STUPID RULES

How about we fast forward eliminating the IT class. Why wait for RULES CREEP to take over by year 2030 making IT & Production cars the same let's open the rules today by cassing all IT cars in Production & you people will have just what your looking for. Hmmmm...... or will you.

Ron don't like my Have Fun ;) therefore how about,

Hapy Holidays :biggrinsanta:

David
 
How about we fast forward eliminating the IT class. Why wait for RULES CREEP to take over by year 2030 making IT & Production cars the same let's open the rules today by cassing all IT cars in Production & you people will have just what your looking for. Hmmmm...... or will you.

Ron don't like my Have Fun ;) therefore how about,

Hapy Holidays :biggrinsanta:

David
[/b]
Click to expand...

Before that happens, we'd have to make those crazy Prod guys put their windshields back on their roadsters and get them off of racing slicks and on to DOT rubber :lol:

I'm turning a new leaf, no more complaining about the rules, no matter how crazy they might be. They are what they are, I'm just glad to not have to deal with NASCAR type rules that it depends on who you are, if they do or don't apply to you. I'll just figure out where I fit based on how much I can spend to get legal.

James
 
My No. 1 pet peeve - we a have rule that is fairly clear and then someone in Topeka says it says something totally different.
No. 2 - many if not most drivers agree w/ it, not because it makes sense, but because it benefits them.

Really, most of these seemingly stupid rules are quite logical when you read them in the context of the class philosophy. Note these terms in the ITCS: "low cost cars," "limited modifications," "restrict modifications to those useful and necessary to construct a safe race car," "inexpensive cars." The gist is that IT is a stock-based class and the default rule is that they stay stock except as "useful and necessary" to make a safe and decent car for racing. I.e. they remain primarily stock cars - they are not intended to be, as someone mentioned, "real race cars." They have washer bottles simply because they came w/ washer bottles and there is no compelling reason why they should be removed. Many of the exceptions have been necessary to level the playing field among different cars. The issues more and more people are having w/ the rules really have more to do w/ the underlying philosophy than the rules themselves. Now, sure, you can start pointing to one rule and say that if that is allowed then this other mod should be allowed, but most of those are themselves failures to keep the rules w/i the philosophy. That's what drives rules creep. At some point we either have to change our attitude, change the philosophy, or change classes.

That said, I sure would like jack plates/points.
 
Okay So I've got to add it just because stirring the pot is fun and it's soooooo beaten to death....here goes....

You can have a totally aftermarket ECU but it must fit in the stock case....

There I did it...

FLAME AWAY!!!
:D

R
[/b]
Click to expand...

Yeah. Allowing a totally different ECU is one of the more stupid rules in my opinion also. :P
 
Really, most of these seemingly stupid rules are quite logical when you read them in the context of the class philosophy. Note these terms in the ITCS: "low cost cars," "limited modifications," "restrict modifications to those useful and necessary to construct a safe race car," "inexpensive cars." The gist is that IT is a stock-based class and the default rule is that they stay stock except as "useful and necessary" to make a safe and decent car for racing. I.e. they remain primarily stock cars - they are not intended to be, as someone mentioned, "real race cars." They have washer bottles simply because they came w/ washer bottles and there is no compelling reason why they should be removed.
That said, I sure would like jack plates/points. [/b]
Click to expand...

Bill, hehe, now your blowing smoke up my skirt.

You state that "restrict modifications to those useful and necessary to construct a safe race car," but then say, they are not intended to be, as someone mentioned, "real race cars." Which was me that said that.

1. My washer bottle would never function because of all the shit that flys up on my sand blasted windshield would never mix with washer solvent or water! Use you washer bottle after someone blows synthetic oil on your windshield.

2. My not a real race car is illegal for the street and I can only run it on enclosed courses so whether you like it or not, it's a race car.

3. The Moroso oil catch tank was in it's place when I bought the damn car and it weights a hell of a lot more than the windshield bottle, thus I'm penalizing myself with the weight difference.

4. The oil catch tank is much more functional and more of a safety item the the washer bottle ever will be or ever was.

5. My car came with a lot of shit like seats passanger, rear seats and a hell of a lot more that I was allowed to remove and your going to tell me I have to keep the washer bottle because the car came with it!!!!!!!!??????????

6. Windshield washer bottles and jack plates and common sense items! One should be done away with and the other you should have. :snow_cool:



For one and for all, if you need jack plates, put them on and tell them Dan said it was OK. :cavallo:
 
To paraphrase Adrian Cronauer: you guys are more in need of a race season to start than anyone in history...
 
Bill, hehe, now your blowing smoke up my skirt.

You state that "restrict modifications to those useful and necessary to construct a safe race car," but then say, they are not intended to be, as someone mentioned, "real race cars." Which was me that said that.

1. My washer bottle would never function because of all the shit that flys up on my sand blasted windshield would never mix with washer solvent or water! Use you washer bottle after someone blows synthetic oil on your windshield.

2. My not a real race car is illegal for the street and I can only run it on enclosed courses so whether you like it or not, it's a race car.

3. The Moroso oil catch tank was in it's place when I bought the damn car and it weights a hell of a lot more than the windshield bottle, thus I'm penalizing myself with the weight difference.

4. The oil catch tank is much more functional and more of a safety item the the washer bottle ever will be or ever was.

5. My car came with a lot of shit like seats passanger, rear seats and a hell of a lot more that I was allowed to remove and your going to tell me I have to keep the washer bottle because the car came with it!!!!!!!!??????????

6. Windshield washer bottles and jack plates and common sense items! One should be done away with and the other you should have. :snow_cool:



[/b]
Click to expand...

Have you written a letter to the CRB asking for a rule change regarding the washer bottle?
 
Seriously - you crazy kids go for it. I'm AOK.

So far, Joe's the only one who's found rules that actually rise to the level of "stoopid" in my book - the balaclava and SFI label dumbness. We have collectively been lulled into a happy place where fire protection is required only because it's a rule, not because anyone really expects to catch on fire. And SFI is a trade organization - nothing more.

Add to that list the complete lack of any requirement for eye protection. That's a stupid rule.

The rest are simply manifestations of our individual fantasies about what a "real race car" is supposed to look like.

(He said, with appropriate academic detachment because from here on out, IT is one more case study in creep that he expects to support his existing hypotheses about influences causing road racing classes to wither and die.)

K
[/b]
Click to expand...

What do I win?

cause I have more? Why allow cars without fuelcells and with full carpet...(ss/touring) have a hand held fire extingisher and reqiure a full system in a GT1 car?

Cages....bolt in for SS/IT and the weld in full tilt boogie cage required for prod....Most IT/SS cars weigh more and are more likely to actally use the cage.

Why not have safety rules for the club instead of the class.
 
I think he's referring to this verbiage:

In any automobile where allowed removal of rear seats, upholstery, etc., creates an opening between the driver/passenger compartment and an exposed gas tank, fuel cell, or part thereof, a metal bulkhead which completely fills such opening shall be installed (See GCR 9.3.26.1.)

This is from 9.1.3 E in the IT portion of the GCR. In Civic/CRX's the removal of the interior panels or rear seats causes the fuel filler neck to become "exposed"...

Christian
[/b]
Click to expand...
That's the one. Andy probably didn't notice it when he was penciling in his personal corrections.
 
Have you written a letter to the CRB asking for a rule change regarding the washer bottle? [/b]
Click to expand...

Bill, in all honesty I have not. I was really hoping that common sense would prevail and that someone in the CRB would look at the waterbottle issue and just take out his or her's eraser........and that would be the end of it. The ECU rule was worth typing a letter. The waterbottle issue so so abstract from reality that no one in their right mind would ever consider to DQ or protest a racer for not having one. :114:
 
Infrared radiation. While thin sheet metal may not be able to stop a propagating flame for long, it will do a damn fine job of blocking radiating heat from melting the fuel lines...

Try taking a thinnest piece of sheet metal and putting it in front of your face while you stand next to a campfire and you'll see what I mean.
[/b]
Click to expand...
I agree, but there are no exposed fuel lines, only the filler pipe for the tank. I agree the metal would help, but the rule allows for me to keep the plastic side panel in its place to shield the filler pipe. I suppose it has some value, but I wouldn't want to rely on it, just abide by it.
 
Why allow cars without fuelcells and with full carpet...(ss/touring) have a hand held fire extingisher and reqiure a full system in a GT1 car?

[/b]
Click to expand...
that one is easy, because more fires are caused by poorly constructed plumbing to fuel cell than by a factory installation.
 
that one is easy, because more fires are caused by poorly constructed plumbing to fuel cell than by a factory installation.
[/b]
Click to expand...
Bingo, so rather that treat the flu they check your prostrate!

Also if you go by that reasoning the fire system would be required as soon as you install an optional cell in an IT car?
 
The guaranteed question while filling the tow vehicle.
How fast does it go? (Obviously a race car since it's on an open trailer).

My standard answer: It depends how long the straight is.

Response: deer in the headlights look. :D
 
" My washer bottle would never function because of all the shit that flys up on my sand blasted windshield would never mix with washer solvent or water! Use you washer bottle after someone blows synthetic oil on your windshield."

Dan, you must have missed my point. Keeping the washer bottle has absolutely NOTHING to do w/ whether it has any function in an IT car. It is there solely because the car came w/ it and there is no rule saying you can remove it. There is no rule because it is certainly not necessary, nor perhaps even useful, to remove it in order to have a car suitable for racing.

All I am saying is that, rather than come up w/ B.S. reasons to deviate from the class philosophy over and over and item by item, just change the philosophy to fit what the will of the IT community is and let's get on w/ it.
 
I have no problem with dumb rules. I mean, I really don't care about the fact that I don't have to go an move my battery to a "safer" position, or that I would have to replace my overflow...er washer bottle with some overpriced alum gidget...

But...

Here's the kind I hate. Safety rule changes masquerading as rules to make racing "safer" when they really just put more money in the SFI's (or others) pockets. Like the new swap your belts every two years BS, because we're afraid that some dude in Florida is going to leave his belts exposed in daily thundrestorms and sun for 4.9 years, then race the car, hit a wall, and sue the club becuase the belts were degraded, and incresed his injury level...

Grrrr................
 
" My washer bottle would never function because of all the shit that flys up on my sand blasted windshield would never mix with washer solvent or water! Use you washer bottle after someone blows synthetic oil on your windshield."

Dan, you must have missed my point. Keeping the washer bottle has absolutely NOTHING to do w/ whether it has any function in an IT car. It is there solely because the car came w/ it and there is no rule saying you can remove it. There is no rule because it is certainly not necessary, nor perhaps even useful, to remove it in order to have a car suitable for racing.

All I am saying is that, rather than come up w/ B.S. reasons to deviate from the class philosophy over and over and item by item, just change the philosophy to fit what the will of the IT community is and let's get on w/ it.
[/b]
Click to expand...



Sorry Bill if I did miss your point. What I've been trying to say, in a cynical manner, is that these rules should have never been addressed in any way shape of form for the get go. And not allowing anyone jack points, or making you put a piece of flammable plastic over your filler neck and some of the other crazy and non practical rules (ECU rule also) are not worth the gun powder it would take to blow them up. :D



While I'm ranting here, I might as well bring up the "NON SPECTATOR EVENT" BS! If anyone hasen't noticed there are some people, in the neighborhood of 25 million people and probably more, that sometime frequent various race tracks in the hope of catching a good race and if their sick, a good crash, if any crash is good. If anyone from any race tracks or the SCCA head honchos might read this, I just mignt be possible to cash in on these "NON SPECTATOR EVENTS" and fatten their wallets in doing so!!!!! So when any ask us what do we win, instead of saying a hunk of wood, there might be a response like, we get some of expenses covered. Has anyone noticed the BS Speedvision TV has on this winter? Bobsled racing, old movie re-runs, what the hell does this have to do with Racecars??? If anyone had any insight at all, Grassroots Motorsports would be cashing in on this slow time with some great club racing, nationals as well as IT. They advertisers would be more willing to adverstise, headers, tires, oil, greases, etc, etc, etc. on these races than on an old movie that probably everyone has seen 100 times. Racing is entertaining and entertainment and until someone else that has more clout than me figures this out, all that $ is going to other places and everyone including us raceers will continue to lose out year after year.
 
I agree with part of what you're saying. Particularly the part about Speed TV. I fear it's only a matter of time before the most of us lose faith in hoping for a German Touring Car race or such only to see another rerun of Death Race 2000 or such and give up on Speed. Then we will only have to read about F1 and such. I would hope that a sponsor wouldn't pay much for advertising some of the crap they have on there now.

I agree with the need for spectators at our races, but if you don't know what's going on, you don't appreciate the racing. With the exception of only a few nation wide events, multiple classes are running simultaneously. The guy winning his class in a fight for his life could be a lap down to the leader. To the average guy in the stands, he's just in the way.

I've been told, and this was a long time ago, that the insurance on a spectator event was triple that of a regular secret club race. I can only imagine that it's worse now. Major races such as NASCAR, Champ Car, F1, etc. have one class on the track. The guy that comes in first is the winner from the fan's point of view. These races cost tons to put on, the entry fee is outrageous, and the sponsors are fighting for a piece of the action...at least on NASCAR. It would be nice, but there are few regions that could afford to make it happen.

The last time I heard the price of an IRL entry at TMS was ten years ago, and that was over $1000. That would pretty much put me back into autocrossing.
 
Here's the kind I hate. Safety rule changes masquerading as rules to make racing "safer" when they really just put more money in the SFI's (or others) pockets. Like the new swap your belts every two years BS, because we're afraid that some dude in Florida is going to leave his belts exposed in daily thundrestorms and sun for 4.9 years, then race the car, hit a wall, and sue the club becuase the belts were degraded, and incresed his injury level...

Grrrr................
[/b]
Click to expand...
You ain't seen nothing yet, Jake. SFI just had it's meeting at PRI here in Orlando. Prepare to reach for your wallet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top