I decided to send in a request to remove/replace wires in IT cars

shwah

shwah

New member
I am sure there are divided opinions on this. The request is pasted below. What do folks think?

Request Details

Title: Allow replacement wiring
Category: IT
Class: IT
Car: none
Request: Please provide an allowance to remove or replace wires and connectors in vehicle and engine wiring harnesses. Prohibit the addition of any functional current/signal path that was not present in the OEM system (you cannot run a new wire path that wasn't already there unless it is already permitted within the rules), in respect of the principles of the class.

The reason for my request is just a basic desire to simplify repair and maintenance of the race car.

While I am aware that there may be some cases where a car could loose some amount of weight through re-wiring, I struggle to convince myself that this could account for more than one or two dozen pounds. Personally as a competitor I don't mind one bit if every other racer in my class is able to achieve minimum specified weight - that would only make the racing more competitive and thus enjoyable. Considering that most oem wiring is routed along the floor and/or frame rails, I am not even convinced that loosing a few pounds there is an advantage vis a vis weight distribution.

As car builders and maintainers we would appreciate the opportunity to clean up the appearance and servicability of our race cars when we encounter a wiring failure or decide to take advantage of an allowance such as installing a replacement ecu. Please allow us to do so.

thank you,
Chris Schaafsma

letter number #3799
 
I add wires and cut off ends of the fuel pump circuit, and ignition drive. Anything that makes the car run more often should be legal, IMHO. MM
 
Chris: I appreciate your effort, and agree with your request. I fear, however, that you will probably receive the same answer that I received when I requested that we be allowed to add small plates to allow us to jack our 25+ year old cars safely - 'the rules are adequate as written.'
 
how does this make the class better if there is already an allowance to remove an old crusty wire (or entire harness) and replace with a new one?
 
Chris,

i am glad you brought up the subject of wiring. i meant to start a thread to ask about what to do with wires that might end up "hot" due to allowed mods.

There is this section in the rules:


Gauges and instruments may be added, replaced, or removed.
Click to expand...

as well as this part:


f. Carpets, center consoles, floor mats, headliners, sun roof liner and frame, dome lights, grab handles, and their insulating, attaching or operating mechanisms may be removed.​
Click to expand...

so i can remove the dome light but not the wires to it. or i can remove a gauge but not the wires to it.

i removed the dome light and crap when i removed my sunroof mechanism, etc. i coiled up the wires leading to the dome light and zipped it to the roll cage. but typically the dome light does not have its own fuse and so when the door opens, the lead to the light is "hot."

so some wires are "hot" because of allowable mods and i taped it off. i would much rather pull the wires back to the source.

sorry to bend the thread but i think there is more to the issue of removing wires than the engine harness.

tom
 
Can you snip the hot wire way back in the harness and insulate it? The wire's still there but no current.
Would that work?
 
tom91ita said:
Chris,

i am glad you brought up the subject of wiring. i meant to start a thread to ask about what to do with wires that might end up "hot" due to allowed mods.

so i can remove the dome light but not the wires to it. or i can remove a gauge but not the wires to it.

i removed the dome light and crap when i removed my sunroof mechanism, etc. i coiled up the wires leading to the dome light and zipped it to the roll cage. but typically the dome light does not have its own fuse and so when the door opens, the lead to the light is "hot."

so some wires are "hot" because of allowable mods and i taped it off. i would much rather pull the wires back to the source.
Click to expand...

I wondered the same thing myself since I've got a hot dome light wire going to the windshield header. Maybe I should pull it back through it's routing and coil it up at the source. But at some point someone needs to take a look at the rules and clean up the ridiculous ones like this.

And I thought jacking plates were not illegal?
 
what i think is ridiculous is people who drive race cars, which require fire systems/extinguishers, extensive roll cages, nomex, specialty helmets and restraint systems, etc. trying to sell an exposed dome light wire as a safety issue that cannot be dealt with other making wholesale changes to the rules.

:rolleyes:
 
GTIspirit said:
And I thought jacking plates were not illegal?
Click to expand...

Depends on how they are done. The ones on my car are completely legal and very functional. The ones I've see on other RX-7s are chassis stiffeners.

(Shhh, look the other way, wink wink, nudge nudge. it's one of them geo-graph-ical deals. ;)
 
tnord said:
what i think is ridiculous is people who drive race cars, which require fire systems/extinguishers, extensive roll cages, nomex, specialty helmets and restraint systems, etc. trying to sell an exposed dome light wire as a safety issue that cannot be dealt with other making wholesale changes to the rules.

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

With all due respect I hope you know that this response represents your opinion on behalf of the ITAC. Your on the ITAC that will review that exact letter and you get a chance to vote with your peers on it. Being disrespectful to the membership that YOU represent is ridiculous. This comment that you made is completely useless and has no valuable input on the discussion that the original poster created. I really hope your going to have more input when fulfilling your commitment to represent me and the other "ridiculous " people that are involved in the IT classes.

Stephen

PS: Wholesale change? Really? How long have you been IT racing, I am guessing not long...
 
Why doesn't the OP consider the wires that lead to the dome light either 'attaching', 'operating' or 'insulating' mechanisms?

I do. Probably all 3.
 
And what many think ridiculous is
tnord said:
people who drive race cars, which require fire systems/extinguishers, extensive roll cages, nomex, specialty helmets and restraint systems, etc.
Click to expand...
having to work to justify removing things that don't belong in a race car such as dome lights, OEM wiring harnesses, washer bottles, and so on.
 
Andy Bettencourt said:
Why doesn't the OP consider the wires that lead to the dome light either 'attaching', 'operating' or 'insulating' mechanisms?

I do. Probably all 3.
Click to expand...

from Webster's:

Mechanism: a mechanical contrivance; structure of a machine.
Click to expand...

to me, the section of "mechanism" can only apply to something like the sunroof as opposed to the carpet. "operating" pretty much speaks to "mechanisms" imho.

to me, "attaching" would be hardware and brackets.

"insulating" might have a far flung hope of applying because the wires are indeed insulated.

tnord, sorry to be playing the "safety" card but it was SCCA that taught me that with the periodic replacement of belts, etc.

if the consensus on the forum is wiring can be removed if the device to which the device was attached can be removed, so be it. but why not have a clear rule set to begin with.

on second thought, i think i'll pull my washer bottle as well and put 3M windoweld in my motor mounts since most here think that those rules are BS as well.

besides, the wires that i can pull because they were "attached" to the dome light are attached to the wire harness that is attached to my washer bottle, ergo, i can pull the washer bottle, right?
 
Ron Earp said:
And what many think ridiculous is having to work to justify removing things that don't belong in a race car such as dome lights, OEM wiring harnesses, washer bottles, and so on.
Click to expand...

So you're telling me my Golf isn't a race car...?

Seriously, Ron - that's just not an effective test. EVERYONE has a different perception of what a race car "should be." You want to put it out to a vote and end up with body kits and ginormous rear wings? Or let popular perception relegate anything that's over 25 years old to vintage. Or the scrapper. Yeah - THAT'S the rule we should us. Anything with carbs can't possibly be a "racing car!"

K
 
Knestis said:
So you're telling me my Golf isn't a race car...?
Click to expand...

In my opinion it be a far more serviceable race car if it was stripped to the bare essentials leaving the core components of IT which you eloquently stated in another post, basically stock suspension, stock motor/tranny/brakes, stock body, and the rest of it - have at it.

Knestis said:
Seriously, Ron - that's just not an effective test. EVERYONE has a different perception of what a race car "should be."
Click to expand...

Kirk, I realize that. I was born at night but I wasn't born last night. We all have different opinions of what IT should be and about this time every year we all start airing them out.

Knestis said:
You want to put it out to a vote and end up with body kits and ginormous rear wings?
Click to expand...

I seriously doubt that will happen. The motor mount vote indicates to me that the ITAC/CRB isn't all that interested in what the members want.

Knestis said:
Or let popular perception relegate anything that's over 25 years old to vintage.
Click to expand...

Sort of like the hot new "National-sort-of-like-IT-for-Hondas" class that everyone is talking about? That one regulates quite a few older cars out of the running.

Knestis said:
Or the scrapper. Yeah - THAT'S the rule we should us. Anything with carbs can't possibly be a "racing car!"
Click to expand...

I'm with you there. The sun is setting on the carbed cars in ITS with the open ECU rules. As it should. At some point we've got to move on.
 
I acknowledge we may hurt/ruin IT with any changes like this. But my personal view is we will ultimately improve it and help keep it vital.

We aren't going down the prod road. The biggest "change" to IT in my race career has been the Process -- which is a system designed to ensure stability, and not the opposite.

The second biggest was the ECU rule, and if there ever was creep, more like a leap really, that was it.

But beyond that, Kirk, a question for you - what has fundamentally changed about the IT rule set? And let's leave passenger seats and carpet and stuff like that out of it. What about the core stuff has changed?

In my opinion, since day one of IT, the answer is nothing. That is not true of prod.

We now have an official competitor in STU/STL that in my view is trying to woo the IT crowd.

I don't see anyone other than (and I say this with all due respect) the old guard who really wants to race racecars with dome lights and washer bottles and all of the dual purpose vestiges that serve no purpose other than as symbols of a of a conservative ruleset.

I agree it is a ruleset that has served us well, but if we don't do things that, without violating what IT is truly about, make IT more attractive to newer and new racers, the category will die. Just as if we "prod-ized" it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top