August FasTrack is out

Well, it appears everyone has been quite busy:

http://www.scca.org/_Filelibrary/File/04-0...08-fastrack.pdf



------------------
Bill
Planet 6 Racing
bill (at) planet6racing (dot) com

Indeed!

Did you notice the rationale behind allowing remote reservoir shocks in American Sedan? These implications can apply to us as well. Granted, we're not ready to breach that discussion again quite yet, but the writing is on the wall...

message recalled

[This message has been edited by Tom Donnelly (edited June 22, 2004).]

For the Isaac users, what does this little tidbit mean (page 12, Member Advisories):
-----------------------------------
GCR
Item 1. There seems to be some confusion
amongst competitors and Scrutineers
regarding the requirement for all driver
restraint devices to be able to be released
by a single action. The Club Racing Board
would like to clarify that all safety devices
(including head and neck restraints), per
GCR Section 20.4, shall free the driver
from their belts and the car with a single
point of release.
--------------------------

Originally posted by planet6racing:
Well, it appears everyone has been quite busy:

Click to expand...

Actually, a lot of this is being restated from the previous months in-order to prepare for the BoD final approvals at their November meeting...

Now would be a REALLY good time to let your BoD members know how you feel about many of these items... ESPECIALLY if you want them to be approved...



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX

Originally posted by Tobey:
For the Isaac users, what does this little tidbit mean (page 12, Member Advisories):

Click to expand...

My initial reaction?? It means that an arguably better device has been "dumbed" out of legality..

Further research needed.

Isaac
Isaac
Isaac...

(thats the Gregg Baker alert sound)

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

Well if that is what is coming down to (ISAAC not legal because it has two points of release) I won't be racing with SCCA. Simple as that. There are other playgrounds that will welcome me.

If the SCCA is trying to prevent someone from utilizing a device that takes 18 steps to release it, I understand....Let's have a list of approved devices instead of a blanket statement dictating their design.

Many people get upset when the SCCA dictates that they improve their safety equipment above what that person feels is adequate. But what about when they won't let us utilize devices that are better than the minimum required????

I haven't received that issue yet, at what stage is this rule?

Originally posted by Quickshoe:
Well if that is what is coming down to (ISAAC not legal because it has two points of release) I won't be racing with SCCA. Simple as that. There are other playgrounds that will welcome me.

Click to expand...

I'll be joining you.

I just keep getting screwed by the SCCA when it comes to safety. I buy a car with belts that are supposed to have some life left in them and then find out I have to buy new belts because the rule changed. I go out and buy new FIA belts and then find out a month later that the new belts I just bought have one too few attachment points because the rule changed... again. I go out and buy a head restraint to save my neck after too close of a call, only to now find out that because I didn't buy from the manufacturer that appears to be greasing a few palms, I can no longer use it because of an extra step.

Heres an idea... Educate the workers on the head restraints available and require a sticker on the vehicle for the type of head restraint used. That way the workers will know what they'll have to do before they even get to the car. Seems to work for fire retardant and the kill switch.

Now, when is NASA going to move into the Midwest? COMMA down at Hallett is looking better and better even though it's a 6 hr tow.


------------------
Scott Rhea
It's not what you build...
it's how you build it

Izzy's Custom Cages

[This message has been edited by Speed Raycer (edited June 22, 2004).]

Now they have gone too far!!
Take a look at page 18, Item 1:
"Top heavy noveliy vehicles, such as motorized bar stools, are not permitted"

Yes, they are banned from Solo II competion.
I am sure they will be banned from club racing next!!!!
******************************************
Rodney Williamson
#93 IT7
www.titaniummotorsports.com

Anyone else catch the HUGE section describing legal harnesses? No more 5-point after 2007, and pretty detailed descriptions of how to mount everything...



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Renton, WA
ITS '97 240SX

Well, at least with the harnesses, there is a 3 year lead, which shouldn't catch anyone before theirs is up for replacement, so I'm OK with that.

I have an idea of a way around this Isaac issue, but I'll let Gregg Baker give it the okie dokie first.

The idea about training and stickers is a great one. I have run just such stickers ("Isaac Equipped") since I started wearing the Isaac, (a rule requiring such is currently being discussed) and this spring, we did a workers meeting at lunch (At Lime Rock) where we went over the various H&N restraints with them on and hooked up. Kathy Barnes, just off her term as Area 1 Director, happened to be there, called Topeka and flashed me the thumbs up indicating the approval of headquarters. She later indicated they were very supportive.

We plan another such a demonstration at an upcoming event at NHIS, to show a new batch of workers the ins and outs.

Finally, a comment that was made to me by a worker rang true. "Hey if I can't find it (the release) right away, I pull out this" And he showed me his knife that slides between you and your straps...then poof! No straps! So, in the event of difficulty, the Isaac is out in a slice anyway....

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited June 23, 2004).]

You know, reading this, I think they mean that when you undo your belts, the H&N has to come off too. (As opposed to pulling ONE pin on a H&N, in addition to the belts...)

The Club Racing Board
would like to clarify that all safety devices
(including head and neck restraints ), per
GCR Section 20.4, shall free the driver
from their belts and the car with a single
point of release.

Click to expand...

What they didn't say, and where the rule's logic falls on its face is that the window net (it IS, after all, a driver restraint, no??) has to be released with that same "single release".....

(not to mention arm restraints, internal nets, etc.)

Thoughts?????


------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited June 23, 2004).]

Originally posted by lateapex911:
Finally, a comment that was made to me by a worker rang true. "Hey if I can't find it (the release) right away, I pull out this" And he showed me his knife that slides between you and your straps...then poof! No straps!

Click to expand...

As one of my instructors as a corner worker said: "Honey, if you can't figure out the releases, cut every strap you see ... he'll (the driver will) come out!".

------------------
Doug "Lefty" Franklin
NutDriver Racing

I think every track/area should do the demo thingy for the head restraints, belts ,window nets.... blah blah blah I'd be willing to help!! we currently use the hutchens device...mike g.

Scot--The belts change was in the works for some time. Don't blame SCCA for that one--The FIA apparantly demonstrated the superiority of the 6 and 7 point system. Other sanction bodies will likewise be going to that standard too.

IT Miata hardtops will be optional from Jan. '05.

------------------
Ony Anglade
ITA Miata
Sugar Hill, GA

"Actually, a lot of this is being restated from the previous months in-order to prepare for the BoD final approvals at their November meeting..."

November meeting? Thought these items were going to be voted on in August. Just trying to determine how long I have to wait to find out the primary answer I'm waiting for (as well as a few others).

Yeah, I dropped Gregg Baker a line as an FYI... apparently they've been trying to work with Topeka for a little while to clarify the rule. Perhaps this is a bit of a blindside to him as well. Certainly is BS IMO since there's no discussion about radio leads, drink tubes, etc.

As for NASA in the Midwest - working on it. And I agree, if this is what Topeka's gonna do, I have further reduced motivation to continue to play in IT, even if I can get the proposed drop to ITB. Gotta be safe, even more important than being competitive!

------------------
Vaughan Scott
Detroit Region #280052
'79 924 #77 ITA/GTS1
www.vaughanscott.com

Jake asked for "thoughts". Here's mine; The phrase "shall free the driver from their belts and the car with a single
point of release" would not apply to a HANS device at all.

Because.... restated it says 'shall free the driver from A & B'. OR, 'shall free the driver from A and free the driver from B'.

A) "their belts" (to me at least) refers to the 5/6-point harness.

"the car" is, well... the car. A HANS device does not attach you to the car, it attaches your helmet to another part of you.

As others have already pointed out, this technically DOES apply to radio hookups and (depending on whether you clip the tube to your suit) camel-backs, since they do (technically) attach you to the car. On the other hand, a window net does not attach you to the car, it just impedes your path out. Another clarification is probably necessary here.

For the benefit of those less informed (me) would someone please explain how the Isaac system works? I've never seen one. Thanks!

------------------
Mike Spencer
NC Region
ITA/7 RX-7 almost In-Garage
1990 RX-7 Convertible In-Driveway