Hey, hey, ho, ho. SFI has got to go..

[jjjanos]

The new fire system requirement in the GCR has got to go. As far as I can tell, it serves only two purposes:
1. To put more money into the hands of SFI. You cannot be certified w/o paying their extortion-like per-unit fee.
2. To put more money into the hands of people who make these systems. If you're system is discharged, you no longer can refill it yourself. You must have it refilled by someone who is "certified". I.e. see item #1.

Can someone please explain to me the value-added to the racers by this requirement?

Frankly, if you are contemplating building a car, I advise you to buy the rollcage/logbook of a wrecked older car. The logbook goes with the cage, not the car. I.e. all of the grandfathering goes with the cage.

I'm really getting angry.

[Greg Amy]

The logbook goes with the cage, not the car. I.e. all of the grandfathering goes with the cage.
Actually, technically speaking, I don't think there's nothing that says you can't recage an already-logbooked car, or if you do that you have to re-issue the logbook...ergo, the numbers can be transferred to the new main roll hoop...

Just sayin'...

[shwah]

I recaged my car a few years ago, and kept the same log book.

[924Guy]

It's even worse than you think (I was pondering putting this firebottle issue in the H+N thread, but figured it was too off-topic, and I was too lazy to start my own thread).

Anyway, yes, it's worse than you even state; apparently (according to our local race shop guy, Keith Averill of Averill Racing Stuff) when you get an SFI firebottle - it also has to go back to the mfgr every 2 years to be inspected!!! What a scam!!!

Also, the SFI ones tend to be too tall to fit in-between the rails of a formula car in the standard fitment. Fortunately FIA ones are still allowed, but they have to be on the FIA list, and finding the list is a PITA.

Sadly, I will be buying a new firebottle system for my new car; even though it came with a system and logbook, since I will have to get it re-homologated due to a class change, I expect (taking an FF and making a DSR), I have no choice but to buy new... :(

I'll also proably have to suck it up and buy a HANS to replace my ISAAC, eventually...

[Knestis]

You're all paranoid about SFI. They have your best interests at heart.

...or maybe...

DON'T START WHINING NOW. YOU'VE SEEN THIS COMING FROM MILES OFF.

K

[jjjanos]

You're all paranoid about SFI. They have your best interests at heart.

...or maybe...

DON'T START WHINING NOW. YOU'VE SEEN THIS COMING FROM MILES OFF.

K

Who said I'm starting to whine? I've opposed them along. What I'm starting to get is angry.

[JamesB]

Meh, it is what it is.

[DavidM]

How much of the cage has to go into the new car? I'm "rebodying" the 240 and I was just going to get a new cage built since I wanted a lot of cage work done anyways. Can you just cut out the part with the log book number and transfer that?

David

[shwah]

My car had an old Autopower Bolt in. It was what I had, was free, and got me on track. I got the log book in December of the last year you could use ERW tubing.

Once I had the funds, and a baby on the way, I improved every safety system, which included installing a custom, welded cage. Took it to tech, told them what we did, asked them how they wanted to handle it, and they elected to just make a note in the existing log book and stamp the new cage with the old number.

There was none of the original cage retained.

[AjG]

Wait, what's with the fire systems? I don't have time right now to follow the news. Is my ESS AFFF Fire System still OK?

[Gibson]

So the way I understand it, on the ITA I am building now I can either run just the plain fire extinguisher, or the high dollar system you guys are talking about, but nothing in between?

I was already puzzled by the fuel cell rule, which allows either the stock tank or a top of the line cell, but none of the perfectly fine budget alternatives. What is the reasoning here? I am asking this in all seriousness, I am new to IT rules and am curious as to the why the all or nothing thought process.

[lateapex911]

Sigh...I dunno about this new firesystem fracas, but, last I checked, the fuel call rules were more open. I have a Jaz Rotomolded cel in my car.

There wasa rather lengthy thread on here about cels, Greg Amy played a role in it, maybe a search under his user name with Fuel" as a keyword would net hours of head scratching reading pleasure!

[jjjanos]

Wait, what's with the fire systems? I don't have time right now to follow the news. Is my ESS AFFF Fire System still OK?

As of now, cars "registered" before 1January2009 do not need to meet the stupid SFI requirement.


So the way I understand it, on the ITA I am building now I can either run just the plain fire extinguisher, or the high dollar system you guys are talking about, but nothing in between?

Bingo. Seems that to meet the system, it must be shipped loaded. That incurs a charge to load it. It also incurs a HAZMAT shipping fee. If you never fire your bottle, then two years after certification, you have the privilege of shipping it back to the manufacturer for "inspection." That would require discharging the bottle, incurring a recharge fee in addition to the inspection fee.

Everybody who thinks that companies getting full bottles shipped to them for recertification will simply ship them back w/o discharge but with the recharge fee - raise your hand.


I am asking this in all seriousness, I am new to IT rules and am curious as to the why the all or nothing thought process.

Guess? Asshat BoD members buying into the agenda of some safety-fascist on the CRB who recommend it. Stupidity on our part for not fighting this tooth and nail.

[frnkhous]

haha man scca just got stricter than grand am/nascar on firesystems. atleast they just check the guage not a date of certification... this is ridiculous.

[tom91ita]

.....:(

I'll also proably have to suck it up and buy a HANS to replace my ISAAC, eventually...

and then it will be an FIA seat.

and then it will need to be replaced every 5 years due to UV damage of the composite materials.

and then it will be the car's chassis....

[Duc]

Bingo. Seems that to meet the system, it must be shipped loaded. That incurs a charge to load it. It also incurs a HAZMAT shipping fee. If you never fire your bottle, then two years after certification, you have the privilege of shipping it back to the manufacturer for "inspection." That would require discharging the bottle, incurring a recharge fee in addition to the inspection fee.

Everybody who thinks that companies getting full bottles shipped to them for recertification will simply ship them back w/o discharge but with the recharge fee - raise your hand.


First the HAZMAT is NOT true. Big brown box trucks do not care what you ship (just do not tell them) and bring the box pre-packaged. Did that with my fire bottle to and from the shop. Second, if the company doing the work is not someone you trust, don't send it to them.


Also why could someone not just keep a hand held fire extinguisher and have a AFFF system as well. That is still compliant.

What everyone needs to get mad about is the lawyers that take on frivolous lawsuits that is driving this all.

[jjjanos]

First the HAZMAT is NOT true.

Then someone needs to tell the manufacturers. The two places I checked said it wa shipped with a HAZMAT fee when charged.


Also why could someone not just keep a hand held fire extinguisher and have a AFFF system as well. That is still compliant.

The principle?

Cost? It isn't compliant if you also want to enter in production. Between fuel, mileage, food, hotel, leave time, etc. there is a significant cost in towing 4-6 hours to a track. I've got a car that, other than a ridiculous requirement for a fire system and an SFI certified system at that, could be entered in a second race - often at a volume discount. The ability to run that extra set of sessions means I don't need to do the test day (saving 1 day of expenses). Hell, it's twice the track time for the same towing cost.

The danger from fire is significantly over estimated. I've seen and heard of more drivers dieing from heart attacks while racing then who have experienced a fire where they needed the suit, let alone a fire system.

Kee-rist, if they want to save our freaking lives, the requirement should be for a real-time EKG when driving.

[Greg Amy]

Big brown box trucks do not care what you ship (just do not tell them)...
Dude. That's potentially a Federal offense. If that thing ends up on a commercial airliner and they don't know, at best you're on your way to the pokey (witness: Value Jet 592).

If it's HAZMAT, you better declare it.

GA

[Duc]

We are talking about a fire bottle. They all have pressure relief valves. If it does go off it is going to make a mess and may put out a fire:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ValuJet_Flight_592

Not oxygen generators.

Catch up on Mythbusters' Extinguisher_explosion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MythBusters_(season_6)#Extinguisher_explosion) which was a good one.

Plus it is only a 10-20 dollar fee. The shop I went through did not send it that way (or ate the cost). Nor did the UPS I sent it through. I told them what it was and they did not even know of a hazmat fee (let alone what a fire bottle is).

Plus let me state I really do understand the added cost as I am just starting up. I am still borrowing safety equipment, and will as long as I have a good friend (Helmet, Suit, and HANS).

Also forget the EKG, maybe auto defibrillators like you can find at the airport. Though you would have to use it yourself due to the fact that some is afraid of being sued. Put the button right next you your starter, just hit the right one.

Get pissed off at the lawyers that take on stupid cases, not the governing body that is trying to keep the insurance company happy.

[Speed Raycer]

I must have dozed off on this one... WhenTF did this go down??????

[Greg Amy]

We are talking about a fire bottle. They all have pressure relief valves. If it does go off it is going to make a mess and may put out a fire:
If it's listed as HAZMAT, it's a Federal offense to ship it without notifying the carrier.

Period.

[Duc]

If it's listed as HAZMAT, it's a Federal offense to ship it without notifying the carrier.

Period.

Ok flogged sufficantly.

So don't go out to eat twice and you have the hazmat shipping payed for, or if you are doing Fast Food, 4 times.

Point is it is a a new rule. It will cost money. But last time I checked that racing was not free, nor cheap. To get pissed off that they decided that SFI specified fire extinguisher is not worth it. The reason they have to specify something is to keep the manufactures some what honest, and to keep the lawyers off their backs. This is no worse than CARB emission certifications for every aftermarket hard part that goes on any vehicle. It is there to keep the honest people honest.

[Knestis]

The point at which he has to cross SFI's hand with gold for a rollcage or something else that he's used being able to make a decision about himself, Derek will catch on.

When I said "you're all," DD, I meant "y'all" - the collective. For the last couple years, it's only been the "Isaac hotheads" who've been "paranoid" about SFI requirements getting foisted on them. That's going to change but you know what? (Y'all know what?) It probably won't make a difference. There's enough turnover in SCCA that the people who know "how it was" are a small enough minority that they can be dismissed under "black helicopters."

NOW, if I believed that SFI membership made us safer, I'd be totally OK with it. I don't. For those of you who haven't been around for the last 27 of these convesations, you're welcome to search the archives here to find out why but I'm feeling old and tired right now.

K

[dickita15]

When the Nazis came for the communists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist),
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democrat),
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_union),
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews),
I remained silent;
I was not a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
Okay I know this is a little over the top but it does demonstrate the issue with incremental expansion of restrictions.:o

[924Guy]

Get pissed off at the lawyers that take on stupid cases, not the governing body that is trying to keep the insurance company happy.

I'm not really getting the sense that this is the case (not that I'm any fan of laywers)...

Sadly, SCCA seems to just be getting scared of lawsuits, and not just about safety: there was recently a big stink about some special wheels in FF, which were custom-made at great expense, for an aero advantage. They were ruled (in protest during a race weekend) as being illegal. The car owner, who paid to have all these special rims made (not directly perhaps in conflict with the rule, to be sure), filed appeals etc right up to the top. As I heard word-of-mouth, it came down to him complaining that he'd invested a great deal of money into having the rims made, and if SCCA didn't find them legal for use, he'd sue SCCA.

I think it was the Jan Fastrack that had a wheel rule change for FF to allow basically any wheel you want, covers unrestricted.

Sad, but I heard it from a trustworthy source IMO. :blink:

[924Guy]

Point is it is a a new rule. It will cost money. But last time I checked that racing was not free, nor cheap. To get pissed off that they decided that SFI specified fire extinguisher is not worth it. The reason they have to specify something is to keep the manufactures some what honest, and to keep the lawyers off their backs. This is no worse than CARB emission certifications for every aftermarket hard part that goes on any vehicle. It is there to keep the honest people honest.

Seems like in this case, yes, SCCA did a decent job (or tried to, at least) - all existing cars are grandfathered. As builder of a new car in addition to owner of an existing car, I don't have a big problem with buying a new system that is approved; this IMO is a reasonable expense in my safety, and I truly do go to extensive lengths to be safe (note that I was an early adopter of ISAAC and center net).

What I do have a problem with is probably an unintended consequence that SCCA didn't notice, this clause about SFI systems having to be re-inspected every 2 years. That's blatant self-interest on the part of the SFI firebottle mfgrs. Not much different that the whole BS about rewebbing your belts every 3 years. If they're made of the el-cheapo SFI webbing that degrades quickly in the sunlight, as opposed to that superior euro-spec stuff that lasts much longer.

Of course, since we're not SFI members ourselves, we have no say in the matter... sorta taxation without representation... :(

[lateapex911]

Don't hold back your hate just for the lawyers, Derek, be more even handed and spread it to people who milk things for all they are worth, and the system that allows it...

I actually have some friends in each of your "hate groups"...they just want equal love!

You say, "Hey, it's fine, it's for my safety, and racings expensive anyway"....well, sure, but the point here is that it's extra unneeded expense, extra hassle, and it basically puts money into an organizations hands that does nothing to increase my actual safety!

[shwah]

Of course, since we're not SFI members ourselves, we have no say in the matter... sorta taxation without representation... :(

The SCCA is a member of SFI as far as I know.

[Xian]

I must have dozed off on this one... WhenTF did this go down??????

x2

As someone who has a new car build in progress, I'm very interested in seeing where/when this was published. I've got a brand new AFFF system in the garage and a car that's about 95% ready for a log book. Don't tell me that the firesystem I have is a paperweight now.

Christian

[raffaelli]

Get pissed off at the lawyers that take on stupid cases, not the governing body that is trying to keep the insurance company happy.


That is just plain silly. Don't hate the player (lawyer), hate the game (laws which allow courts to become bogged down with nothing lawsuits). Lawyers just do there job - get the most bang for the buck for their clients.

[Ed Funk]

When the Nazis came for the communists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist),
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democrat),
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_union),
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews),
I remained silent;
I was not a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
Okay I know this is a little over the top but it does demonstrate the issue with incremental expansion of restrictions.:o


Geez Dick, what's the deal? Either your font is so big my monitor tips over or it's so small my old guy eyes can't deal with it!:D

[jjjanos]

Seems like in this case, yes, SCCA did a decent job (or tried to, at least) - all existing cars are grandfathered.

Which does nothing to protect them from lawsuits. In fact, it probably makes them more likely to lose.
Plantiff Attorney - "So, being fully aware of the dangers of uncertified fire systems, SCCA allowed my client to compete in a car using substandard equipment?"
SCCA - "Yes."
Plantiff Attorney - "Your honor, we ask for immediate judgement with triple damages on account of the defendents own admission of gross negligence."


As builder of a new car in addition to owner of an existing car, I don't have a big problem with buying a new system that is approved; this IMO is a reasonable expense in my safety, and I truly do go to extensive lengths to be safe (note that I was an early adopter of ISAAC and center net).

The certification increases your safety, if and only if, SFI conducts random and unannounced testing of both completed product and the manufacturing process. Anything else and the only two things you are relying upon are the willingness of the manufacturer to pay SFI's protection money and the manufacturer's reputation. W/o certification, you are relying on the manufacturer's reputation. I.e. no delta.


x2

As someone who has a new car build in progress, I'm very interested in seeing where/when this was published. I've got a brand new AFFF system in the garage and a car that's about 95% ready for a log book. Don't tell me that the firesystem I have is a paperweight now.

Christian

I won't tell you that. What you have is a very effective fire system that you can continue to use.... as long as you have a fire bottle in your car (assuming it is IT).

[1stGenBoy]

"Everybody who thinks that companies getting full bottles shipped to them for recertification will simply ship them back w/o discharge but with the recharge fee - raise your hand."

Not on my watch!!!!! Every FIA bottle or any bottle we recieve for recertification or a recharge goes through the WHOLE process. No short cuts!

AFFF bottles and FIA bottles have always had to have recertification every two years.

The kicker is the manufactures will not allow us to recertify a bottle if it is more than two years out of the service date and the bottles are only good for 10 years.

As a licensed and UPS certified HAZ shipper I can tell you the Fed's do not take kindly to shipping things like this without the proper documents. Fines start at $10K and go up fast. People have been caught and it is not pretty amd don't even think about shipping by the postal service for these .

Not my rules so don't flame me.....

Bob

[ekim952522000]

x2

As someone who has a new car build in progress, I'm very interested in seeing where/when this was published. I've got a brand new AFFF system in the garage and a car that's about 95% ready for a log book. Don't tell me that the firesystem I have is a paperweight now.

Christian

Christian is yuor system on this list? Mine is I have the SPA system. If it is listed you are ok.
http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public.nsf/8F36A4FEEE70658DC1257522005E7FCB/$FILE/L16_Approved_extinguisher_system.pdf

[JamesB]

So Jeff, what is your solution if SFI and FIA are not enough?

PS- Don't even suggest yet another standards instatution. You already have 2, what is your solution above and beyond the two that already exist. Adding a 3rd is not a solution.

[tderonne]

OK, I'll throw a little gas on this fire (pun intended!).

We have to have our fire systems certified/checked/whataver every two years?

If you have an FIA rated cell (as called for in the GCR for most other classes), the FIA certification expires after 5 years and the cell needs to be recertified. None of us do that of course, nor have I ever heard of a tech inspector even asking.

Don't worry about a fire from an old cell, you have a safe fire system!

(And SFI has specs for cages (that we don't use).......but that is another topic.)

[Xian]

I won't tell you that. What you have is a very effective fire system that you can continue to use.... as long as you have a fire bottle in your car (assuming it is IT).

That looks like the route I'm going to have to go...


Christian is yuor system on this list? Mine is I have the SPA system. If it is listed you are ok.
http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public.nsf/8F36A4FEEE70658DC1257522005E7FCB//L16_Approved_extinguisher_system.pdf

I didn't see it... I've got this one: http://www.ioportracing.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=ESS-5&Category_Code=ESS But don't remember if it has the "extra" $10 upgrade to SFI... the system was bought middle of last year.

F*ck. Is this enough to get me racing with NASA? Definitely getting closer to going somewhere else.

Christian

[jjjanos]

So Jeff, what is your solution if SFI and FIA are not enough?

It is not that SFI and FIA are not enough. It is that SFI and FIA are too much, or more accurately, the SFI system creates, for them, a powerful set of incentives that undermine the stated purpose for their existence, i.e. driver safety.

1. Direct conflict of interest. I believe that SFI gets a fee on each certified unit that is sold. SFI's incentive is now maximizing units sold and no longer devising the best standard.
2. Direct conflict of interest. SFI only collects a fee if there is a standard. When examining whether a standard needs to be established, SFI will always determine it is needed.
3. Indirect conflict of interest. The companies being regulated by SFI write the regulations. Problem - the standard will be written to the lowest level needed to obtain standard's committee approval. No member sitting on the committee will support a standard that negatively impacts their business. (I don't recall what safety item this was about, but I seem to recall SFI trying to write standards for a product in which the industry was split about 50/50 between two technologies. Group A wants to outlaw group B. Group B wants to outlaw group A. Result - no standard.)
4. AFAIK, lack of verification. Does SFI do random checks of both finished product and quality control?

Solutions:
1. SCCA simply states the minimum requirement for safety equipment (see roll bars) and put the responsibility back on the consumer who purchases the item.
2. Disband SFI. Replace with an organization similar to Underwriters Lab which, I believe, does not have income dependent on the sales of certified products. Eliminate the involvement of manufacturers from the standards process.

[Tristan Smith]

Hey Christian, on that link you provided to the IOPort system you bought it says this.....


New rules for the SCCA Club Racing in 2009 requires a SFI 17.1 Certified fire system in all newly logbooked cars in classes requiring fire systems. Upgrade to a SFI 17.1 fire system for just $10.00. Additionally, SCCA will allow the club racer to use the ESS refill kits without requiring any re-certification. This is a great advantage for the club racer over any other system since if they are fired, they must be sent back to the factory to be refilled and re-certified.

So is that true? And if so, doesn't that bypass the issue? I realize that that we are talking about re-certifing every two years, but come on....If I can refill myself?

[jjjanos]

Hey Christian, on that link you provided to the IOPort system you bought it says this.....


New rules for the SCCA Club Racing in 2009 requires a SFI 17.1 Certified fire system in all newly logbooked cars in classes requiring fire systems. Upgrade to a SFI 17.1 fire system for just $10.00. Additionally, SCCA will allow the club racer to use the ESS refill kits without requiring any re-certification. This is a great advantage for the club racer over any other system since if they are fired, they must be sent back to the factory to be refilled and re-certified.

So is that true? And if so, doesn't that bypass the issue? I realize that that we are talking about re-certifing every two years, but come on....If I can refill myself?

Unless it says so in the GCR, I wouldn't count on it.

[pgipson]

...F*ck. Is this enough to get me racing with NASA? Definitely getting closer to going somewhere else.
Christian


If anything, NASA is even more in bed with SFI/FIA requirements than SCCA is. 2 year rule on window nets, 5 year rule on FIA seats, 5 year rule on FIA cells (and approved cells are the only option apparently). Not to mention SFI 38.1. If racing was this dangerous 10 years ago, how did we make it to this point?

[Xian]

Hey Christian, on that link you provided to the IOPort system you bought it says this.....


New rules for the SCCA Club Racing in 2009 requires a SFI 17.1 Certified fire system in all newly logbooked cars in classes requiring fire systems. Upgrade to a SFI 17.1 fire system for just $10.00. Additionally, SCCA will allow the club racer to use the ESS refill kits without requiring any re-certification. This is a great advantage for the club racer over any other system since if they are fired, they must be sent back to the factory to be refilled and re-certified.

So is that true? And if so, doesn't that bypass the issue? I realize that that we are talking about re-certifing every two years, but come on....If I can refill myself?


Unless it says so in the GCR, I wouldn't count on it.

Well... here's some interesting info. I just got off the phone with Tom Turner (President ESS) and here's what he said (and I paraphrase): Since we are running in a class that doesn't require a plumbed fire system and we are simply substituing a plumbed system for the legal, non-SFI handheld system we should be just fine running a non-SFI plumbed fire system. FWIW, he's also currently a national scrutineer for SCCA. He also confirmed that the ESS systems do not require 2 year re-inspection and that they may be refilled by the user and maintain their SCCA club approval.

FWIW, he seemed like a super nice guy and very knowledgeable.

Christian

[Greg Amy]

There wasa rather lengthy thread on here about cels...
http://www.improvedtouring.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23937

[jjjanos]

Well... here's some interesting info. I just got off the phone with Tom Turner (President ESS) and here's what he said (and I paraphrase): Since we are running in a class that doesn't require a plumbed fire system and we are simply substituing a plumbed system for the legal, non-SFI handheld system we should be just fine running a non-SFI plumbed fire system. FWIW, he's also currently a national scrutineer for SCCA. He also confirmed that the ESS systems do not require 2 year re-inspection and that they may be refilled by the user and maintain their SCCA club approval.

FWIW, he seemed like a super nice guy and very knowledgeable.

Christian

According to the 2009 GCR, he is in error. You're car must either meet the fire system rules and/or the extinguisher rules. Cars registered 2009 or later have specific requirements for a system.

2009 GCR

9.3.22. FIRE SYSTEM
All cars shall be equipped with an On-Board Fire System except Showroom Stock, Touring, Spec Miata, and Improved Touring.
A. On-Board Fire System Requirements
Cars registered after 1/1/09 shall comply with the following onboard fire system requirements:
• Systems certified to SFI specification 17.1
• Those listed by the FIA on Technical List No. 16
The following information must be visible of the unit:
• Certification label
• Capacity
• Type of extinguishing agent
• Weight, or volume, of the extinguishing agent
The following is acceptable for cars registered before 1/1/09:
On-board fire systems shall use Halon 1301 or 1211, with a five pound minimum capacity (by weight). Alternatively, on-board fire systems may use AFFF or equivalent surfactant foam material, 2.25 liter minimum capacity (by volume). All AFFF fire system bottles shall incorporate a functional pressure gauge and shall be marked with the manufacturer’s recommended “filled weight.” CO2 cartridge propellant fire extinguishing
systems are permitted provided that the seal of the manufacturer specified CO2 cartridge is not punctured and the fire bottle is equal to the weight specified by the system manufacturer.


B. Hand-Held Fire Extinguisher Requirements
The following are acceptable for Showroom Stock, Touring and Improved Touring cars:


Please not the highlighted words. Acceptable does not mean required.


Sporting regs clearly say that everyone other than touring, spec miata, SS and IT must run a fire sytem. If you are required or allowed to run system and the car is registered 2009 or later, it must meet the new minimum standards. If you are required or allowed to run a system and the car is registered 2008 or earlier, the old standards apply.


In fact, there is no allowance in the GCR to mount either a fire system or handheld extinguisher in an IT car.


Showroom stock category rules: 9.1.7.D.2 - requires either a fire system or extinguisher compliant with 9.3.22
Touring category: 9.1.D.10.C - requires either a fire system or extinguisher compliant with 9.3.22
Spec Miata - 9.1.8.C.9.b - requires either a fire system or extinguisher compliant with 9.3.22
Improved Touring - 9.1.3.B. "... competition adjustments, other than as outlined in section 9.1.3.C, are not allowed. Other than those specifically allowed by these rules, no component or part normally found on a stock example of a given vehicle may be disabled, altered, or removed."
Improved Touring - 9.1.3.C - NADA about fire systems or fire extinguishers.
Improved Touring - 9.1.3.D -


AUTHORIZED MODIFICATIONS
The following modifications are authorized on all Improved Touring Category cars....


NADA about fire systems or fire extinguishers


Improved Touring 9.1.3.D.10:
Safety
a. The stock fuel tank may be replaced with a fuel cell. The fuel cell shall be located within twelve (12) inches of the original fuel tank location. Additional reinforcement may be added to support the fuel cell, but such reinforcement shall not attach to the roll cage. Floor pan may be modified for installation. See GCR Section 9.3.26., for requirements.
b. Spare wheels and tires may be removed.
c. Air bag systems shall be disarmed and may be removed.
d. If so equipped, the rolling door lock mechanism may be deactivated by unplugging the components.


You'll note the absence of any mention of fire systems or extinguishers.


Since IT cars are only allowed those modifications specifically required or allowed by the GCR and our category rules neither allow or require fire systems or extinguishers, we are all illegal.

[Greg Amy]

You'll note the absence of any mention of fire systems or extinguishers.
Eek. He's right.

We know what the rules are meant to say, but he's right in that there's nothing that says that any fire extinguishers are required.

What a terrible re-write...

[Xian]

:sigh: :(

[jjjanos]

Eek. He's right.

We know what the rules are meant to say, but he's right in that there's nothing that says that any fire extinguishers are required.

What a terrible re-write...

It's been that way for 3 editions. I brought to the attention of the CRB via email and received an email saying the fire system and extinguisher rules were adequete as written. I didn't even get the courtesy of a mention in Fasttrack!

If I didn't need the weight, the extinguisher would come out of the car for this year's annual tech.

[Gregg]

So take it out for the annual tech and make a point of telling the scrutineer why you pulled it out. I'd be interested to see if they sign off or not.

They don't weigh you for an annual.