Social Media


Welcome, Guest
Username Password: Remember me

2011 Change Proposals - New Allowances (4 Items)
(1 viewing) (1) Guest

TOPIC: 2011 Change Proposals - New Allowances (4 Items)

Re: 2011 Change Proposals - New Allowances (4 Items) 13 years, 12 months ago #8681

  • jaje
  • OFFLINE
  • Seasoned Racer
  • Posts: 162
I understand that it might be similar weight if required to run an actual duct system. However to simplify the rules completely by just allowing those to add lexan to both sides will be cheap and easy to do (a sheet of lexan costs $30 to do these windows and you can drill and pop rivet it in place in probably 20 mins time). By doing this to both sides it also helps get rid of some potential glass that is closer to the driver's area (even though the back hatch is glass). I am mainly looking at it from a law perspective where if you make a rule it has to be easy to interpret (and clear as to the spirit it was written in) - getting rid of any grey area makes it so.
Joel
83 944 Spec (#74) - conflictedracer.wordpress.com/

Re: 2011 Change Proposals - New Allowances (4 Items) 13 years, 12 months ago #8682

I flipped my 944 over its nose, onto its roof, and didn't break any glass except the windshield.
Eric Kuhns

National Director Emeritus

2007, & 2008 National Champion
2011, 2012 2nd

Re: 2011 Change Proposals - New Allowances (4 Items) 13 years, 12 months ago #8690

Do people actually think they will get beaten because someone else has lexan quarter windows vs their glass windows ? That's silly.

Think I'll have to go grab the bathroom scale and weigh 1 oem window and rubber seal and 1 lexan piece with screws and see what the actual difference is. Either way this is good bedtime reading


Tom

Re: 2011 Change Proposals - New Allowances (4 Items) 13 years, 12 months ago #8692

  • spec28
  • OFFLINE
  • Junior Racer
  • Posts: 40
Lexan side windows : Weight - there is no difference in weight. Each car has the same min 2600 lb requirement. And there is no weight bias relocation concern in the tops as all the cars vary depending on sunrof cover materials choise and/or sunroof delete cars.
Safety: NACA ducts in the driver or pass door window is a safety issue. Lower front position blocks mirror, and upper rear position catches helmet and Hans device on exit.

Since this is not a rule requirement "must do" but rather an option which allows people to individualize thier build, it should be allowed. Let's save the "no new rules" mindset to areas that affect performance equilization.
Dean S.

Re: 2011 Change Proposals - New Allowances (4 Items) 13 years, 12 months ago #8695

  • cbuzzetti
  • OFFLINE
  • Endurance Racer
  • 944 Spec = The best racing on the planet
  • Posts: 1192
An unstable, constantly changing rules platform will not help bring in new people. They will sit on the sidelines and wait it out or go elsewhere.

This is the main concern to me. If you want to grow a class then it needs to have a stable rules set.

That is the main reason I loudly proclaim "NO NEW RULES" if it is not broken do not fix it.
2018 NASA 944Spec National Champ
2018 NASA ST5 P2 944 Nationals COTA
2017 NASA 944Spec WSC P3
2016 NASA PTD-944 WSC P2
2015 NASA GTS1 Western Champion
2014 NASA 944Spec Western Champion
2013 NASA 944Spec So-Cal Regional Champion
2013 NASA 944Spec National P3
2010 NASA GTS-1 National Champion
2010 NASA 944Spec National P3
2010 NASA So-Cal 944Spec Regional Champion
2009 NASA 944Spec National Champion

Re: 2011 Change Proposals - New Allowances (4 Items) 13 years, 11 months ago #8748

I'm going to go with "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

I'm pretty new, and I don't immediately see anything too bad off the bat with these changes, but I don't see them as necessary to solve any clear problems either. I don't really want to deal with constant rules creep.

Show me that there is clearly an issue. Explain how the rules will solve a clear issue without causing a bigger one.

There's a reason I chose this series over SM, SE30, or HC.
Banner
Time to create page: 0.11 seconds