ITR legality question about hub.

[Bill Miller]

Whatever it takes Joe. Bottom line is, self-policing doesn't work. And when you have fiascos like "A Protest Story", it makes you scratch your head and wonder, even if you think you have an airtight case. And it shouldn't be up to the racers to enforce the rules. Or, if you're going to do it that way, let the protest be heard by a panel of racers, not officials.

[lateapex911]

Whatever it takes Joe. Bottom line is, self-policing doesn't work. And when you have fiascos like "A Protest Story", it makes you scratch your head and wonder, even if you think you have an airtight case. And it shouldn't be up to the racers to enforce the rules. Or, if you're going to do it that way, let the protest be heard by a panel of racers, not officials. [/b]

I'm not sure I'm completely comforatable with the racers as judge and jury approach. Sure, some would be great. Others though, jeeez. We'd miss the "justice" mark by a wide margin. Just read some of the opinions here. Lots of racers wouldn't even accept the position...not enough time.

Protesting takes time, and working a protest can be a full time job for a few days for a few officials.

Remember, we don't pay stewards to officiate, at least not enough that they actually make money. (i know Matt-berg (I'm sure he has an netbot set to search his name, LOL) will be swooping in here citing facts and figures to show how being a steward in SCCA is actually a very profitable retirement plan, but I digress...)

I think the system can work.....BUT..like any muscle in our body, it requires exercise.

[JohnRW]

Remember, we don't pay stewards to officiate, at least not enough that they actually make money. (i know Matt-berg (I'm sure he has an netbot set to search his name, LOL) will be swooping in here citing facts and figures to show how being a steward in SCCA is actually a very profitable retirement plan, but I digress...)
[/b]

Let me assure you, despite what the racing sociopaths might claim, that being an SCCA Steward is a totally negative-sum proposition. I've yet to find the funded retirement plan, the clothing allowance and the keys to the shrimp-mobile. I can race a Regional at Nelson Ledges for about $100 more than it costs me to be a Steward at LRP for a weekend (fuel + tolls + motel + entry fee). Really.

[JeffYoung]

I was wondering if some of you guys with Nationals experience could chime in on a question I have.

For me, the group of ITS drivers in the SEDiv is generally a very good bunch, we all know each other for the most part, and we are all probably loathe to protest anything unless it is just obviously and blatantly illegal. In fact, I'm not aware of a mechanical protest of any type since I started in 03.

Is it different on the National level? With guys traveling more, and I guess at least on teh surface higher "stakes" are there more protests? Are people more willing to do it?

I guess the point I am driving at is that perhaps the regional culture, while very competitive, is perhaps more club like resulting in less protests?

[Joe Harlan]

Nope Jeff, not much different except in SS classes.

[x-ring]

Well, Jeff, I've been working Tech for a few years; I only work Nationals (if its a Regional I race), and I'm still waiting to see the first mechanical protest (other than at the Runoffs) from a competitor.

OTOH, I have had a lot of people come up to me and whisper in my ear that I should have a look at so-and-so's car, because he's clearly cheating. Bull$hit. I don't do witch hunts. Need a pen? Here you go. I've got forms, too. Wanna use my table and GCR while you write that up? Help yourself.

Is anybody aware that the items that will be checked in impound are (or are supposed to be, anyway) agreed to by the chief of tech and the chief steward before the first car hits the track Saturday morning?

That isn't to say that, as an official, I can't write that paper myself, for any infraction I see. But tell me, why would I, if that person's fellow competitors don't care? Around here anyway, tech is usually pretty short staffed; rarely are there more than two scrutineers working. The only thing I've ever written up are things that I come across, in the course of checking something else, that normally couldn't be seen by another competitor. Something I see while I have it apart, in other words.

[seckerich]

I think you hit a very important point Jeff. The people I race with are almost all good friends. We tend to overlook things unless they get out of hand. We have to resist the usual urge to "do it if everyone else is" because most did not get the "cheating memo" and are getting screwed. It is almost always handled over a beer with a gentle reminder to get it fixed by the next race. After that I will write paper on blatant cheating. I am sure I am part of the problem because I only pay attention as a driver to those that are beating me. As a scrutineer it is different because it is my job to look at everything.
Check is always the same either way.

[Greg Amy]

Nope Jeff, not much different except in SS classes.[/b]

+1. Same-ole, same-ole, different letters on the side of the cars. That's why I get such a giggle when folks get a hard-on to go National racing...

JohnRW, you're my Internet hero. You know that, right...?

[Joe Harlan]

Well, Jeff, I've been working Tech for a few years; I only work Nationals (if its a Regional I race), and I'm still waiting to see the first mechanical protest (other than at the Runoffs) from a competitor.

OTOH, I have had a lot of people come up to me and whisper in my ear that I should have a look at so-and-so's car, because he's clearly cheating. Bull$hit. I don't do witch hunts. Need a pen? Here you go. I've got forms, too. Wanna use my table and GCR while you write that up? Help yourself.

Is anybody aware that the items that will be checked in impound are (or are supposed to be, anyway) agreed to by the chief of tech and the chief steward before the first car hits the track Saturday morning?

That isn't to say that, as an official, I can't write that paper myself, for any infraction I see. But tell me, why would I, if that person's fellow competitors don't care? Around here anyway, tech is usually pretty short staffed; rarely are there more than two scrutineers working. The only thing I've ever written up are things that I come across, in the course of checking something else, that normally couldn't be seen by another competitor. Something I see while I have it apart, in other words.
[/b]

You would and you should ty because even as a volunteer you should know your stuff better than most competitors. If you are not willing to write paper then (as I have done) a friendly chat about the item in question is always warranted. Sometimes you as a tech official get to see things other competitor may not ever see and may also not see because as you know being in competition is a whole diffferent situation than tech. I do feel it is up to all of us to enforce the rules even when it is our friends. I have friends that are customers also and they all know the deal to be in my shop. Anyways Jeff part of th problem is the bonding process (I don't have a better solution) I put together a group of guys once and gave them all the specs on a Bimmer running non-spec cams. I wrote up the paper for them and the whole deal. Once they saw the cost of the bond even though they knew they had the goods there was no will to take a chance on loosing the money.

From time to time we do need an actual witch hunt that is telegraphed all over the country. The other part of the deal should be cheaters that are caught should get more than a little slap on the hand and the parts taken away.

[x-ring]

You would and you should ty because even as a volunteer you should know your stuff better than most competitors. If you are not willing to write paper then (as I have done) a friendly chat about the item in question is always warranted. Sometimes you as a tech official get to see things other competitor may not ever see and may also not see because as you know being in competition is a whole diffferent situation than tech. I do feel it is up to all of us to enforce the rules even when it is our friends. I have friends that are customers also and they all know the deal to be in my shop. Anyways Jeff part of th problem is the bonding process (I don't have a better solution) I put together a group of guys once and gave them all the specs on a Bimmer running non-spec cams. I wrote up the paper for them and the whole deal. Once they saw the cost of the bond even though they knew they had the goods there was no will to take a chance on loosing the money. [/b]

I may have left you with the wrong impression, Joe, and rereading my post I can see why.

If I see something non-compliant on a car it has to be pretty obvious. In other words, I'm not likely to 'see' non-compliant cams on a formula ford, or an out of spec head on an SM. If, OTOH, someone has done something that's right out there in front of God and everybody, or even if it is halfway hidden and I come across it during a post race or annual inspection, they will get either a friendly word, or paper, sent their way. If it's a warning, it gets marked down in my accounts receivable column for another look later on.

What I won't do is ask a competitor for their cams on the basis of the whispered words of someone else.

[ddewhurst]

As long as the conversation is about more or less legal/illegal/questionable stuff I'll ask a question that it seems many of you along with terch inspectors shy away from.

At first time for a roll cage inspection or at anual inspection (which is to be a safety inspection) why are so many illegal roll cages given a number/book & sent on their way as A OK.

I made a similar comment in the Mazda forum with no comments from anyone. Folks, if it's illegal, IT'S ILLEGAL.

It's time for tech inspectors to note some log books with a

I have a letter that has been sent at this time & I'll bet -ya I can write the response that I'll receive because no one in offical dume wants to offend anyone or has the balls to write notes in a bunch of log books. Roll cages are something that IMHJ SHALL be to rules........................... If something as out in the open as roll cages ain't legal how the hell is anyone going to do anything about the items that can't be seen.

& now I'm off that soap box.

Happy Next year
David

[x-ring]

From time to time we do need an actual witch hunt that is telegraphed all over the country.[/b]

Talking with Jeremy and John at the runoffs, that's sort of what is planned to do with the SM compliance money, or part of it anyway. They want to get the message across that you had better have a compliant car when the team shows up, because they'll be looking.

Now, how do you spread that across all classes?

I know that when Bill P. took over as NA of Tech a few years ago, he sent a letter to the CRB telling them what he felt the problems were in the specialty. High on the list was the 'professionalism' and work ethic of the tech crews in some areas. We don't just need volunteers, we need hard working, knowlegable volunteers.

I've been to races where there was one scrutineer, and maybe one steward, working their a$$es off, just trying to get the GCR mandated items checked.

I've also been to races where the tech crew (sometimes five or more) maybe weighed the winners, checked their fire bottles, and sent them on their way. More a social event than an impound.

Fortunately, the latter is the exception rather than the rule.

So what to do about it? We have, in RMDiv, ONE regular working scrutineer who isn't also a racer. She's a pretty hard worker, and competent too, but I digress. Other than her, we're all drivers, and what other pool would we draw from? So what does it take to get drivers, who would be good working tech, to volunteer?

Send me a half dozen drivers who actually know something about their cars, not the arrive-and-drive kind please, and who are willing to work a couple of weekends per year, maybe when they aren't racing, and I can turn them into good techies.

If I had four (good) scrutineers at a race, instead of two, how much easier do you think it would be to run down some of the 'everyone is doing it, I might as well' guys?

The other part of the deal should be cheaters that are caught should get more than a little slap on the hand and the parts taken away.
[/b]

Hmm, now there's an idea...

[JohnRW]

At first time for a roll cage inspection or at anual inspection (which is to be a safety inspection) why are so many illegal roll cages given a number/book & sent on their way as A OK.

I made a similar comment in the Mazda forum with no comments from anyone. Folks, if it's illegal, IT'S ILLEGAL.[/b]

OK...you've made these same comments in several places, and gotten no traction. There are are several licensed scrutineers who frequent IT.com, and several others (like me) who have passed the written SCCA-SFI (gasp) Technical Inspector exam. And (tah-dah !) there are a bunch of people here who have SM's. Hell...even I've got one.

Sooooo....what is it that you're seeing that screams "ILLEGAL" to you ? Forward hoop members welded thru the dash tube ? OK...we know now that is illegal. Missing door bars ? Cut out convertible top mounting points ? What ?

Greg - you wanna see me in tights ? Oh....I guess you didn't say "super-hero", did you ?

[lateapex911]

Greg - you wanna see me in tights ? Oh....I guess you didn't say "super-hero", did you ? [/b]

Ackkk.......althouuuuuuggghhh...............you might bear a slight resemblence to Clark kent due to the glasses...


(leave the tights at home, thankyou...)

[Crashtest]

Hey everyone I just wanted to say thank you for all your input on this and the GCR as a whole.

I am going to be trying to get more info on the hubs and take it from there.
worst case I will just use that set of stock ones I have coming.

O an Happy New Year!!!

[ddewhurst]

***Sooooo....what is it that you're seeing that screams "ILLEGAL" to you ?***

JohnRW, when someone fabs a roll cage & in the process tourches out the welded in chassis box members that attach between the "A" pillar & the cowel IMHU of the rule that's ILLEGAL. There are other items that are modified when implementing this particular over the counter roll cage which slide down the illegal scale a bit, but still illegal. Would you like to visually know how to identify when these chassis box members have been tourched out without having to pulling the dash? Hey, I don't have an issue with people doing things to the as you call it the dash tube. The local Hall Mazda dealers part fish calls the tube a "insturment panel frame", the down load from Mazdaspeed calls the tube a "frame" & in the owners manual I can't find the tube & Mazda calls the panel a "dashboard".

Happy Next Year
David

[JohnRW]

...& in the process tourches out the welded in chassis box members that attach between the "A" pillar & the cowel IMHU of the rule that's ILLEGAL.... [/b]

What you describe, if I understand it, is illegal. Did you point this out to the Scrutineers ?

Hey, I don't have an issue with people doing things to the as you call it the dash tube. The local Hall Mazda dealers part fish calls the tube a "insturment panel frame", the down load from Mazdaspeed calls the tube a "frame" & in the owners manual I can't find the tube & Mazda calls the panel a "dashboard".
[/b]

You might not have a problem with it, but it's clearly illegal, and has been ruled so up thru the COA.

Soooo....Others did something with the cage at the cowl/downtube that you viewed as illegal. Somebody else does something with the dash bar that you view as "OK". Both are likely illegal. Sum = zero.

See how opinions can be at odds with the rules ?

[ddewhurst]

***You might not have a problem with it, but it's clearly illegal, and has been ruled so up thru the COA.***

JohnRW, after it was ruled what were the car or cars required to do because of the alledged non-compliant instrument panel frame?

JohnRW, the tourched box member issue is in many Spec Miata cars (maybe some ITA cars). My question to you is, how do WE stop cars with these illegal issues from getting a number stamped in the roll cage?

Happy Next Year
David

[JohnRW]

***You might not have a problem with it, but it's clearly illegal, and has been ruled so up thru the COA.***

JohnRW, after it was ruled what were the car or cars required to do because of the alledged non-compliant instrument panel frame? [/b]

It not just "alledged" to be non-compliant. It WAS non-compliant. They were required to saw it out, and this affected a bunch of cars. This wasn't a 'schmoe' builder, either...it was a well-respected SM builder in the NE who has been around since the birth of SM.

JohnRW, the tourched box member issue is in many Spec Miata cars (maybe some ITA cars). My question to you is, how do WE stop cars with these illegal issues from getting a number stamped in the roll cage?[/b]

Scrutineers are fallible. If you see a car that has a non-compliant cage, point it out to the Scrutineering team, or protest the car. All it takes is a pen and $25, which you will invariably get back, if your protest is "well-founded".

Opinions differ about any rules-set. You yourself would have given your "seal of approval" to one cage design that is clearly illegal. If you're an SM owner/builder and you aren't even up to speed on these items, can you really bust hard on a Scrutineer who is looking at 30+ classes of cars on a given weekend ?

[ddewhurst]

Way to go John, shove the Scrutineer job back to the other car owners. Maybe the part your not looking at is that the roll cage of each car should be closely inspected BEFORE the number is stamped into the cage. How many NEW roll cages per year will a surutineer inspect? Lets think outside the box. Maybe there is a rule or two that people use as a licence to do as they please that need some attention. What excause did this non 'schmoe' builder use to justify what he/she did? Maybe at the initial inspection a same marquee owner should be present to support the scrutineer.