CARS Rule change feedback wanted...

If you look at the document from the committee they clearly say they think RA's requirements are excessive. I think some cars are showing up with virtually no padding.

---

First Rally: 2001
Driver (7), Co-Driver (44)
Drivers (16)
Clerk (10), Official (7), Volunteer (4)
Cars Built (1), Engines Built (0) Cages Built (0)
Last Updated, January 4, 2015

Quote
john vanlandingham
Blame is for idiots. losers.

Quote
Morison
If you look at the document from the committee they clearly say they think RA's requirements are excessive. I think some cars are showing up with virtually no padding.

Coo...

Understood.

(guilty as charged... he he...well we have padding on the door bars!)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/21/2013 01:46AM by Mad Matt F.

Quote
Morison

Quote
Mad Matt F
Keith,

great, how does that affect my cheap assed tube seats? And the seats of those of us who this rule would affect (ie the cheap assed crew?)

Good question... I don't often think of tube seats because I've never sat in one that was comfortable enough to spend a day in.

Keith,

Are you looking for a chance to spend the day at Lanark in the Justy??

It won't hurt, I promise.

Quote
john vanlandingham
Do you want some help documenting that other, larger and more experienced Federations are not enforcing the seat expiration date rule?

Also ask them what constitutes "a crash".?

I'd like to see it too, just curious.

And the "you crashed, replace your seats" idea is useless. It's too simplistic. You could have a nice slow roll like Autochoad did in their CRX (sorry, forget the names and the rally!) which wouldn't do shit to a seat. Or you could have a nice hard roll, come down hard and damage a seat. Who can tell REALLY how hard the crash was?

I'll email Chris Martin my opinions, but:

Production handbrake: Yeah why not? Not a big advantage, so sure. And as per rules, it may be needed for some cars soon with electronic parking brakes.
Production pedal box: No, for the reasons listed in the committee.
First Aid kit: Yeah, have it visible. If I'm going to try and help you, you better have your kit somewhere I can find it quick.
Seats: I was going to bitch more about this, but when I looked my seats were made in 2005 and 2006. I thought they were 2008/2009. Oops. So, ehhhh.... I guess they're getting to the point of replacement. I still think it's stupid to just put an arbitrary expiry period on them. Like what Matt said, 7 events on a seat? I'd be pissed too.

I like the changes to allow free brakes on production models. Pretty much brings puts STi/EVO back into production like SP does but more limitations. Really it's even for stuff like the Mazdaspeed3 which could never run production because you cannot fit a 15" wheel over the brakes.

The pedal replacement rules is fine to require the stock pedal assembly. Something like a booster delete and a master re-size is something that could be considered for safety to give consistant pedal feel since we do a lot of LFB. Does that mean you can modify the stock pedal assembly to get a different pedal ratio as well?

So with all the freedom to swap diffs, brakes suspension top mounts etc etc etc what differentiates a Peee car from a Group2 car performance-wise...

In other words, why bother with the class?
It cannot and isn't cost.

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

Quote
Mad Matt F
Are you looking for a chance to spend the day at Lanark in the Justy??

I doubt I could fit in the justy!

---

First Rally: 2001
Driver (7), Co-Driver (44)
Drivers (16)
Clerk (10), Official (7), Volunteer (4)
Cars Built (1), Engines Built (0) Cages Built (0)
Last Updated, January 4, 2015

Quote
john vanlandingham
Blame is for idiots. losers.

Quote
john vanlandingham
So with all the freedom to swap diffs, brakes suspension top mounts etc etc etc what differentiates a Peee car from a Group2 car performance-wise...

Essentially, Production classes are restricted to stock driveline components, other than adding a LSD, which has been allowed for some time in Canada.

The rule change allows some cars that are 'barely' group 2 or open to be pulled back to production 2wd or AWD spec where they won't have to compete in a class where the competition is dropping dollars on dogboxes, heavily built engines, etc. But, the expensive and annoying 'has to be the right radio delete plate' stupidity is gone from the classes, as is the idea that 'production' means 'PRODUCTION.' (The manufacturers don't REALLY care about that)

Quote
john vanlandingham
In other words, why bother with the class?
It cannot and isn't cost.

Actually, cost and convenience. The ease and simplicity of dropping in a stock driveline from a junker (if you think that's wise) rather than spending thousands on a rebuild is part of the intent. The ability to improve brakes and shed weight also makes the car perform better with the stock driveline and allow a clean path to upgrade the car to open 2wd later.(IE: for the most part you don't have to work around an existing cage install to cut out weight that you couldn't remove in Production.)

---

First Rally: 2001
Driver (7), Co-Driver (44)
Drivers (16)
Clerk (10), Official (7), Volunteer (4)
Cars Built (1), Engines Built (0) Cages Built (0)
Last Updated, January 4, 2015

Quote
john vanlandingham
Blame is for idiots. losers.

Really a stock motor/trans (with LSD) with no aftermarket suspension links should be all that's needed for P class. Brakes to a limit of OEM replacement from same family of vehicles. So pretty much all P subaru's get the 4/2 pots but don't allow aftermarket companies to limit those wanting to put $10k AP racing kits on their P class car.?

This production class thing has me a bit confused.

The recent CARS 2wd rules were changed under various auspices --one of which was to encourage greater entries in the open 2wd class.

NOW, you are trying to make a place for G2 cars with stock final drives and engines which will presumably pull many competitors out of the 2wd open class like a vampire.

**Shrug** I don't have a clue what CARS is dong but this makes no sense unless you are going for the SCCA autocross competition spreading class proliferation. Let Production class die already.

---

____________________________________________________________-

One. Class -- 2WD

www.quantumrallysport.com

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/pages/Quantum-Rally-Sport/281129179600?ref=nf

Quote
Josh Wimpey


**Shrug** I don't have a clue what CARS is dong but this makes no sense unless you are going for the SCCA autocross competition spreading class proliferation. Let Production class die already.

I agree.
But think, Josh, what would they do then if they didn't have endless bullshit like Peee class to obsess over..

Screw it FFS.
Sobody starts out and they wanna get going without spend spend spend for new motor?
Fine, let 'em

2 big classes, one big strike.

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

Few things...
a) "12.8.5 Mechanical Components
Suspension, differential, clutch, pressure plate and flywheel are free.
Brakes are free but must retain the OEM pedal box and equal number of master cylinders as OEM. OEM pedal box being the OEM brake pedal, location, mounting and actuation."

How is one supposed to install a hydraulic handbrake and retain the same number of master cylinders as stock? I think you are trying to say the pedal box and primary master count must remain, but you gotta add one if you are adding a hydraulic handbrake.

b) Ya'll know that the crash that had the movement of the bar to close enough to get to the competitors head was a GRANDFATHERED cage and if built currently would not be legal...
There was no a-pillar reinforcements or roof bars, either of which would have likely prevented the a-pillar from deflecting so much.
http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.306035679486301.70214.157239364365934&type=3

---

Grant Hughes

Welded metal seats with removable covers are pretty easy to inspect. They are also relatively cheap. If you Google safety of the US seat manufacturer that begins with K, you'll see a picture of a deformed 944 with an undamaged seat and a driver that came out fine.

Why can't we use those?

Quote
Josh Wimpey
The recent CARS 2wd rules were changed under various auspices --one of which was to encourage greater entries in the open 2wd class.
NOW, you are trying to make a place for G2 cars with stock final drives and engines which will presumably pull many competitors out of the 2wd open class like a vampire.

Actually the only thing happening here is a clarification on what can be done in terms of lightening the chassis. This was always the intent with the 'new' production classes.

Not to debate the class structure indefinitely, one of the things the committee did was to look at the cars that were running and see if the classes made sense. The result was recognizing there were many cars in the 'open' classes that were there for non-performance enhancing reasons and more accurately 'fell out' of production class rather than being built into the open class. Particularly in Open 4wd, the cars at the top are quite literally a different class of car than the majority of the field - why not recognize that?

Conceptually, Prod 2wd is a (relatively) cheap entry point to the sport but puts you in a car that can be upgraded to the 2wd open class easily.

---

First Rally: 2001
Driver (7), Co-Driver (44)
Drivers (16)
Clerk (10), Official (7), Volunteer (4)
Cars Built (1), Engines Built (0) Cages Built (0)
Last Updated, January 4, 2015

Quote
john vanlandingham
Blame is for idiots. losers.

http://www.californiarallyseries.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=57&Itemid=81

Is not the SCCA's Production class. Predates it by a year.

---

Self-righteous douche canoe