rewiring rules

[Knestis]

While not on board with the specifics here, I'm going to defend Matt's right as a club member to have - and share - whatever opinions he might want.

I spent a long time arguing that there was a major hole in the IT category, at about the place where a bazillion perfectly good cars should fit, and while it didn't work out that my specific proposal was accepted, I don't think it's too much of a stretch to suggest that it might have made a difference in the long run.

K

(a do-gooder with an ego)

 

[Geo]

Originally posted by ShelbyRacer:
OK, but is that anything more than conspicuous consumption? Is there a real advantage to that (performance-wise) versus molex connectors that are well maintained?

Honestly? I don't think it's conspicuous consumption. The mil-spec connectors being used in top professional racing are vibration proof, water proof, fuel proof, etc. They are far less likely to fail. And since failing means losing, they will be used. And they will become the standard for a fully prepared IT car. It would not be a stretch to find someone paying $5k for a true race harness (they are damned expensive items). It wouldn't surprise me to find there are high performance wires out there that are super low resistance combined with light weight and that would drive up the cost. I don't think this is far fetched. We could easily find ourselves five years down the road shaking our heads and wondering how IT got where it did.

Originally posted by ShelbyRacer:
Just because it says you can, doesn't mean you "damn well" have to...

True, you don't bloody well have to (I was mis-quoted

), but people will do it and that is enough. It will become the standard by which full preparation is judged.

Originally posted by ShelbyRacer:
And I would suggest that if you think that there are not already a good number of $55k or higher IT cars, then you are being naive also...

Hehe. No. I'm not that naive. I had to pick a number and $50k is the one usually tossed around here.


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

 

[Joe Harlan]

Matt,
I will never have an issue with sharing idea's. I don't currently drive an IT car either. I do maintain 20 to 30 of them a year so I tend to have a good understanding also. My issue is just like the ECU rule when we think we are doing a good thing often times it just becomes another way to raise the bar. For you think that just because it says you can doesn't mean you have to is a little incorrect. When an allowed Mod has an advantage then everyone must have it to be competitive. Everytime we allow a little change just to make it a little easier we head more toward open rules. Sooner or later somebody says "well you did this in the past" and Bam you have another easy set of standards to fall back on.

 

[ddewhurst]

Anyone who thinks this rules CREEP a little bit at a time is ok needs to look at what Production cars were in the 60's & what Production cars are today. (They are GT cars with a frame & they wonder why no one wants to play their game.) That my friends is just what your all trying to do with your little bit of rules change at a time within IT.

Happy Newyear

David

 

[ShelbyRacer]

Originally posted by Geo:

Honestly? I don't think it's conspicuous consumption. The mil-spec connectors being used in top professional racing are vibration proof, water proof, fuel proof, etc. They are far less likely to fail. And since failing means losing, they will be used. And they will become the standard for a fully prepared IT car. It would not be a stretch to find someone paying $5k for a true race harness (they are damned expensive items). It wouldn't surprise me to find there are high performance wires out there that are super low resistance combined with light weight and that would drive up the cost. I don't think this is far fetched. We could easily find ourselves five years down the road shaking our heads and wondering how IT got where it did.

Well, I don't think it's far fetched, but what I'm questioning is the advantage. Like your query with the Motec issue, I don't think the advantage is there. Actually, I agree there is an advantage with less maintenance, BUT, that can be overcome with a little elbow grease (and some dielectric). I'm trying to put forth something where the $$$ advantage can be overcome by work. This is it. As for "low" resistance, I can start quoting conductivity numbers for copper vs. any other material, and you'd see the advantage would be essentially immeasurable. Again, the weight difference would also be nil, and we still have the whole thing I wrote in my rule about minimum AWG and "stock materials". I have a real problem with counting reliability as a "performance enhancement". Yes, you have to finish to win, but in this type of racing, the "win" isn't worth as much as knowing you outprepared, outdrove, and outwitted your "opponents". I'm sorry, but I can't feel good about getting a win against a superior car just because he/she dropped or crashed out due to a mechanical, especially one that is the fault of the rules themselves! Perhaps I'm not in the norm with that thinking, but it's the way I am.

Originally posted by Geo:

True, you don't bloody well have to (I was mis-quoted ), but people will do it and that is enough. It will become the standard by which full preparation is judged.

Sorry about the misquote... I was spending the holidays with a relative and the "damn well better" phrase was being used. Brain fart on my part

I would agree with you on the standards issue though, but see my "arguement" above.

And BTW- to all who have participated in this discussion so far, thank you very much! It has been a learning experience, and I'm very happy to see that we've gone quite far with this and it has not degraded to the level of some other threads on here.

And Phil, I do like to "do-good" when I can, and I know I have a hell of an ego (which is one of the reasons I'm a racer!). I do see your point and respect it, I just see it differently. I guess that after 7 yrs experience with SCCA, I'm still looking at it from the "new guy" standpoint, but I personally hope to stay that way for a while.

------------------
Matt Green
"Ain't nothin' improved about Improved Touring..."

 

[Geo]

Originally posted by ShelbyRacer:
Sorry about the misquote...

Oh phooey! I was teasing. Not an issue at all. In fact, the use of "bloody" in this instance translates well enough with "damn" anyhow.

Seriously, it was all in fun. Kirk was the first to write "damn" and I was having a little fun with it since I have always used "bloody" instead of "damn."

And I agree, it's nice to have adult conversations here.

FWIW, I would LOVE to find a way to change the rule to make things simpler, yet not turn into an abomination of what was intended. In this case, I think that would be most difficult, especially since I would be among the first to make a new and better harness if we left that door open even a crack.

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

 

[Geo]

Originally posted by ShelbyRacer:
I guess that after 7 yrs experience with SCCA, I'm still looking at it from the "new guy" standpoint, but I personally hope to stay that way for a while.

BTW, don't feel the least bit bad about looking at it with "beginner's eyes" as the Japanese would say. One shouldn't judge by the length of membership.

It's no secret that I'm a relative newbie to SCCA membership, but I've been around it in one way or another for over 20 years. I remember when I first heard of IT over 20 years ago and have followed it ever since and almost built a car in 86 (and kick myself for NOT doing so to this day). I've raced in other venues with other organizations since 87 and have been a board member of a kart racing club. The point is, we all have something to contribute and sometimes outside experience is a very good thing. In fact, there is an effort to break up some of the "old boys club" however real or simply preceived.

We should never be afraid of fresh ideas. Steve Johnson has brought a lot of them to the SCCA, much to the benefit of the membership. Fresh ideas are great. We just need to view how to get from concept to reality with a critical eye. IT remains one of the great successes of SCCA club racing and as such, change does not come easily. Must like porting a cylinder head, it's easier to screw it up than it is to get it right.


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

 

[Ron Earp]

Originally posted by ShelbyRacer:
I guess that after 7 yrs experience with SCCA, I'm still looking at it from the "new guy" standpoint, but I personally hope to stay that way for a while.

Matt, thanks for looking at it with a New Guy approach. I call it opened minded, but I appreciate it all the same. With any organization, the longer you are with it the more resistant you are to change. As the number of years with an organization approaches a lot, resistance to change approaches infinity.

Still nice to read comments on this thread and a somewhat civil dispute. I'm racing my car in Feburary and my solution to my particular problem is diagramed above.


------------------
Ron
http://www.gt40s.com
Lotus Turbo Esprit
Ford Lightning
RF GT40 Replica
Jensen-Healey ITS
My electrons don't care if they flow through OEM wires, do yours?

 

[Matt Rowe]

Wow,

A guy steps away from his computer for two days for holiday travel and this is what happens?

A couple of things

Dick, I would support the idea of a wiring rule change, although your original wording does open the door pretty wide. The version ShelbyRacer put forward certainly has more limits but perhaps too many to be practical. But having written a specifically worded suggestion for a rule change I hesitate to spend too much time on wording when the CRB is likely to completely rewrite as they see fit. Nevertheless, I think the current practice is not practical and does more to hinder car prep than it does to maintain any semblance of parity.

Next, for you people who drive your cars to events. How do you go out on track without being paranoid about how you are going to get home if anything happens? I spent some time running Solo I's and driving to events and was constantly worried about something breaking or ending up of course and impacted into something stationary. That was bad enough, but here you have to worry about all that plus the other people around you trying something overly optomistic. But for those of you driving your car to the track whose compromise is right? Mine to make sure you stay relatively competitive or yours to make it practical for me to prepare a car? Remember we are only racing for plastic trophies and were aren't not gauranteed to be competitive. If you don't want to go all out to prepare your car to the limit of the rules by keeping it streetable why should anyone be worried about where you finish in the running order?

$5000 for a wiring harness - yeah I can build one for that. It would be just as good as the one I built (for a different car) that was fully streetable, used all mil spec connectors (on critical components), high performance wire and still only cost me $350 in parts. Incidently that harness would take me 2 days to build, where a repair to a badly aged harness would cost $150 in parts plus two old harness to reuse connectors from and take 8 days to wire. Which seems more practical? And more importantly if there is no performance difference why shouldn't I have the choice. We don't prevent people from spending $3000 on a paint job when $500 is good enough, if they have the money and it doesn't make them faster than why not? An all out wiring harness is not going to make any difference other than availability and reliability and I'm not looking to beat someone just because his wiring lets him down. Especially when no one here can even definitively say what a factory authorized repair would be. Do I have to rewrap the harness per the factory method, solder connections, wire color? We can all give our opinions, but the COA says is what matters so if I repair mine I have to live in fear of a protest because nothing in the rules tell me what is allowed.

As far as rules creep, and the success of IT, part of the my holiday was spent looking at the production rules and where my car would fit in. After George's comment the only thing keeping me in IT is the participation level. Checking the results for my home track shows 6 times the number of entries in ITA than in EP or FP. I came to club racing because I want to race against people and IT definitely has that going for it. But I also want to race a relatively inexpensive car and if I'm going to have to spend $5k on a Motec or spend 6 hours before every race checking over my old stock wiring harness to make sure it isn't getting ready to short out then I'll go run SRF's or SM or something else. To stick our head in the sand and say we've always done it this way and we are succesful is usually the sign of a series in decline.

BTW. The production car option is not neccesarily open to all IT cars. If you read January's Fastrack you'll find that the CRB turned down a car for classifaction into production based on it's age, they are looking to only bring newer cars into Production. So to say an IT car has the option to move somewhere else is not completely accurate. Some cars really don't have any options.

From what I can see the ITAC is trying to limit changes, but not by completely freezing the rules. I applaud the overall effort of the last few years, where the Motec situation has been the exception, not the rule. But it seems that the people pushing for changes like this wiring rule are looking for allowances that make a car more cost effective to build and maintain without altering the cars performance. Isn't that what IT should be about? That is what the current intent implies. Yes, that is a black and white simplfication but you're never going to completely remove the grey areas from rules. The best we can do is follow a plan and toss around wordings and interperations in discussion like this until we can come to the best compromise. Then you monitoring how the rule is used an if necessary you adjust. It's not perfect, but tell me what is?

Taking a look at the current IT fields I see ITB and ITC have a number of older cars running in them. The front running cars in ITA and ITS may be newer but the mid pack groups are also filled by 20+ year old cars. All of these older cars are running out of stock dealer parts. We just changed rules to allow aftermarket parts that duplicate stock performance and dimensions. But that is all going to be worthless once they can't repair wiring anymore. Do we really want to lose a IT car becuase a small dash fire takes out the only wiring harness left for it? Or is this the plan on how to make room in the classes, by making cars obsolete not based on performance but parts availability? I don't think that will sit well with some long time IT participants.

It is nice to be able to chat about all of this in a friendly environment. Now I'm off to see about getting my car classed as a limited prep FP car. At least there I'm allowed performance adjustements.

------------------
~Matt Rowe
ITA Shelby Charger
MARRS #96

[This message has been edited by Matt Rowe (edited December 27, 2004).]

 

[Geo]

Originally posted by Matt Rowe:
$5000 for a wiring harness - yeah I can build one for that. It would be just as good as the one I built (for a different car) that was fully streetable, used all mil spec connectors (on critical components), high performance wire and still only cost me $350 in parts. Incidently that harness would take me 2 days to build

First of all, go price a race car harness. They aren't cheap. I figured someone would think $5k for a harness was nuts. I agree. But apparently people are spending more than that to have someone wire up a MoTeC inside their ECU box.

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

 

[Matt Rowe]

Originally posted by Geo:
First of all, go price a race car harness. They aren't cheap. I figured someone would think $5k for a harness was nuts. I agree. But apparently people are spending more than that to have someone wire up a MoTeC inside their ECU box.

George,
I priced stuff like that before. But just because some people will pay that doesn't mean the same thing can't (and shouldn't) be built for less. As I said for $350 in mil spec parts and 2 days work I can build a harness as reliable as any race car needs. I know there are probably guys spending that much to have a motec installed, but as I understood that included the cost of the motec plus some baseline tuning. And, if they didn't have to fit it into the stock ECU housing it would be cheaper.

Some people will always spend more than they have to, but why limit the choices so the guys with the small budget don't have any options? As an example, just because there are guys spending a thousand on a torsen are you going to outlaw spring loaded diffs like the phantom grip? They don't make a torsen for my car so should my only choice be having quaiffe build me a custom diff? The torsen is definitely better performance wise but if I can't get one I'll run the phantom grip and save my money for rebuilds.

So is that all you have to comment on after my previous long winded post?

------------------
~Matt Rowe
ITA Shelby Charger
MARRS #96

[This message has been edited by Matt Rowe (edited December 27, 2004).]

 

[ShelbyRacer]

Originally posted by Geo:
First of all, go price a race car harness. They aren't cheap. I figured someone would think $5k for a harness was nuts. I agree. But apparently people are spending more than that to have someone wire up a MoTeC inside their ECU box.

See, but someone can do it themselves for a LOT cheaper with some time and energy. My biggest problem with the ECU and wire harness contradiction is exactly what you mentioned. I, even with my experience with electronics, wouldn't feel comfortable cramming the Motec (or any other aftermarket controller) into the stock box. Why? Well, mostly because I just spent up to $4000 (check online and you'll see prices) on the unit itself, and now I have to take it apart and maybe screw something up? I'm sure the fee to pack it into the stock housing isn't very cheap either...

I can wire up a complete harness with Molex connectors for under $200. Would it be as wonderful as the Mil-spec equivalent? Not sure, but I'll guarantee that any advantage gained from those expensive wires and connectors can be overridden by careful and proper maintenance. Replace money with labor, simple as that. Most people don't possess the technical expertise to make the Motec-to-stock-ECU-box change, but I'll bet that most can easily solder some connectors on to decent wire, route the whole thing, and maintain it well. Right now, you have NO OPTIONS. With this rule rewritten, those with perfectly functioning stock harnesses would NOT be penalized, as they could make all the same mods to their stock harness, OR make a new one. Again, my biggest issue with this whole thing is that in IT, the gap is widening between the haves and the have nots. All the current rule does is screw those people who don't have the money to do it the a$$-backwards way.

The essence of my intent here-
You have to keep everything that it doesn't say you can remove.
You can't add anything it doesn't say you can.
You can't use super-hyper-unobtainium type materials.
You either have to work a bit, OR pay someone to do it, but either way you're not forced into spending cubic $$ to be competitive, and that's only if you need to do it in the first place.

If my suggestions are out of line with the "class philosophy", let me know.

Again, I'm putting this all up for discussion's sake. I probably wouldn't try to institute a rule change, since I don't compete in the class at this point. I just think it's interesting to see ahead of time what the comments will be if someone requested this. Also, since there are several ITAC members that are among us, I just want these comments to be part of their thought process. If I'm being presumptuous (sp?) or over-egotistical with that thought/comment, then I am. Perhaps what we talk about here will have no impact on the class, but maybe, just maybe, it will.

And I promised myself that I wasn't going to come into this board and be my normal, loud-mouthed self (yes, I'm a lot like this in person, and yes, I know that sucks). Well, there's always next year...

Hey Dick, did you ever think this topic would get 50 posts in 2 days? I did

------------------
Matt Green
"Ain't nothin' improved about Improved Touring..."

 

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by ShelbyRacer:


Hey Dick, did you ever think this topic would get 50 posts in 2 days? I did

Well, you might have known that you'd be adding 20% of the posts!

The more I think about this, the more I think it's really a tempest in a teapot.

Pragmatically, it's pretty workable as is.

We all agree that most of the wires are uneeded. Pull the fuses! Clip the wires at the source that are on shared fuses. And for those that are needed, snip it out, and solder a new one in. It's just not that hard. Wrap it up in tape, and move on.

Connectors bad? Radio Shack has 'em in all sizes and shapes. How will the Jenson dealership repair it? Or the Alfa dealership? They'd do the same thing...if you're lucky! If the car is available in the junkyard, clip it out and solder it in if you're worried about absolute legality. Again, half an hour of soldering.

Honestly....who would EVER come up to you, look at your car, find a repair that isn't factory fresh, and protest you?? First, if it happens, you're dealing with a raging lunatic, or a revenge freak, and second, I can't imagine such a protest being upheld.

(Although the second part COULD go awry!)

I'm thinking the rule is adequate as is....

too many things could got wrong if it were re written.



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

 

[Matt Rowe]

Originally posted by lateapex911:

We all agree that most of the wires are uneeded. Pull the fuses! Clip the wires at the source that are on shared fuses. And for those that are needed, snip it out, and solder a new one in. It's just not that hard. Wrap it up in tape, and move on.

But none of that is legal

Originally posted by lateapex911:


Connectors bad? Radio Shack has 'em in all sizes and shapes. How will the Jenson dealership repair it? Or the Alfa dealership? They'd do the same thing...if you're lucky! If the car is available in the junkyard, clip it out and solder it in if you're worried about absolute legality. Again, half an hour of soldering.

Again, radio shack connectors are illegal. And the factory authorized fix for my car is to replace the connector. Of course no dealership will touch the car because of the age. So the factory authorized fix is nothing. Oh and swapping one old brittle connector for another doesn't do anything for reliability.

Originally posted by lateapex911:


Honestly....who would EVER come up to you, look at your car, find a repair that isn't factory fresh, and protest you?? First, if it happens, you're dealing with a raging lunatic, or a revenge freak, and second, I can't imagine such a protest being upheld.

(Although the second part COULD go awry!)

Well, some people have already posted that they would protest anyone they saw with illegal fixes. But more importantly there are people (you included) who have said cheaters suck and should be hung by there own alternator belt. (Slight exageration) But seriously, you say that and know you are telling me to cheat because it's not that big a deal. When is it okay to cheat? When is it not that big a deal? I don't want to run something illegal and we shouldn't be telling people to do so.



------------------
~Matt Rowe
ITA Shelby Charger
MARRS #96

 

[Diane]

Originally posted by Matt Rowe:

Next, for you people who drive your cars to events. How do you go out on track without being paranoid about how you are going to get home if anything happens?

Number of options for me.....

When we both raced, we towed Tim's car up and I drove mine. So we did have a trailer with us.

LRP is less than 100 miles from home and we have AAA. (BTW, anyone ever used that for a balled up car?)

For the event I went to on my own at LRP, here are a number of competitors that live in my general area. If I couldn't get the car home, my plan was to bum a ride home and come back with the tow rig the next day to bring it home.

Even with NHIS, we have friends close by we could have left a car at in the event they both needed to be trailed home.

Of course none of this logic would have worked if we went to events further away.

Now back to your regularly scheduled topic...


Diane

 

[lateapex911]

Yup- Cheaters suck. And yes I am a guy who will do something about it.

But, like most, when I decide to do something about it, I choose to protest someone who is malicious. Domed pistons and that sort of stuff. Things guys have actually gone out of their way to do for perceived performance gains.

Repairing a connector aint one of 'em.

How is clipping an unused wire that is shorting out down the line cheating? If it has been broken naturally is that cheating?

If you have a wire that has multiple breaks, and you need that wire, how is soldering a same guage wire cheating? I bet thats well in the normal dealership repair parameters.

Maybe you can make a case that they are all cheats, but what exactly is the performace gain from either?

Look, in a perfect world, we might like to ahve a better harness rule...but the costs (unintended consequences) of such a rule are likely to much greater than the status quo.

Plus, there are lots of bigger fish to fry...

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

 

[Geo]

Originally posted by lateapex911:
Plus, there are lots of bigger fish to fry...

You should've seen the one that got away!

Re: driving your car to an event....

It's relatively easy actually. You just need to know where the closest U-Haul is. I drove my Infiniti G20 from Houston to DC for the SE-R Club of America convention and drove my car at the annual convention DE event. If I had balled the car up or hurt it beyond repair that far from home, I would have just rented a U-Haul truck and trailer to bring it home. Not cheap, but cheaper than monthly payments on a tow beast (since those who drive usually do so in lieu of having a tow beast).

I have a friend with a street registered race car (SE-R Cup) who was stressing over not having a tow beast because of what might happen. I told him not to stress and just know where the closest U-Haul is. Not that big a deal.


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

 

[Geo]

Originally posted by Matt Rowe:
So is that all you have to comment on after my previous long winded post?

If you like I can take requests.

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

 

[Matt Rowe]

Originally posted by lateapex911:
How is clipping an unused wire that is shorting out down the line cheating? If it has been broken naturally is that cheating?

Well, if it does not perform to stock specs (i.e. works) then it is illegal. So a pulled fuse or a cut wire is illegal.

Originally posted by lateapex911:
If you have a wire that has multiple breaks, and you need that wire, how is soldering a same guage wire cheating? I bet thats well in the normal dealership repair parameters.

Well someone has already commented that without the stock color and tracer the wire doesn't conform to specs. So again, it's illegal.

Originally posted by lateapex911:
Maybe you can make a case that they are all cheats, but what exactly is the performace gain from either?

Oh, so if it's not a performance gain it's okay to cheat. Perfect you walked right into that one.

Originally posted by lateapex911:
Look, in a perfect world, we might like to ahve a better harness rule...but the costs (unintended consequences) of such a rule are likely to much greater than the status quo.

Plus, there are lots of bigger fish to fry...

Okay, but the costs are all passed on to either guys spending money they have too much of on something that won't make them faster or guys who need the allowance to keep a car in racing condition. There may be bigger fish to fry for you but not all of us feel that way.

------------------
~Matt Rowe
ITA Shelby Charger
MARRS #96

 

[Matt Rowe]

Originally posted by Geo:
If you like I can take requests.

Actually I was hoping you would comment on what happens to IT cars that can't conform IT rules and won't be classed into production. You had previously stated they we always have the option to go into another class. Production is apparently closed to older cars so what options are they left with? It sounds like they will be between a rock and a hard place.



------------------
~Matt Rowe
ITA Shelby Charger
MARRS #96