April Fastrack...

OK, It's here guys and gals...

http://scca.org/news/tech/fastrack/04-04-fastrack.pdf

NOTHING on the IT front this month. I was told the CRB was working on clearing some old business that's been on the books for 4-5 months... obviously with an emphasis on Production and GT... We'll have to wait until next month's edition to see what IT items have been addressed...

One point of particular interest to many here:

Quote:

---

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">MOTION: Instruct the CRB to document the process involved in classification of new cars and present such process to the BoD. (Christian/Allen) PASSED</font>

---

This ought to be interesting... http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/eek.gif


------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX
http://home.comcast.net/~djjordan/Web/DJ_AV1.jpg

[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited February 25, 2004).]

But also see page 5 re restraints. They are talking about requiring 6 or 7 point systems beginning Jan 07.

Scott

True Scott. I always liked the six point in the old rally car. Looks like it will be time to price that item for the future.

Cheers.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Scott Malbon:
But also see page 5 re restraints. They are talking about requiring 6 or 7 point systems beginning Jan 07.
Scott

---

Hmm... Think about all of those folks scrambling around trying to buy a new harness because theirs SUDDENLY expired early. It looks like a lot of them are throwing down extra bucks to go with the 4 or 5 year FIA belts. And now they're going to be told they can't use them past 2006??? Nice, real nice. What's next? Require us all to get new seats?? Maybe make everyone install a different cage. Oooh, how about making us reinstall all of the factory interior stuff and make it all work again (did you save the floor mats from your early 70's 260Z??).

Maybe I should revisit that ole "the SCCA is trying to screw us" thread....

------------------
-Scott Gallimore
-ITC #88 Pulsar

Maybe I don't read close enough but...

Why does it seem like all the safty stuff is related to Road Racing when it should be related to Rally Cars... Isn't that where everyone gets hurt??? Cars are as fast if not faster and their is a lot more stuff to hit. One of our crew members bought a well prepped G2 Rally Car a couple weeks ago, I feel much safer in my Audi.

Is their a list somplace of injuries and the causes of them for all of SCCA... I think it would be interesting to look at. I wonder if it is looked at by the BOD or if they do things based on media/gossip/manufacturer $$$?

If we have to be this safe, can we start hitting each other... we will need to test this stuff somehow... I have extra shells!!!

Raymond 'anoyed, can you tell" Blethen

PS: I am not against safe racing, I am an advocate, always have been. Safety is first, but I think it is time to prove the need to continue increasing the requirements. I don't see a problem with making recomendations, however their needs to be a line on requirements. We need to justify to someone who wants to play 2 times a year, otherwise we will continue to market ourselves out of the economy... What will happen if we really have recession???

I don't have the actual per-mile figures for injuries and fatalities but I would be surprised if rallying were significantly more dangerous in those terms than is road racing.

There was a movement a few years ago to demand that rally entrants file incident reports for every off because the data suggested that a huge percentage of crashes had really bad outcomes. The problem was actually that only the really bad ones were written off and that hundreds and hundreds of rally crashes resulted in no injury whatsoever.

I am the rare co-driver that never had a real crash (thanks, Todd) but evidence suggests that forests are actually pretty good at attenuating kinetic energy. Particularly in northwest tree farming territory, stands of small evergreens (less than 3" in diameter) damage a car less than the typical tire wall.

K

Quote:

---

but evidence suggests that forests are actually pretty good at attenuating kinetic energy. Particularly in northwest tree farming territory, stands of small evergreens (less than 3" in diameter) damage a car less than the typical tire wall.

K[/B]

---

I've done them both, that is a stand of trees and a concrete wall. http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/redface.gif Wall wins hands down in my book.

Rick

Having been involved in both, (road racing as a Driver and a Performance Rally Crew Chief). I believe more recent safety related changes have been made with the Rally cars. I'd like to see everyone in full face helmets. A big rock or tree branch through a window might ruin your afternoon.

Just as some tracks are safer than others, some rally stages are safer than others. Little baby trees probably do a good job of scrubbing energy at a more comfortable speed. The bottom of a mountain at Rim probably not so good. Given the option I would choose a wall versus a big tree anyday. My mind invisions deflecting at some angle off the wall vs. the car wrapping around a big tree.

I will be co-driving for the first time next weekend (our regular co-driver needed to be air lifted out of Prescott Rally and isn't able to co-drive yet). This particular Rally is in the Nevada Desert, shouldn't be any trees or walls to hit. None the less, I feel very safe in a road race car (even a FF), and vulnerable in the rally car. Something about getting whacked by tool boxes, heavy spare tire, first aid kits, SCCA mandated spill kits, etc. Too much stuff in that car!! It's all "secured" during normal situations, just not certain how secure they will remain in a sudden stop.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Scott Malbon:
But also see page 5 re restraints. They are talking about requiring 6 or 7 point systems beginning Jan 07.

Scott

---

Here is the proverbial never a dumb question.

I can't be the only person who is wondering where the seventh point is located. Is it a sternum latch?

I haven't been able to find any mfg info while searching out 7 point systems.

Rick

7-point system: http://www.impactraceproducts.com/tab.wws?...straint_systems

Think of a cross between a 5-point and a 6-point....

In essence, take a 6-point harness and add the sub-strap from a 5-point.

Jarrod

7 point? Seems to kind of ruin the idea having some room to breath so to speak.

I started in FVee and have though about running a 6 point in my ITS, but I don't see any seats that seem to be set up for a 6 point to work like it is suppose to. Anyone modified a seat for this or found one already set up?

Jeff
'71 240Z

Willans recommends running the double crotch belts under your legs and back through the lap holes, around the insides of your thighs like a climbing harness. I have never been particularly comfortable in anything else.

The "loop and D-ring" type do this really well. The "T" or "Y" type double crotch belts are pretty good, too. I have the latter, with the turnbuckle fixed to the crotch belts for quick driver changes.

K