Plastic quarter window [Archive] - Improved Touring Racing Forums

Gregf

10-10-2012, 01:20 AM

In looking over a customers ITS car for a race weekend the question came up regarding a replacement rear quarter window that was used to install a Naca duct for driver cooling. One of our newer racers said it is not allowed in the rules but I clearly remember it being in Fastrack that one window could be replaced for the purpose of driver cooling. Where did this go? Greg F

Gregg

10-10-2012, 05:53 AM

In Spec Miata you may replace the vent window for this purpose, but to my knowledge there is no such allowance for what you describe in IT.

That said, with both front door windows either down or removed, it should be pretty easy to draw cool air for the driver.

Greg Amy

10-10-2012, 07:01 AM

I concur with Gregg. What you read was for Spec Miata; not allowed to replace the quarter in IT.

Andy Bettencourt

10-10-2012, 07:18 AM

'Rear' quarter window? What kind of car? Are we sure this is a Miata?

And IIRC, the rules for this type of replacement DO exist for IT (front quarter).

Greg Amy

10-10-2012, 07:30 AM

'Rear' quarter window? What kind of car? Are we sure this is a Miata?
He didn't say it was a Miata, he said it was an ITS car.

And IIRC, the rules for this type of replacement DO exist for IT.
"Quarter window", Andy? As in the rear window on a 2-door car? Ain't sayin' it's not there, but you'll need to cite that in the regs...

tac911t

10-10-2012, 07:34 AM

Section 9.i, mentions driver/passenger window area can have ducting added. No mention of replacing glass with plastic. I have seen NACA ducts positioned in line with the plane of the open drivers or passenger window to capture air into a hose that is routed to the driver.

Andy Bettencourt

10-10-2012, 07:58 AM

"Ducting may be added to provide fresh air to the driver/
passenger compartment. This ducting shall be located in the
driver and/or passenger window area, with no modifications
to the bodywork. Only the cooling duct is permitted in the
window area. It is not permitted to otherwise fill in the window
area. The complete duct assembly in the plane of the window
shall be no larger than 100 square inches."

So I would submit that a window in the drivers compartment can be replaced with a plastic NACA duct set-up provided it does not exceed 100sq inches.

Knestis

10-10-2012, 08:04 AM

Ed Funk

10-10-2012, 08:39 AM

Greg Amy

10-10-2012, 09:20 AM

So I would submit that a window in the drivers compartment can be replaced with a plastic NACA duct set-up provided it does not exceed 100sq inches.
That reg is referring to the door window area only, not the quarter glass. Its intent is allow ducting while limiting one's one's ability to one, block off the window for aero improvements and two, minimize obstructions for safety workers getting to you through the window in case of incident (thus the "It is not permitted to otherwise fill in the window area" notation.)

Further, a quarter glass is not a "driver and/or passenger window area". By definition, a quarter glass cannot ever be a "driver window area".

Thus, this reg does not allow a quarter glass to be replaced/modified. If it did, then a lot of people would be dropping some weight off of head height be replacing the quarter glass(es) with Lexan and putting in a crappy ineffective "ducts". I certainly would.

GA

Dano77

10-10-2012, 10:21 AM

Im with Andy on this. It says the driver pasenger window. Dosent say Driver passenger FRONT DOOR window. On a 2 door,2 seater such as an RX7,the entire campartment is for the driver/passenger. NO? There is no back seat, no rear doors, no trunk area so to speak. Dont start preachin about spirits and all, I dont believe in ghosts.

As long as the window dosent take up 100 square inches then replace it with the allowed duct.

RX7 Quarter windows are about 100 square inches and I need to replace one HMMMMMMM

But then again, I like to argue about rules and such

Dan

Greg Amy

10-10-2012, 10:41 AM

Im with Andy on this. It says the driver pasenger window.
Then you just allowed replacing all side glass in the car with polycarbonate.

Fine with me, we're already doing that in Super Touring.

GA

Dano77

10-10-2012, 10:56 AM

Dont be that way Greg, I said up to the total 100 squre inches, not all the glass in the car. The rear deck glass needs to stay. If the door glass is already removed, whats the point. We are only talking about the rear side glass on certain cars, that have windows smaller then 10 x 10. Thats not that big in all reality.

And besides, I am trying to save a couple bucks finding a 30 year old window is all.

Just laugh a little, Race Seriously, Dont take it Seriously, we are only racing for ashtrays.

Greg Amy

10-10-2012, 11:09 AM

Just laugh a little, Race Seriously, Dont take it Seriously, we are only racing for ashtrays.

But then again, I like to argue about rules and such

Just sayin.... ;)

Dont be that way Greg, I said up to the total 100 squre inches, not all the glass in the car.
So you're only going to allow users with rear quarter glass smaller than 100 sq-in the ability to replace that glass with polycarbonate? Seems a bit inequitable...and if the regs were not intended to allow placement of a duct soley in an already-vacant area (such as the allowed front door glass removal), then where in the regs does it say you can replace any glass glass with poly to install that duct? Can that replacement also extend into the rear hatch/window glass? After all, to your definition that's "driver/passenger glass", too...?

If the door glass is already removed, whats the point.
Ding! Winner. Quarter glass is not allowed to be removed by the regs. Thus there's no vacant space to fill with a 100 sq-in duct.

Just to ensure we're talking about the same thing, "quarter glass" is the piece below above the "Acura Motorsports" decal. I'm NOT talking about a rear door glass on a four door, I'm talking about a fixed piece of glass behind any door glass but in front of the rear hatch/window:

http://i1201.photobucket.com/albums/bb345/GregAmy99/Racing/IMG_0497.jpg

Dano77

10-10-2012, 11:19 AM

We are talking about the same glass. And I dont really think that there is a car out there that uses on 10x 10 windows in the rear. Oh wait, my 87 Buick Regal had one that size. But thats not an IT car.

I just measured the 7 window. It comes to just over 100 square inches. And thats not a big window. Dam Need to find a piece of glass. Got any laying around I can duct tape into the hole?

Later dude, Your 7 awaits you. Come wrestle a dinosaur

You just had to get your car in this didnt you.

Greg Amy

10-10-2012, 11:27 AM

Later dude, Your 7 awaits you. Come wrestle a dinosaur...You just had to get your car in this didnt you.
;) Hey, if you'd stop wrecking yours we could use it as an example (and you'd have more pieces of glass!) I do believe there's a Regional at NHMS in April... - GA

Gregf

10-10-2012, 11:45 AM

Thanks for all f the replies. This car and several others were built by us from 2000 to 2006. ( Porsche 944) I am sure there was an allowance in SS or maybe T class cars to allow this. The car in question has a driver with MS, so it is part of an involved driver cooling system to control his core temperature. As I remember it it only allowed one window to be substituted, and only for the purpose of cooling the driver. Tjhis and several other items recently have cropped up as Fastrack allowances that have not made it into the final rules apparently. Greg

Knestis

10-10-2012, 11:52 AM

FWIW, I concur with the interpretation that the "duct" rule allows us to fill in some of the space vacated by the driver's/passenger's windows being down (or removed) but that there's no allowance for removal of any other windows. That was on the list of final tweaks that Pablo was going to get before the ARRC this year. :(

K

Andy Bettencourt

10-10-2012, 02:13 PM

That reg is referring to the door window area only, not the quarter glass. Its intent is allow ducting while limiting one's one's ability to one, block off the window for aero improvements and two, minimize obstructions for safety workers getting to you through the window in case of incident (thus the "It is not permitted to otherwise fill in the window area" notation.)

Further, a quarter glass is not a "driver and/or passenger window area". By definition, a quarter glass cannot ever be a "driver window area".

Thus, this reg does not allow a quarter glass to be replaced/modified. If it did, then a lot of people would be dropping some weight off of head height be replacing the quarter glass(es) with Lexan and putting in a crappy ineffective "ducts". I certainly would.

GA

So being on the committee when this was written I certainly understand the intent. But I am not sure you can pin down the definition of "passenger window area". I would think it legal for a 4-door to cut a 10x10 chunk out of the rear door glass to install a duct.

I guess the real question is whether or not we consider this rear quarter glass part of the passenger compartment. As the 944 is a 4 seater, that RQG is, IMHO, passenger glass. I would have no issues with anyone cutting that RQG to install a legally sized duct for driver ventalation. Nit picking the wording for sure but I don't think it provides an advantage either way.

Ron Earp

10-10-2012, 03:44 PM

So being on the committee when this was written I certainly understand the intent. But I am not sure you can pin down the definition of "passenger window area". I would think it legal for a 4-door to cut a 10x10 chunk out of the rear door glass to install a duct.

I guess the real question is whether or not we consider this rear quarter glass part of the passenger compartment. As the 944 is a 4 seater, that RQG is, IMHO, passenger glass. I would have no issues with anyone cutting that RQG to install a legally sized duct for driver ventalation. Nit picking the wording for sure but I don't think it provides an advantage either way.

I've been contemplating just this very thing on the Mustang. I have some tiny rear quarters that would accommodate a NACA duct perfectly to feed my DR COOL.

"This ducting shall be located in the
driver and/or passenger window area"

My car carried passengers, and, the rear window is located in the passenger area.

Now, I know what they meant with the rule, but I think I could pass muster with a NACA duct in the rear quarter.

prodogdriver

10-10-2012, 03:54 PM

as a side note to fellow super touring drivers I found these pre-made side windows

http://www.flex-a-lite.com/auto/html/flexite-molded.html

Andy Bettencourt

10-10-2012, 04:22 PM

I've been contemplating just this very thing on the Mustang. I have some tiny rear quarters that would accommodate a NACA duct perfectly to feed my DR COOL.

"This ducting shall be located in the
driver and/or passenger window area"

My car carried passengers, and, the rear window is located in the passenger area.

Now, I know what they meant with the rule, but I think I could pass muster with a NACA duct in the rear quarter.

And as has been correctly stated, the 100 sq/in rule was put in place to limit the aero-engineers so other than the weight savings of said size glass, it shouldn't be an issue.

DavidM

10-10-2012, 05:28 PM

Ron Earp

10-10-2012, 09:25 PM

I think you could put your NACA duct in the quarter window *area* if you so choose.
David

Okay, but, if I choose, why couldn't I use the 100 sq inch rule? If you agree I could put the NACA duct in the quarter window THEN it could be 100 sq inches and that might be larger than the window. Then the window would be gone, like this:

http://www.streetbeatcustoms.com/Agent-47/Body-Kit-Accessories/Ford-Mustang-Agent-47-Quarter-Window-NACA-Ducts-_-30207/639416/

http://www.streetbeatcustoms.com/productImages_thumbBIG/1242085028111029.jpg

StephenB

10-10-2012, 10:03 PM

I think you could put your NACA duct in the quarter window *area* if you so choose. It would be pretty ineffective with the quarter glass blocking it. I don't think the rule allows you to remove the quarter glass. The door windows are down/removed based on a different rule.

David

Okay, but, if I choose, why couldn't I use the 100 sq inch rule? If you agree I could put the NACA duct in the quarter window THEN it could be 100 sq inches and that might be larger than the window. Then the window would be gone, like this:

http://www.streetbeatcustoms.com/Agent-47/Body-Kit-Accessories/Ford-Mustang-Agent-47-Quarter-Window-NACA-Ducts-_-30207/639416/

http://www.streetbeatcustoms.com/productImages_thumbBIG/1242085028111029.jpg

Your missing part of his quote in your post...

I agree with David that you can put it where ever you choose but you cannot remove something that isn't allowed to be removed. So, Ron if you put your window back in then your duct is perfectly legal. (It looks like from that picture that the window was removed which I do not see an allowance for in the IT ruleset.)

Stephen

Ron Earp

10-11-2012, 08:23 AM

Your missing part of his quote in your post...

I agree with David that you can put it where ever you choose but you cannot remove something that isn't allowed to be removed. So, Ron if you put your window back in then your duct is perfectly legal. (It looks like from that picture that the window was removed which I do not see an allowance for in the IT ruleset.)

Stephen

We are allowed to install brake ducts. But in that allowance, there isn't a section that says we can use a hose clamp. But of course, we all use hose clamps to install the ducts because it says we can duct the brakes for cooling.

Here, I can install a NACA duct and it can be 100 square inches in size. If the NACA duct I choose is 100 square inches it might be larger than the window and might require the window be cut away to install it, e.g., gone.

Or, if that interpretation isn't favored, what if I cut away all about 1/4" of the window and glue a 95 sq inch NACA duct in place. Would that be more satisfactory?

StephenB

10-11-2012, 09:37 AM

nope that comparison doesn't work for me. you ADDED a hose clamp to make it work. If you REMOVED a headlight or something then that would be a comparable argument.

Stephen :)

Ron Earp

10-11-2012, 10:59 AM

I'm cutting that rear window out and installing a NACA duct.

Protest, bring it.

Greg Amy

10-11-2012, 11:16 AM

i'm going to cheat.

Protest, bring it.
ftfy.

Ron Earp

10-11-2012, 11:24 AM

Nice! :)

Andy Bettencourt

10-11-2012, 01:30 PM

I think you could put your NACA duct in the quarter window *area* if you so choose.

David

So this simple thought process has me turned around on my position. The rules says it may be added. Doesn't say that you can replace. The rule assumes you are 'adding' to an area where the glass is already removed.

Good debate.

lawtonglenn

10-11-2012, 01:53 PM

ShelbyRacer

10-11-2012, 04:37 PM

ftfy.

Greg makes me giggle.

And, wow, every time I see one of these threads, I realize how much more I need to learn...

manny

10-17-2012, 09:00 AM

i agree with Ron. +1.

jumbojimbo

10-17-2012, 01:04 PM

So this simple thought process has me turned around on my position. The rules says it may be added. Doesn't say that you can replace. The rule assumes you are 'adding' to an area where the glass is already removed.

Good debate.

What amazes me is that clearly the rule was written with the idea of people adding vents to the already open/missing front windows. And clearly designed to prevent you from closing off the window with a "vent".

Granted, the wording could be twisted to include the rear windows. And you could say this is an example of a poorly written rule that depends on intent rather than explicit wording.

Why go against the clear intent of the rule just because you can sort of argue the wording of the rule could be intepreted that way. If you do so, you will (or should) force a rewrite of the wording, which creates needless work for other people and you've now spent time and money doing something that was clearly inteneded to be illegal in the first place. And now you'll have to undo it. All the while bitching about these BS rules that cost you time and money you knew you shouldn't have spent in the first place.

Seems like it would be easier to just follow the rule as intended and save everyone a lot of time and effort. Although granted, it did provide some diversion for rules geeks here.

Gregf

10-29-2012, 11:36 PM

The reason several people chose to install their driver cooling into the quarter window here is just simplicity and cost. On a 944 the window is very small, and a 944 has no vent wing window that can be replaced as is the case with a Miata. To fabricate a structure to hold a Naca duct or similar device would interfere too much with visibility and potential inbreed/egress if you should need to escape through the window opening on the 944 model. Greg F.

Knestis

10-30-2012, 06:41 AM

There are all KINDS of things we could do in the name of simplicity and cost that are still not allowed by the rules.

K

Ed Funk

10-30-2012, 07:36 AM

....and there are approved methods of getting the rules changed.

Gregf

10-30-2012, 12:15 PM

I did send a letter regarding this, but it has apparently been absorbed into the collective... It doesnt really matter for us regionally, as I dont think anyone will protest a racer with MS because of a single window. In his case he hauls around a 30lb ice chest, a 6lb fan and all of the ducting and hoses that keep his core temp under control. The other car is just a really big guy that struggles with the hot weather and needs cool air to cope. Greg F