electrical wires

[Geo]

Originally posted by Harry:
George, Why wouldn't you just unplug the wiring from the radio in lieu of cutting it.

I would and did. If you reread what I wrote, it was in reference to a theft recovery and the potential of someone protesting the radio connector being cut off. Let's be real OK?

Originally posted by Harry:
It's much more dangerous to have a bunch of wires cut off than unpluged.

I would expect a reasonable person to cap such wires, but I suppose it's not safe to assume most people are reasonable. But I agree, cut wires hanging loose is unsafe. Again, please go back and reread what I wrote in the context in which it was written.

Originally posted by Harry:
When IT began they drew a line in the sand that said 1968 and up. That's the way it should stay because I have no intention of being a party to eliminating any car built for IT by moving the date up.

I haven't heard anyone say anything about moving this date up. I certainly would be against it. What I am opposed to is rewriting rules just because it's harder for older cars to find parts. Sorry. For me that doesn't fly.

Originally posted by Harry:
George, You don't belong on the ITAC if you feel exception here & there should be overlooked.

Please be more specific. If you're concerned about my reference to the radio connector being missing, I think you're a bit over the top. If it's in reference to something else, you'll have to be specific.

Originally posted by Harry:
You should stand to enforce the rules as written or make suggestions to the balance of the board the the rule should be rewritten.

I don't think there is anyone who could say I've done anything but this.

Originally posted by Harry:
I highly reccomend that ITAC find out just who seems to have the final word on the Bomp Board about IT. Because what I here is that all they want to do is keep things the way HE wants it since it's his baby.

I'm not aware there is a single person on the CB with personal final word on IT. I think you're making assumptions.

Originally posted by Harry:
This sit back and wait and see over 4 to 5 years is BS. Changes need to happen now to bring about any parity in IT.

Thank you for your input.

Originally posted by Harry:
I could start in on you George and have you wanting to kill me behind the woodshead.

I think you have started in on me. That's fine. You're not the first. You won't be the last. I accept that I will get some criticism because I do post publicly and also post my personal opinion.

Originally posted by Harry:
I started racing IT when it first started. Never in my wildest dreams did I every think a 944 would be consider a low cost car.

I'm not sure where that came from. But, I'll bet my 84 944 will be cheaper to build than most ITS cars. Sure, I could throw money at it in a big way and spend 2-3x as much, but it's not necessary.

Originally posted by Harry:
My car cost $1,990 new. No matter.

I assume your point is that IT cars are becoming more expensive. That's true. It concerns me as well. But I have to ask.... Have you bought a new road car in the last 30 years? They've become a lot more expensive too. Unless you want to require IT cars to be at least say 25 years old, no IT car is going to have been as cheap as yours to buy.

Originally posted by Harry:
Someone on the Comp Board wants to try to keep IT low cost and at the same time does give a damn about the older cars.

Yes, like the low cost E36 at $50k?

Originally posted by Harry:
They've already went too far in some areas that they cannot police.

I don't think there is anything anyone can do about the ECU issue. And once you start allowing modifications, the price really starts to climb. If you're talking about the ECU, there's not much anyone can do. If you're talking about something else, you'll have to be less general.

Originally posted by Harry:
So from what I hear you say I don't think your in favor of competition adjustments. True or false? Where exact does George stand?

Apparently you haven't been paying close attention. I've never hid my feelings on the subject. But, for the sake of clarity (and since I'm being called out)....

I was initially against comp adjustments. I feel if nothing else that there is too much disparity in drivers and prep in IT to be able to make reasonable adjustments.

Then Jake (lateapex911) suggested very limited adjustments to weight only. I like the idea in concept, but wasn't sure that box should be opened and I wasn't sure it could be done right.

Then, during one discussion, I came to believe that the rash of spec categories that are proliferating are in many ways a result of the dissatisfaction with parity within IT. I changed my position (and posted it here) that any harm from some sort of limited adjustments would be far less than the harm of people leaving IT for spec series. And that is where I stand today. I support the ITAC's "Performance Compensation Adjustment" proposal.

Originally posted by Harry:
We do know that he's ready to take my ass out behind the woodshead over the radio wires. HA HA HA (laughing)

If you protested someone because their radio connector was missing (but the wires still there), I think I would have to stand in line. That would be an awfully petty protest, don't you think?

Originally posted by Harry:
Please know.... I know you are trying to do a very difficult task on the ITAC and I respect you for all your dedication and hard work. Keep up the fight.

Thanks. I will.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

[This message has been edited by Geo (edited October 01, 2003).]

 

[planet6racing]

Can someone please post the Radio Rule for me, straight from the GCR? I can't seem to find my PDF disk. I don't remember it saying "Radio Receiver"...

I'm one of the people who believes the wires are part of the radio. Without the wires, the radio doesn't work, therefore it is part of the radio. Just like without the wires going to the washer bottle, the washer pump doesn't work (see how I did that? I got the whole washer bottle in there too!

). I don't think the 1 pound of wire from that and the speakers is going to make a lick of difference.

As for the original question, well, I'd probably just coil up the original harness, stick it in the glove box, get a painless wiring kit that will make everything work, and go racing. This is supposed to be about the fun of racing, not the "fun" of picking through every wire in a wire harness for 14 days just trying to get it right. Besides, show me where I can get pink wire with a green stripe so I can wire it the same as the factory did!

{edit} Stupid Smiles...

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

[This message has been edited by planet6racing (edited October 01, 2003).]

 

[cherokee]

Looks like I am going to clean up the fuse box and run new wire from there...kind of hard getting a dealer letter when there has not been a dealer in the US for a long time...unless you count imported for Buick. Thanks for your advice. I am still on the fence on this car now...keep the ITA car and build the "new" car for ITB or go FP... It is hard to tell intent on the printed word I am not trying to be a pain...You Can't buy any kind of wire harness for this car...and Harry you are correct you are lucky in that you have a MG you can build one from scratch with all the repro parts out there...not so with my car. If we have to hang on to the cars we have but we have to move the rules along with the times "ECU's for example" You can now chip your car and remove your rev limit fiddle with air fuel mix at any rpm and who knows what else. Where my poor old car is stuck with rear drum brakes, and a out of production Carb...seems like the new cars got a LOT more performance possibilities out of a ECU upgrade then I ever will by pulling 10lbs of old wiring....The car will still be heavy spec line wise if I could do that.

 

[planet6racing]

Cherokee:

No offense, but since you are just building your car now... No one says that you have to build this car into a race car. If there are no parts available, what are you going to do when you crash it?


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

 

[cherokee]

I would like to think of that as IF I crash it. I can make body pannels that will look good on the car. I can get A-Arms, trans, rear ends, racks, glass, even new side marker lenses...just not the &%&# wire harness. Normal wear and tear items are not an issue, as well as common mechanical parts. Someone once said of the cars "on a good day you got one made by Hans the craftsman, on a bad day one by Atilla the Hun" I have yet to meet an owner that has not had to replace the wireing...I guess everything has a week point. I got my answer it is just going to come down to the joy of building an orphan. Another on this forum said if you are building an orphan you had better love it when you start....you are going to hate it when it is over...he was real close...I still love the car, I don't care if I run dead last, It will just be too cool to see it running out there. It sounds way too cool to next to those little Hondas and VW's....Just gotta be different and thats the price you pay.

 

[eh_tony!!!]

Cherokee, You're not the only one in that boat, as there has not been a FIAT dealer in the US for quite some time as well. I am one-step better off though and at least have Linea Rossa, a fiat authorized parts provider. I would have to re-read the 'unavailable part' rule again, but I think you'd be defendable in a protest if.

1) You replaced what wiring was bad (all?) with the painless (or other) kit.
2) You kept the original harness inside the car.

Ever seen the creative interpretation of the door-glass rule?? (door glass shattered in a bag in the door).

Also, don't overlook the repair wording.
17.1.4 section D.8.h "All chassis/structural/electircal repair, if performed, shall be in concurrence with factory precedures, specifications, and dimensions. ..."

Read again... "IF PERFORMED"

Hell, you could even argue that Opel has no applicable "factory procedures" anymore. Why do I say that?? I'll bet there isn't a shop manual available from an "authorized dealer" to document those procedures.

 

[SilverHorseRacing]

Ok, let's see the rules nerds figure out this one!

Example car has been in a fire, and is being repaired. Wiring that is required to make the car function is repaired according to factory standards so far as gauge, length, etc. Ignition, fuel pump, two-way radio wiring is added as allowed. All other wires burned in fire are not replaced.

Rule states"all repairs...if performed".

Please explain how the wires have to go back. Remember, stay within the letter of the rules

------------------
-Marcello Canitano
www.SilverHorseRacing.com

[This message has been edited by SilverHorseRacing (edited October 01, 2003).]

 

[Knestis]

Choose to "perform" the repairs? You will be out of compliance if you don't do them following factory-prescribed practice: Don't do the repairs? You are out of compliance under "Modifications shall not be made unless aughorized herein" since there is no clause in the ITCS that allows you to run burned-up wiring. Two different issues, two different rules.

It makes no difference if the part burned up, fell off, got swiped, or was purposefully removed by the owner: If it ain't there but is supposed to be, it's not legal. Kind of like the mufflers that used to "fall off" when we first started trying to quite club racing cars in the early '80s.

PLEASE don't take us down the "bag of glass" road again. If the glass breaks, it must be replaced to be legal: "Shattering" is certainly an included term under "modifying"
and is not allowed by any section of the ITCS that I've seen.

Bill - We don't have the luxury of deciding whether a cheat actually makes a difference or not when deciding whether it is legal. The radio won't work without the battery either but that doesn't make the allowed removal of the radio an excuse to take IT out. Look at your own language for clues to your true intentions: You use two different nouns - "wire" and "radio" - to describe two different things, that you subsequently decide to call parts of one.

NERD

 

[SilverHorseRacing]

Originally posted by Knestis:
Choose to "perform" the repairs? You will be out of compliance if you don't do them following factory-prescribed practice: Don't do the repairs? You are out of compliance under "Modifications shall not be made unless aughorized herein" since there is no clause in the ITCS that allows you to run burned-up wiring. Two different issues, two different rules.

It makes no difference if the part burned up, fell off, got swiped, or was purposefully removed by the owner: If it ain't there but is supposed to be, it's not legal. Kind of like the mufflers that used to "fall off" when we first started trying to quite club racing cars in the early '80s.

NERD

Kirk,

Hope you're having fun with this, as am I. FWIW, I've got the horns on my car, but then again, I have tags and insurance on her too! Makes going to the shows easier.

But I digress....

Let's quote the rule, verbatim, and see what lands where...

From the 2003 GCR
8.h."All chassis/structural/electrical repair IF PERFORMED shall be in concurrence with factory procedures, specifications, and dimensions. Unless specifically authorized by the manufacturer for repair or allowed by these rules, no reinforcement, i.e. seam welding, material addition, etc. is permitted." (emphasis added by me)

Now, going back to the example I posted...the car is on track, the ignition switch in the column shorts out (common in Fords), the car burns to the ground. Driver lives to fight another day, and the chassis, mechanically, is in good shape. I have not made any UNAUTHORIZED modification. There was damage to the vehicle. The rules do not state I have to make the repair, but if I CHOOSE to, I must do it per the factory specs. Since I choose not to repair the wiring, the crumbled dust sits in the channel or what's left of the loom or whatever, and whatever wires I do choose to repair, I do per factory specs. Your analogy to mufflers don't hold water. I HAVE to meet sound control, and a "suitable" muffler "may" be required, depending on application. Ditto on the battery, since it states it must be int he original location, and of the same type and size as well. As well, if you read my original (or was it my second) post on this, the base model vehicles open up a lot of leeway in removing wiring as well, since if the car doesn't have a CD-changer in the trunk in the base model, you don't have to leave the wiring there in your optioned-out ride, since you fall under the update / backdate rule. Same for extra speakers, power locks, courtesy lighting, etc...

If we took your side of the argument to the extreme, since it "doesn't say we can, we can't"... Your horns got wet, and quit working. It didn't specifically say we could modify the horns by soaking them in a rain soaked track, so do we have to repair them? IF we don't, and the horn circuit shorts out, and burns the harness, are we making an unauthorized modification?

Can an act of God (the rain) be considered an illegal modification? How would you word the protest to that, using what rationale?

------------------
-Marcello Canitano
www.SilverHorseRacing.com

 

[Geo]

Originally posted by SilverHorseRacing:
Now, going back to the example I posted...the car is on track, the ignition switch in the column shorts out (common in Fords), the car burns to the ground. Driver lives to fight another day, and the chassis, mechanically, is in good shape. I have not made any UNAUTHORIZED modification. There was damage to the vehicle.

Well, if you choose to repair any of the loom, you must repair the entire loom or replace the entire loom. Too easy.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

 

[planet6racing]

Kirk:

I'll assume this wasn't an attack, just because I know how passionate you are.

As far as the radio/battery thing, the radio will work without the battery as long as the car is running. Sorry.

The wiring for the radio is protest proven, IIRC. I believe that was mentioned above. Reasonable people may disagree with this, but in my opinion, wiring is part of the radio (just like the knobs, lcd display, and any other part you can name).

So, now what about speakers? And, what about the spare tire? I don't see those listed specifically, but I know those are gone on all the cars I have seen... (not trying to de-rail anything, but I seriously don't see any provision for removing the spare. It is clearly pointed out in SSS, but not in the ITCS that I can find).


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

 

[Knestis]

Certainly not an attack, Bill - just the way it is. Over and over again it's been upheld that an modification beyond that allowed by the rules is illegal regardless of intent or the degree to which it provided a "competitive advantage."

On the other hand, Marcello is just being a big silly.

K

EDIT - Provision allowing removal of spare is on p. 22 of the ITCS.

[This message has been edited by Knestis (edited October 01, 2003).]

 

[Geo]

Originally posted by planet6racing:
The wiring for the radio is protest proven, IIRC. I believe that was mentioned above. Reasonable people may disagree with this, but in my opinion, wiring is part of the radio (just like the knobs, lcd display, and any other part you can name).

I hope it's not protest proven. Most cars have the same wiring harness from the factory whether or not the radio is intalled from the factory. My Sentra SE-R was delivered to me with no radio. When I went to install it, all the wiring was there of course. So, the wiring is part of the stock harness, not the radio. I'm sure there are different cases for different cars, but I'll bet this covers most.

Originally posted by planet6racing:
And, what about the spare tire? I don't see those listed specifically, but I know those are gone on all the cars I have seen... (not trying to de-rail anything, but I seriously don't see any provision for removing the spare. It is clearly pointed out in SSS, but not in the ITCS that I can find).

That's because you're not a real nerd.

ITCS, p22 (2003) 17.1.4.D.10.i: "Spare wheels and tires may be removed."



------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

 

[SilverHorseRacing]

Originally posted by Knestis:
Certainly not an attack, Bill - just the way it is. Over and over again it's been upheld that an modification beyond that allowed by the rules is illegal regardless of intent or the degree to which it provided a "competitive advantage."

On the other hand, Marcello is just being a big silly.

LOL... at least I'm not being called a big meanie-head

Just having some fun here while I decide what to do for next season...



------------------
-Marcello Canitano
www.SilverHorseRacing.com

 

[Harry]

Originally posted by Geo:
I'm on the ITAC, but do we really want to become a vintage series like Production?I'm not for forcing out the older cars, but I personally don't believe in changing the rules to keep making it easier for the older cars to comply.

George,
I haven't seen any rule changes to keep making it easier for older cars to comply. Sounds to me like you want to dump the older cars to me. My car complies and it has always been competitive. 5 championships. I could race equally an beat the Honda's in "95 & '97 when all they were only allowed is to send false readings to the ECM to lean or richen the mixture. My ITS car 280Z won three MIdiv chamionships with no EFI modifications. That was on sponsored 205-60-14's because that was as big a tire in 14" that they offered.
All you needed to stop the cheating was to watch, check & investigate and then make the punishment fit the crime. If caught you never get to race SCCA again. Screw second chances.
I'll reply to you later to explain more and apoligize for not reading the sentence after the woodshead paragraph.
George I've been protested for some really small crap that only dealt with additional safety for myself or one of my drivers.
I've seen cars in the last few races that the builder couldn't have possibably read the GCR or ITCS rules because the car was so illegal it was patheic. I could see 20 plus items the instant I viewed the car.
My problem with you is that you think gray.When rules are black and white. The little crap doesn't matter and your give the impression that it's ok if it's nothing big. The car that had 20 plus little things wrong added up would make a difference.
I don't go around protesting anyone but if I don't police my own class and share my opinion with the other competitors then nothing gets fixed. I date back to the original ARRC's of'67 '68 & '69 and I've been consantly working to improve the rules.
They took back steps on coatings and high dollar shocks. Allowing the ECU rule was what I was refering to an it needs reversing. Like I said above make the penalty fit the crime and most of the cheating will disappear. I have enough feedback from the Comp. Board to know we have leaders & a few sheep.
More Later,
Harry



[This message has been edited by Harry (edited October 02, 2003).]

 

[Geo]

Originally posted by Harry:
George,
I haven't seen any rule changes to keep making it easier for older cars to comply. Sounds to me like you want to dump the older cars to me.

Harry, this is the kind of crap that starts out of a misunderstanding, gets perpetuated, and eventually gets further twisted and retold incorrectly to the point where people complain about those who volunteer in the SCCA and say all sorts of things about them that are not true.

I personally have no interest in dumping older cars. For God's sake, my car is already 19 years old. It's only approximate 5 years newer than yours. You've misread me and perhaps are a bit sensitive to this issue (and I can understand why) and I think it has become a self fulfilling prophesy for you now. Please don't put a label on me that doesn't belong.

The issue I addressed was making allowances for older cars, and specifically it was in reference to the wiring harness and not requiring a full and correct harness. Sorry, but in that case I make no allowances and if you (in the global sense, not you specifically) are not willing to repair or replace your harness, don't ask the CB (or your competitors) to make allowances for you. Fix it or move on to a newer car that has parts available. If you reread what I wrote, you will find this to be what I addressed and was trying to say with the exception of the comment about protesting someone for a radio connector (not wires) being missing. I mean, that would be stupid IMHO - especially since those are often cut to install aftermarket radios and in the case of theft recovery, theives usually simply cut the wires to remove a radio.

I DO NOT WISH TO DUMP OLDER CARS. I SIMPLY WISH NOT TO MAKE ALLOWANCES BECAUSE PARTS MAY BE SCARCE. End of story.

Originally posted by Harry:
All you needed to stop the cheating was to watch, check & investigate and then make the punishment fit the crime. If caught you never get to race SCCA again. Screw second chances.

That's a bit Draconian, don't you think? I mean, a lot of people have trouble reading the rule book. Furthermore, there is grey in the rules. As the GCR says "reasonable people can disagree."

Originally posted by Harry:
I've seen cars in the last few races that the builder couldn't read the GCR or ITCS rules because the car was so illegal it was patheic. I could see 20 plus items the instant I viewed the car.

I know exactly what you mean. At one race last year we were on the grid and looked at the car next to us and could see at least half a dozen illegal items without really even looking.

Originally posted by Harry:
My problem with you is that you think gray. When rules are black and white.

1) Please be more specific

2) The rules in many cases are grey. Let me clarify, in many cases the rules are not specific enough.

Furthermore, there are those who spend time trying to figure out the intent of the rules. Once the rule is written, intent has zero meaning beyond what is in black and white. Unintended consequences occur. That is not the competitor's problem. It's up to the rules makers to write clear rules that say exactly what they intended. I've said this several times in ITAC discussions.

I believe the rulebook is not your enemy, but your friend. It tells you exactly what is allowed. And if it says you can, you bloody well can.

That said, yes, I look for every loophole and open door the rules makers left in the rulebook. That is not unsporting. That is being competitive. If it says I can, I can, whether or not it was intended. Again, if you would like to discuss specifics, I would be happy to.

Originally posted by Harry:
The little crap doesn't matter and your give the impression that it's ok if it's nothing big.

I have no idea where you got this impression of me. Illegal is illegal. I may not protest someone, but it doesn't mean I think it's OK. Again, you'll have to be specific. I think you are way off base. Again, unless you think it's cool to protest someone for a radio connector being missing.

Originally posted by Harry:
I don't go around protesting anyone but if I don't police my own class and share my opinion with the other competitors then nothing gets fixed.

Harry, I couldn't agree more.

Again, I don't know where or how you got these impressions, but I suspect it's from misreading some things and then creating a self fulfilling prophesy about me somehow. If you want to accuse me of something, you'll have to be more specific, because the things you've said are off base.


------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com

[This message has been edited by Geo (edited October 02, 2003).]

 

[cherokee]

Wow guys...I did not mean for this to get so heated...I was thinking it was a little gray also so wanted to see what everyone was thinking on this. When I read the rules I saw the "IF" in there and was thinking I did not have to fix it...I will just snip the wires so I don't turn into a crispy critter. I want to have the lights there..what if I want to run an enduro. We all can agree that our cars are always works in progress, lights may not be the first thing installed but they will get there. Silverhorse has my situation understood, anyone who has been around Opels know about the GT and the front head light wireing. I did find a aftermarket loom for the firewall forward...it is not factory...uses bigger wires to fix some problems. I was thinking that this was out because of the wire size changes from factory. There has got to be someone that can say yes you can or no you can't...forgive me I am in my first season. I was thinking that if someone protested you that was a VERY bad thing and was wanting to do everything I could to prevent that.

 

[Ascona1973]

Cherokee, the GT front harness is not all that tough to make. Figure about 8 hours to remove the OEM front harness, make a new one from scratch, and re-install. I use SXL wire, it takes the heat better, and you don't need to change/increase the wire size. The OEM wire was not German, but rather French-made, and was covered in natural rubber. As you know, the insulation completely crumbles and falls off leaving bundles of exposed copper....

Bob

 

[RSTPerformance]

"So, now what about speakers? And, what about the spare tire? I don't see those listed specifically, but I know those are gone on all the cars I have seen... (not trying to de-rail anything, but I seriously don't see any provision for removing the spare. It is clearly pointed out in SSS, but not in the ITCS that I can find)." (Bill)

LOL I was skimming this thread and saw this and it quickly reminded me of getting my anual tech this year... we run the Audi's with our spare tires (no, they are not lead filed

)as the cars are so close to their minimum weight (we also like to add as much weight to the back as possible as we struggle having our engines mounted infront of the front wheels).

Anyway we were questioned as to if it was legal to run with our spare tires!!!

I thought it was funny

Raymond "no need to worry about a flat" Blethen

 

[cherokee]

Yea..I know I can remake it, and thats what I am going to do...The one that OGTS sells has larger wires to take modern lights that pull more amps and that kind of thing. I am Going to just snip it and re-run it with factory size wire...but my question kinda still stands...the turn signals are below the bumper, they have to go what about the wires? I am of the mind now that I will just re-run everything even for the external voltage reg. that I know I can replace. But for the sake of argument this has been fun...what else am I going to do while the car is at the painters. Its going to be soooo cool silver with a black stripe, just like the electric GT.