IT Fuel Cell Requirements?

[Ryan Williams]

An Improved Touring car can use the factory gas tank; however if a fuel cell is installed, that fuel cell must meet the stated GCR fuel cell FIA specifications.

I know it sounds like a "Catch-22" but if a fuel cell is used, then it must comply to the specified rule.

[dickita15]

I am sorry I disagree. The GCR in the general section states:
All cars must be equipped with a safety fuel cell complying with these specifications, except for Showroom Stock, Touring, Spec Miata, and Improved Touring. All safety fuel cells shall be constructed and certified in accordance with the FIA FT-3 or higher (FT-3.5, FT-5, etc.) specifications. All safety fuel cells shall consist of a foam-filled fuel bladder enclosed in a metal container at minimum.

So according to this the specifications in this paragraph do not apply to IT.

And then in the IT section:
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.

I use a Jaz cell.

[Greg Amy]

Hoo-boy, this is interesting...I agree with Ryan. Here's the line again:

All cars must be equipped with a safety fuel cell complying with these specifications, except for Showroom Stock, Touring, Spec Miata, and Improved Touring.

Here's where the conflict arises: Ryan (and I) read these lines to mean:

All cars must be equipped with a safety fuel cell, except for Showroom Stock, Touring, Spec Miata, and Improved Touring. If installed it must meet these specs.

Here's how Dick reads that line:

A safety fuel cell, if installed, must with these specifications, except for Showroom Stock, Touring, Spec Miata, and Improved Touring.

Frankly, I believe the intent is that cells are optional in Improved Touring, but if installed must comply with the specs. This falls in line with prior "safety" related issues, in that safety equipment must meet specific specifications, such as harnesses, seats, suits, helmets, window nets, ad nausea. In fact, the only "safety" equipment that is allowed but not required to meet any sort of spec is head and neck restraints, and those are not even (yet) specifically called out in the GCR. I can't imagine SCCA calling for a piece of safety equipment and not requiring it meet a spec.

Didn't we have this debate some time back? I seem to recall this, and I also seem to recall being convinced to a position in opposition to what I am writing above...maybe someone can do a search and find it...?

Greg

[Greg Amy]

Yup, here it is. We didn't resolve it back then, either, just Dick and I agreeing to disagree, and tossing it over to someone else to work out...

https://improvedtouring.com...ight=fuel+cell

[Greg Amy]

By the way, I pulled up a copy of the 2004 GCR. The rules for IT are effectively the same, but referred the reader to TWO sections of the GCR, 17.12 and 19.

17.12 was pretty much the same as the current one and had that same verbiage, "All cars shall be equipped with a fuel cell complying with specifications according to GCR Section 19., except Showroom Stock, Touring and Improved Touring cars."

19, however, was a complete discrete section of the GCR detailing how a fuel cell was to be constructed and installed. It started with:

All safety fuel cells shall be constructed and certified in accordance with the FIA FT-3 specifications. Where safety fuel cells are required in SCCA Competition, all safety fuel cells shall consist of a foam-filled fuel bladder enclosed in a metal container at minimum.

In order to comply with the ITCS you had to comply with GCR 19, and while there were no expressed exclusions for IT cars, there are still those "where safety fuel cells are required" weasel words...

I still can't imagine SCCA allowing a safety item in a car and not requiring it to meet a spec, but it's certainly vague enough to make one go ...

[dickita15]

I still can't imagine SCCA allowing a safety item in a car and not requiring it to meet a spec, but it's certainly vague enough to make one go ...

such as optional tubes in a roll cage not having to be of a minimum size?

I guess the best advice is from the other thread. make sure the guy who is going to inspect your car will pass it. In this part of the country the practice agrees with my interpretation. YMMV

[Andy Bettencourt]

I agree with Greg on this one.

My read: Certain classes HAVE to have a cell and that cell must meet FIA spec.

Certain classes a cell is optional - but if installed, that cell is not exempt from spec. "All cells shall be constructed...".

It doesn't make sense to me that certain classes can have 'sub-spec' cells. IMHO.