Jump to content

Time to change the glass rule to match the rest !


Recommended Posts

 Our " remove the glass" rule was made by two guys that could not read the SCCA rule book.  They read that glass must be removed for all SCCA classes.They were wrong be we got stuck with a crappy rule that reduces the cross over  of cars to Chumpcar. 

 How can we change it?  

 Maybe  have a glass deposit? 100$  cash on hand for a sweeper fee if you lay glass on the track? 

 Facts are , very seldom does glass get dumped on the track by cars with full glass.  They hit much lower  pieces like bumpers, fenders etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he is saying even that is unnecessary.  Tempered glass really poses little risk to race tracks. It turns into little pebbles when it breaks, it's not like there are shards of wrist-slashing, tire-stabbing  glass on the track when a quarter glass breaks. Connecting rods pose a bigger risk to tires :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chumpcar has the no helmet cam right.  Adding mass and a handle to your helmet is a bad idea.

 

IMHO Chumpcar has the glass rules wrong. 

 

More side view mirrors get shattered on track than rear and hatch glass.  We got rubbed by a neon in a recent SCCA sprint race and lost just the glass and backing plate out of our passenger wing mirror.

 

Rule 9.3.3 requiring aluminum safety straps on the OUTSIDE of polycarbonate rear windows or hatches presumes that ALL competition cars are producing positive pressure on the INTERIOR of the rear window or hatch - this is profoundly not true.

 

Rules 9.3.5.1 and 9.3.5.2 allowing NACA ducts and 3" holes are also problematic for the same reason.  By restricting the location of vent holes Chumpcar is presuming airflow in these locations will be through the cabin and out over the rear bodywork.  This is not always true and can result in a competition vehicle configuration that meets the rules but produces levels of carbon monoxide inside the cabin that make the vehicle unsafe to operate and potentially deadly.

 

Rules 4.7.2 and 9.3.5.1 are confusing.  Per Phil the intent is to allow one NACA duct, however the rules read as if you could place one NACA duct in each of the rear side windows.

 

I sent Mike a petition to clarify the NACA duct wording back in March, I certainly think the glass rules should be revisited.  Personally I don't see the need for interior and exterior lamination with clear safety film, I am not aware of another sanctioning body that requires it.

 

Ryan

Empty Pockets Racing

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...