/or clarifications to any rule which does not need CRB or BoD approval.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by gran racing@Dec 9 2005, 11:36 AM


This goes back to my prelude being reclasses last year. I saw it was in the Fastrack for 2005 (not proposed) but was told to sit tight, it still needed to be passed by the other "big board" before it is final.

Thanks for the clarification!!

67735


Dave,

What Fast Track are you referring to? I bet there was mention of the move in multiples. One as a proposal, another as a change.

Look here to sort:

http://www.scca.com/Garage/Index.asp?IdS=0...90&x=090|005&~= (http://www.scca.com/Garage/Index.asp?IdS=003B36-5048190&x=090|005&~=)

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by GregAmy@Dec 9 2005, 01:29 PM
"I am a Bill, yes I&#39;m only a Bill, and I&#39;m sittin&#39; here on Capitol Hill..." - Schoolhouse Rock
Dave, all rules changes go through a process, typically from an individual member, to the respective committee (in our case, the ITAC), then to the Club Racing Board, then to the Board of Directors. With the exception of the first step (the ITAC), the minutes of those meetings are published in Fastrak. This is why you may see a proposed rule change 2-3 times in Fastrak before it becomes approved.

The key point is to read the Fastrak when it&#39;s published. All changes are published there, and it&#39;ll be your only opportunity to offer input before going up for review. When reading Fastrak, it&#39;s important to not just scan for "Improved Touring" but also to read UP from there to find out what section it&#39;s in. Some examples:

There&#39;s an inverse bold section labeled "CLUB RACING BOARD MINUTES". IN there you&#39;ll find the minutes of the CRB meeting. Within that are sections labeled:

- PROPOSED RULE CHANGES
- SUBMITTED TO BoD FOR APPROVAL
- RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BoD
- MEMBER ADVISORIES
- NEW CAR CLASSIFICATIONS
- REFERRED or TABLED
- NOT RECOMMENDED

The BoD stuff is what you need to pay attention to. That&#39;s what the CRB has agreed to and has submitted to the BoD for approval. It&#39;s VERY rare that the BoD does not approve CRB recommendations, so once it&#39;s gotten through the CRB it&#39;s almost a done deal.

Once the BoD reviews it, you&#39;ll see another inverse-bold area labeled "BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING MINUTES" and a section labeled "CLUB RACING BOARD"; following it will be the results of the BoD review of these recommendations. Once you see a rule within this showing "approved" it is effective on the date specified.

Another section to be ware of is "Technical Bulletins". This section is provided typically for E&O and/or clarifications to any rule which does not need CRB or BoD approval.

67745


In addition:


ATTENTION SCCA MEMBERS


As approved by the SCCA Board of Directors, beginning with the March issue of SportsCar, FasTrack News will not longer be published and distributed in the Magazine.

FasTrack will continue to be produced as the form of Official SCCA Member Notification and made available on-line in a printable PDF format via the SCCA Garage section of SCCA.com.

Beginning in February, FasTrack will be posted to this section of the SCCA web site no later than the 20th of each month. Unless otherwise noted, all changes outlined in FasTrack will take effect 10 days later on the first day of the following month.

E-MAIL NOTIFICATION

Beginning January 3, 2006 SCCA members may register to receive an automated e-mail notification each month when the latest issue of FasTrack has been posted to the web. To register for e-mail notification, simply edit your Member Profile to request the notification. If you have not yet accessed your Member Profile, visit SCCA.com and log on by clicking the “SCCA Member Login” button at the top of any page or the “Member Login” button in the Members section of the left hand navigation bar.

[Banzai240]

Just make sure that, when you read it in Fastrack, you know which section it&#39;s under... As things go through the approval process, they transition from "suggested" or "recommended" to "approved", etc... They aren&#39;t official until they are "approved" and implemented...

[gran racing]

Thanks guys. I&#39;ve got it now (I think).

[MikeBlaszczak]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Dec 9 2005, 01:35 PM
I also don&#39;t see any weight misprints. The E30 is 2750 and the E36 is 2850...same as in 2005. What is the problem there?

Other than the removal or installation of a RP, there are no issues. What could be holding your off-season up? Seriously?
I&#39;d like to know the minimum race weight for my car. If I&#39;m still at 2850, then I&#39;m ready to go racing.

If I&#39;m getting a weight penalty, I&#39;d like to know so that I can evaluate which class I&#39;ll run in and start to prepare the car appropriately. If I stay [focused] in ITS, I&#39;ll need to start fabricating a ballast box, get it mounted and filled; and then start working on performance improvements to try to overcome whatever weight was assigned to me.

I&#39;ve been thinking about new wheels. If my race weight stays the same, I have the room to get lighter wheels. If my race weight changes heavier, I don&#39;t want to get lighter wheels. Not yet, anyway.

There have been posts on this form saying that the E36es will get more weight for the 2006 season. I&#39;m surprised to not find it here. There&#39;s been repeated posts about the rules for ballast changing to accommodate the large amount of weight the E36es were rumored to be getting, but rule 9.L remains the same about aft of the firewall and fore of the seat.

Darin says that there&#39;s still a list of things that haven&#39;t been implemented for 2006 yet. You seem to be saying that the pipeline is clear, and that I can plan on racing my car as it is specified in the 2006 copy of the GCR we have.

Greg says a weight change is wrong. Jake says that retaining last year&#39;s weight wasn&#39;t an option. (Or, maybe he meant dropping the restrictor _and_ keeping the same weight wasn&#39;t an option.)

If the rules change, I&#39;ll roll with the punches and figure out what to do. But I want them to get settled quickly so that my limited preparation time isn&#39;t compromised and so that I can commit to the season as early as possible.

Championships are won in the off-season, after all.

Seriously.

[Greg Amy]

Well, I don&#39;t know what car you have, But to the best of my knowledge - and as a tech inspector and rules nerd I tend to follow these things closely - the specs are as follows:

BMW 325i/is (87-91), 2750#, Notes: Trunk mounted fuel cell with no larger capacity than stock.

BMW 325i/is (2&4-door, 92-95), 2850#, Notes: TRunk mounted fuel cell with no larger capacity than stock. Throttle restrictor between throttle body and plenum is mandatory (snippage of restrictor details...)

Basically, exactly the same as the 2005 ITCS. - GA

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by MikeBlaszczak@Dec 9 2005, 04:55 PM
I&#39;d like to know the minimum race weight for my car. If I&#39;m still at 2850, then I&#39;m ready to go racing.

If I&#39;m getting a weight penalty, I&#39;d like to know so that I can evaluate which class I&#39;ll run in and start to prepare the car appropriately. If I stay [focused] in ITS, I&#39;ll need to start fabricating a ballast box, get it mounted and filled; and then start working on performance improvements to try to overcome whatever weight was assigned to me.

I&#39;ve been thinking about new wheels. If my race weight stays the same, I have the room to get lighter wheels. If my race weight changes heavier, I don&#39;t want to get lighter wheels. Not yet, anyway.

There have been posts on this form saying that the E36es will get more weight for the 2006 season. I&#39;m surprised to not find it here. There&#39;s been repeated posts about the rules for ballast changing to accommodate the large amount of weight the E36es were rumored to be getting, but rule 9.L remains the same about aft of the firewall and fore of the seat.

Darin says that there&#39;s still a list of things that haven&#39;t been implemented for 2006 yet. You seem to be saying that the pipeline is clear, and that I can plan on racing my car as it is specified in the 2006 copy of the GCR we have.

Greg says a weight change is wrong. Jake says that retaining last year&#39;s weight wasn&#39;t an option. (Or, maybe he meant dropping the restrictor _and_ keeping the same weight wasn&#39;t an option.)

If the rules change, I&#39;ll roll with the punches and figure out what to do. But I want them to get settled quickly so that my limited preparation time isn&#39;t compromised and so that I can commit to the season as early as possible.

Championships are won in the off-season, after all.

Seriously.

67771


As of right now, if you have an E36 325i/is, you are at 2850 with the RP. The "NOTES" section of the 2006 GCR on the E30 and E36 cars were mixed up.

One issue I do have Mike, you have stated that you have more development to do. How will you make a decision based on the competitivness of your program when you haven&#39;t taken it to the max? The ballsat rules have changed prior to this year. The removal of the 100lb maximum was neccesary for changes that we had in mind. The E36 was one, but it primarily centered around some cars that could move DOWN a class but needed weight to do so.

For your world, we have received letters over the past 6 months that have:

- Asked us to keep the E36 as is
- Asked us to eliminate the RP on the E36
- Asked us to eliminate the RP on the E36 AND ADD ONE TO THE RX-7
- Asked us to elimiante the RP on the E36 and increase it&#39;s weight commensurate with the current "process" for classification
- Accused us of blatent favortism toward the RX-7 combined with accusations of smear campains and made up information
- Accused us of "anti-BMW" policies

The CRB has a decision to make with regard to your car. It&#39;s the only one with a RP because it&#39;s current weight has it too light for it&#39;s power potential. Status quo? SIR? Un-restricted but properly weighted? I don&#39;t know.

I understand your issue but what I would say to you is that no matter what they choose, the objective is not to kill the E36 but to surround it with the same parameters as the rest of the class. There are 3 "E36-type" cars in ITA right now that are outside the current parameters for the class...and we hope to affect them for the benefit of the class as a whole. Again, not to crush them into oblivion - but to put them through our process and try and start with a theme of equality.

AB

[MikeBlaszczak]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Dec 12 2005, 03:36 AM
As of right now, if you have an E36 325i/is, you are at 2850 with the RP.


Yep. Is it going to stay that way through the 2006 season, or will there be an adjustment during the year?

That&#39;s all I&#39;m asking -- I&#39;m not sure how the balance of your note would get me any closer to an answer about what work I need to do.

[JohnRW]

Did anyone else notice that the language in the very first paragraph of Section 20 regarding &#39;window nets&#39; has disappeared ?

Thru 2005 it stated parenthetically "(Note: SFI requirements for Driver&#39;s Restraint System does not include arm restraints at this time. Window nets need not be dated.)"

I&#39;ve searched Secs 17, 18 & 20 and the &#39;date&#39; language has not reappeared. Does this infer that we must now replace window nets on the damn SFI requirements (which seems to be every two years) ???

Plus...now arm restraints are in limbo. For those of us with &#39;arm restraints&#39; in our vocabulary, this isn&#39;t promising. I hate having debates about the GCR language with some chuckle-head first thing Saturday morning as I&#39;m trying to get to the false grid.

Did I miss a memo ? I paid reasonable attention to FasTrack for the past few years, and noted the changes in the belt requirements, and am pretty sure I would have noted an absense of the old language. Or maybe I&#39;m just getting senile.

Anybody track this change thru CRB & BOD ?

[Doc Bro]

[quote] There are 3 "E36-type" cars in ITA right now that are outside the current parameters for the class...and we hope to affect them for the benefit of the class as a whole. AB

67915




Andy,
Can you elaborate on this sentence? Did you mean ITA or ITS?

Thanks, Rob

[Greg Amy]

News to me, John. I&#39;ll search through my Fastracks...

On edit: John, you&#39;re absolutely correct. March 2005 Fastrack, page F34, struck those lines entirely, effective 01/01/05. We now have to have dated window nets??? I need to read this more thoroughly.

Sonuva...

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Doc Bro@Dec 14 2005, 09:50 AM

Andy,
Can you elaborate on this sentence? Did you mean ITA or ITS?

Thanks, Rob

68233


ITA.

[JamesB]

Originally posted by JohnRW@Dec 14 2005, 11:37 AM
Did anyone else notice that the language in the very first paragraph of Section 20 regarding &#39;window nets&#39; has disappeared ?

Thru 2005 it stated parenthetically "(Note: SFI requirements for Driver&#39;s Restraint System does not include arm restraints at this time. Window nets need not be dated.)"




The &#39;06 GCR does not mention replacement dates.

17.30. WINDOW SAFETY NETS
Window safety nets shall be used on the driver’s side window of all closed
cars. As of January 1, 1995 and thereafter, all window nets shall meet
SFI Specification 27.1., and shall bear an “SFI Spec 27.1., Label” to that
effect. The window net shall be equipped with a quick-release device.
Nets shall be attached to the roll cage; plastic buckles and elastic cords
are not permitted. Holes in the rollcage to accommodate either support
rod is unacceptable unless bushed and welded completely. Refer to
Figure 4, “Proper Window Net Installation,” for additional information on
mounting methods. Closed cockpit sports racers may use arm restraints
in lieu of a window net


So unlike the restraints which must be dated, I read this is I must have an SFI rated window next and there is not expiration or replacement requirement.

[JohnRW]

Originally posted by JamesB@Dec 14 2005, 01:10 PM
The &#39;06 GCR does not mention replacement dates.

So unlike the restraints which must be dated, I read this is I must have an SFI rated window next and there is not expiration or replacement requirement.

68247



Ahh...you must dig deeper, Grasshopper. Go look at the SFI&#39;s own requirements:

http://www.sfifoundation.com/speclist.html

SFI 27.1 specifies a 2 year replacement interval.

So...the question remails..."Do window nets now have to be dated, and do they now &#39;expire&#39; at some interval"....or was this an inadvertant language change in the GCR ?

[turboICE]

My interpretation has been that in order to "meet" the SFI specification the replacement and expiration parts of the standard are implicit in GCR.

If it isn&#39;t dated or if it is expired I don&#39;t see how the net has met the SFI specification. An expired or undated net no longer meets the specification.

[JamesB]

Ok but everything else that is to be replaced mentions it should be dated. So like you im confused. its not a huge expense, its just a PITA when changes like this happen and the rule is not as clear as other rules.

[Greg Amy]

Well, what a pisser this is. Of course, "here we go again" on another rules discussion...

17.30 says, in part, "...all window nets shall meet SFI Specification 27.1." SFI 27.1 requires "recertification" every two years. Thus, I read the rule to mean our window nets must be replaced (or reinspected) every two years.

It&#39;s the same conundrum as the FIA seats; 18.2.10 sates, in aprt, "Seats homologated to and mounted in accordance with FIA standard 8855-1999 or higher need not have the seat back attached to the roll structure." FIA standard 8855-1999 (http://www.fia.com/resources/documents/895276808__8855_1999_Competition_seat.pdf) states, in part, "The usable life of an FIA homologated seat will be 5 years from the date of manufacture indicated on the seat label." Thus, I read the rule to mean that FIA-approved seats have a useful life of 5 years in SCCA.

That&#39;s OK, there weren&#39;t that many things I could have spent my money on... - GA

[Knestis]

Wait until the Club throws head and neck restraints into that same system. Anyone want to revisit the mission of http://www.headrestraint.org before it comes to that?

K

[JohnRW]

Originally posted by GregAmy@Dec 14 2005, 04:43 PM
Well, what a pisser this is. Of course, "here we go again" on another rules discussion...



Maybe make new nets out of all those forged pistons...

[Geo]

This crap with SFI is totally out of control. Once again it&#39;s a scheme to sell more products for their members. What BS.

[JamesB]

what scheme? wouldn&#39;t you say the same about FIA and SNELL? or how about UL for household products. Its all a bit scheme right?

Seriously, what does a net cost, 30 bucks? I just want to know if they have to be dated and replaced thats all. Unlike with belts its not clearly mentioned that it has to be dated only that it has to have passed the certification. If thats the case, then I wont have to do anything.

[turboICE]

The wording is not that they have to "have passed certification", as in ever.

The wording is that they have to MEET certification. The tense is current it has to meet certification at the time of tech and use. SFI certification expires, dates older than two years will not meet certification currently and should fail tech for not meeting certification at that time. The simple logic should not escape anyone with the capacity to have a drivers or racing license.

While some may think explicit wording in the GCR is neccessary, it isn&#39;t the logic of meeting certification or not is simple. Though apparently it would be nice to add it explicitly for the benefit of people who insist on arguing to no apparent point.

Nothing says the GCR and its rules will be laid out in a consistent manner and any inconsistencies should be taken in the context of meaning anything more or less than what it says. The lack of an explicit date does not in any manner negate the language that is there which states meets certification. It does not rely at all on the wording of other safety requirements for its own interpretation.

Heck I don&#39;t care show up with an expired net, you should fail tech. I am pretty sure OG keeps plenty of window nets in stock at SP.

[JamesB]

ok so we replace them every two years, big whoop. where is the big conspiricy? Given how explicit they are with other expiring items, I would give the CRB the benifit of a doubt that they would at least be less vauge here.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Same conversation on SpecMiata.com (http://forum.specmiata.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=31;t=000043;p=0)

[Matt Rowe]

Originally posted by JamesB@Dec 15 2005, 01:25 PM
ok so we replace them every two years, big whoop.
68369


Are you going to say the same thing when our drivers suits, gloves, shoes and undies are all thrown out every two years? This is as big a deal a rules creep and it&#39;s even starting in the same way. For the sake of saftey we are going to do one thing and it doesn&#39;t cost that much. Next thing you know we are all dropping a thousand dollars every two years while throwing a lot of good equipment in the trash.

[turboICE]

Nothing says anything has to be thrown away. It can be recertified if the condition warrants.

SFI does not require recertification for 3.2/5 and below suits. Recertification is already required for those who want to maintain the higher ratings 3.2/10 and above.

[Drew Aldred]

Originally posted by turboICE@Dec 15 2005, 11:54 AM
SFI does not require recertification for 3.2/5 and below suits.

Not yet anyway...... But with the belts now needing to be certified every two years, pretty soon SCCA is gonna "SFI" themselves right out of business.

[Matt Rowe]

Originally posted by turboICE@Dec 15 2005, 01:54 PM
Nothing says anything has to be thrown away. It can be recertified if the condition warrants.

SFI does not require recertification for 3.2/5 and below suits. Recertification is already required for those who want to maintain the higher ratings 3.2/10 and above.

68375


While the SFI spec may allow recertification in practice how often is it done? Already in the case of belts few of the manufacturers will recertify the hardware much less the belts. I doubt the outlook for recertifying gloves, shoes, suits and underwear is going to be any better. After all would you want to inspect used nomex socks? :blink: Never mind the cost, you would still probably end up spending a couple hundred in shipping and inspection fees. And then there is the inevitable conflict of interest in a manufacturing deciding if your used equipment is good or they would just prefer you buy new.

[turboICE]

My belts don&#39;t require recertification every two years.

[turboICE]

Didn&#39;t say anything about what would happen in practice only that the requirement is for recertification, nothing in the SFI says it has to be replaced unless it fails recertification.

I wouldn&#39;t want to touch/use my nomex socks after 4 weekends I don&#39;t want them anywhere near me less likely recertified.

I guess I just have bigger fish to fry than fretting that there is some helmet, suit, net, seat & harness conspiracy. I am much more concerned about the H&N conspiracy and why they no one can tell me with any certainty how long or if I will be able to use the Issac.

[Joe Harlan]

Originally posted by Drew Aldred@Dec 15 2005, 01:18 PM
Not yet anyway...... But with the belts now needing to be certified every two years, pretty soon SCCA is gonna "SFI" themselves right out of business.

68381



Dude, they already are. the cost of this hobby has just become way to much for most average income people even at a regional level. I lot of people used to get started with used suits and helmets or sharing or what ever, SFI and all of thesse groups are killing those people off. It amazes me when I go out to the local dirt bullring and see what they don&#39;t require.....Can you race an ITZ on dirt?

[Knestis]

You all do know that SFI gets $$ every time something with one of their tags gets sold, right?

K

[Joe Harlan]

Originally posted by Knestis@Dec 15 2005, 02:41 PM
You all do know that SFI gets $$ every time something with one of their tags gets sold, right?

K

68391



Well because I had to order seat belts for 5 cars today....I had my vendor call club racing and ask about window nets... There is no 2 year requirement on nets. That is direct from club racing.

[Greg Amy]

Originally posted by Joe Harlan@Dec 15 2005, 04:16 PM
I had my vendor call club racing and ask about window nets... There is no 2 year requirement on nets. That is direct from club racing.
68398
Joe, I emailed Topeka and got the same response. However, we&#39;re back to the "JoeH way of reading rules": the rules, as written, most decisively say the nets have to be replaced.

They may SAY that it&#39;s not what they intended, but that ain&#39;t what the rules say...I&#39;m going to be doing annual techs in a couple of months (or less), and I&#39;m not quite sure what I&#39;m supposed to do about this... - GA

[Joe Harlan]

Originally posted by GregAmy@Dec 15 2005, 05:55 PM
Joe, I emailed Topeka and got the same response. However, we&#39;re back to the "JoeH way of reading rules": the rules, as written, most decisively say the nets have to be replaced.

They may SAY that it&#39;s not what they intended, but that ain&#39;t what the rules say...I&#39;m going to be doing annual techs in a couple of months (or less), and I&#39;m not quite sure what I&#39;m supposed to do about this... - GA

68408



No Greg, I have to agree with your read. I will be doing tech also and I am not sure how to handle it either. I had a venor make contact because I thought I would get better answers. I think if the vendor thought there was any chance to get me for 5 window nets today he would have. Hopefully it will be fixed E&O quickly cause some of us just get tired of guessing.

[Geo]

Originally posted by JamesB@Dec 15 2005, 10:52 AM
what scheme? wouldn&#39;t you say the same about FIA and SNELL? or how about UL for household products. Its all a bit scheme right?

Seriously, what does a net cost, 30 bucks? I just want to know if they have to be dated and replaced thats all. Unlike with belts its not clearly mentioned that it has to be dated only that it has to have passed the certification. If thats the case, then I wont have to do anything.

68365


SFI is not an independent organization. It is an organization by and for the manufacturers. Do a little research. If they require items to be replaced every 2 years instead of 5, their members (those for whom they exist) get to sell 2.5x as many. First it was belts. Now it&#39;s nets (as if nets go bad after 2 years - be real). Next you&#39;ll have to replace your SFI certified H&N device every 2 years. Won&#39;t that be nice?

I did considerable research into the belt issue when that came up. The science was horribly flawed and based upon 40 year old data from a similar but different material. I wrote to SFI to get their test requirements for belt certification and they are a total joke.

As I said, do a little research.

Snell is an independent organization and I would welcome one for certifying other safety equipment. The FIA is not totally independent, but it&#39;s not beholden to the manufacturers either. Wherever possible I will buy FIA homologated safety gear instead of SFI. That means belts every 5 years instead of 2.

And Joe is right, it used to be you could buy serviceable used safety gear for a budget effort. Forget that today.

[JohnRW]

Originally posted by GregAmy@Dec 15 2005, 08:55 PM
...the rules, as written, most decisively say the nets have to be replaced.

They may SAY that it&#39;s not what they intended, but that ain&#39;t what the rules say...I&#39;m going to be doing annual techs in a couple of months (or less), and I&#39;m not quite sure what I&#39;m supposed to do about this... - GA

68408



How to deal with this ? It needs to be in writing, so that everyone is on the same page. The last thing anyone needs is to get an annual, but then get tagged at Impound later in the year by a Scrutineer who has a different &#39;opinion&#39; of what the rule says. Maybe a Tech Bulletin to the Divisional Chief Scruts...whatever...but it needs to be on paper...with a letter head on top.

Someone (not me, I&#39;m busy) needs to compose a thoughtful letter to the Club Racing Technical Department (Jeremy Thoennes), along with the National Adminstrator of Scruineers (Bill Pichardo), and copy both the Nat. Administrator of Stewards (Costa) and the Club Racing office (Bryan).

Jeremy Thoennes [email protected]

Bill Pichardo [email protected]

Costa Dunias [email protected]

Bryan Cohn [email protected]

We need to take the guesswork out of the GCR. That may mean it has to be thicker. So be it.

[Greg Amy]

Originally posted by JohnRW@Dec 16 2005, 09:51 AM
Someone...needs to compose a thoughtful letter to the Club Racing...
Since I&#39;m Tech, I&#39;ll do it; thanks for the easy contact information. Jeremy is the one that reponded to me that "the SCCA does not currently have a certification life for fuel cells, seats, or window nets". Unfortunately, while that may be the intent...

Let&#39;s not all hammer them with emails until I get a response. - GA