Racer7x Posted October 28, 2018 Report Share Posted October 28, 2018 It's now OK to claim "0" points for any aero as long as the material came off/from the car Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morganf Posted October 28, 2018 Report Share Posted October 28, 2018 (edited) The truck lid was flipped and the rule book has no definition for what a spoiler is so who's to know? Edited October 28, 2018 by morganf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morganf Posted October 28, 2018 Report Share Posted October 28, 2018 (edited) People complain about the size of the scca rule book but at least it says "Spoiler – A panel attached to the body of a car at the front or rear, intended to alter the airflow around or under that end of the car when in motion." So you know what's what. Edited October 28, 2018 by morganf 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racer7x Posted October 28, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 28, 2018 (edited) That's kinda like saying i can make home made headers from the oe wheels I took off the car that you no longer use for "0" points? Edited October 28, 2018 by Racer7x Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbogrill Posted October 28, 2018 Report Share Posted October 28, 2018 Just now, Racer7x said: That kinda like saying i can make home made headers from the oe wheels I took off the car and no linger use for "0" points? I wouldn't complain if you pull that off. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morganf Posted October 28, 2018 Report Share Posted October 28, 2018 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Racer7x said: That's kinda like saying i can make home made headers from the oe wheels I took off the car that you no longer use for "0" points? It's also like saying you can use your heater core as a diff cooler for free even though diff coolers are points but guess what Phil said. Welcome to the chump rule confusion party. Edited October 28, 2018 by morganf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enginerd Posted October 28, 2018 Report Share Posted October 28, 2018 This workaround has been eliminated in the 2019 rulebook in section 4.3.1: Repurposed components will be valued as the new component. 3 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racer7x Posted October 28, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 28, 2018 41 minutes ago, morganf said: It's also like saying you can use your heater core as a diff cooler for free even though diff coolers are points but guess what Phil said. Welcome to the chump rule confusion party. Yeah, but those are still both cores... Saying my sunroof skin and trunk skin can make an undertray for "0" points is completely different... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jakks Posted October 28, 2018 Report Share Posted October 28, 2018 (edited) I’m more wondering how a 500 or 510 point car however you want to look at it, was 4 seconds a lap faster than a couple of the other cars. Even Happy Moose could only do a 1:35 with its pro driver owner in the car. You guys keep your blinders on..... I’m not accusing them of anything. The car is undervalued at its current state Edited October 28, 2018 by jakks 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoparBoyy Posted October 28, 2018 Report Share Posted October 28, 2018 1 hour ago, jakks said: I’m not accusing them of anything. The car is undervalued at its current state You will never see a vpi increase on the sc300. No matter how many different teams put them on the podium. Tbird on the other hand.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snorman Posted October 28, 2018 Report Share Posted October 28, 2018 The trunk skin on the SC300 is pulled away from the support underneath. It's still the stock trunk/body panel. That should be 0 points. I looked at it at Road Atlanta this year. That's a nicely built car. As usual Racer7x, instead of our building his own race car or racing himself, is on the forum bitching about somebody else's car. S. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racer7x Posted October 28, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 28, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Snorman said: The trunk skin on the SC300 is pulled away from the support underneath. It's still the stock trunk/body panel. That should be 0 points. I looked at it at Road Atlanta this year. That's a nicely built car. As usual Racer7x, instead of our building his own race car or racing himself, is on the forum bitching about somebody else's car. S. Glad your new stock hood is working out for you... Come again, I was on a track racing last night, have a new raceable champcar build in the garage next to my dirt car run bi weekly and ran six chump/champ races over the last 12 months. Any other comments you want to make? Edited October 28, 2018 by Racer7x Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABR-Glen Posted October 28, 2018 Report Share Posted October 28, 2018 7 hours ago, Snorman said: The trunk skin on the SC300 is pulled away from the support underneath. It's still the stock trunk/body panel. That should be 0 points. I don't understand how you can think this way about aero when you were against balooned fuel tanks, what's the difference, in your mind? They both use reshaping of the factory metal to achieve a restricted result. They are both gray areas in the rules, we can't know for sure which interpretation is correct without an official ruling, but I don't see what logic allows you to be on different sides of the issue for one case vs the other, just curious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam Benty Posted October 28, 2018 Report Share Posted October 28, 2018 Flipping the boot lid has been done in this series for many years. It is unfortunate some makes of cars cannot use this type of improvisation. I do not think a flipped boot lid is going to cover the field by 4 seconds. This team is obviously doing their homework. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABR-Glen Posted October 28, 2018 Report Share Posted October 28, 2018 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Cam Benty said: I do not think a flipped boot lid is going to cover the field by 4 seconds. This team is obviously doing their homework. If you are going to kick ass that much I would think you would want to be "squeeky clean", why risk losing a win over a gray area that probably makes almost no difference, especially on a 500 pt car where it's so obvious. Just makes people think that "doing your homework" probably consists of pushing other things to or past the limits of the rules. Edited October 28, 2018 by ABR-Glen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snorman Posted October 28, 2018 Report Share Posted October 28, 2018 24 minutes ago, ABR-Glen said: I don't understand how you can think this way about aero when you were against balooned fuel tanks, what's the difference, in your mind? They both use reshaping of the factory metal to achieve a restricted result. They are both gray areas in the rules, we can't know for sure which interpretation is correct without an official ruling, but I don't see what logic allows you to be on different sides of the issue for one case vs the other, just curious. Because if you're against this, then you're basically supporting NO MODS to the body of the car that will allow a performance increase. Using the logic that this should be disallowed, then the same should be applied to the myriad cars that have hoods that are cut and reshaped to resemble heat extractor hoods that decrease lift/create downforce, modifying fenders to clear tires or provide better aero or any other modification to the body that provides a perceived performance advantage. Fuel is and always has been based on the exact fuel capacity (i.e. specification) of the OE tank. Even the national tech director confirmed that on this very forum. The body of the car is not required to be to OE specifications. In fact, only 60% of it has to be on the car. The other thing is, if this is now worth 10 points, then WTF is going the point in doing it? Now, you'll have teams just go out and spend $1500 on a real airfoil. The other difference is that if the series turns a blind eye to modifying the factory fuel tank, nothing good is going to happen. How long before somebody turns a race car into a rolling bomb because they shade tree mechanic'd their tank? It was always the "stock tank, in the stock location" (for obvious safety reasons), or an "approved" fuel cell installation. S. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABR-Glen Posted October 29, 2018 Report Share Posted October 29, 2018 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Snorman said: Because if you're against this, then you're basically supporting NO MODS to the body of the car that will allow a performance increase. Using the logic that this should be disallowed, then the same should be applied to the myriad cars that have hoods that are cut and reshaped to resemble heat extractor hoods that decrease lift/create downforce, modifying fenders to clear tires or provide better aero or any other modification to the body that provides a perceived performance advantage. Fuel is and always has been based on the exact fuel capacity (i.e. specification) of the OE tank. Even the national tech director confirmed that on this very forum. The body of the car is not required to be to OE specifications. In fact, only 60% of it has to be on the car. The other thing is, if this is now worth 10 points, then WTF is going the point in doing it? Now, you'll have teams just go out and spend $1500 on a real airfoil. The other difference is that if the series turns a blind eye to modifying the factory fuel tank, nothing good is going to happen. How long before somebody turns a race car into a rolling bomb because they shade tree mechanic'd their tank? It was always the "stock tank, in the stock location" (for obvious safety reasons), or an "approved" fuel cell installation. S. I think the difference is that this is a specific case of building something that's on the FPV list, compared to rolling a fender or venting a hood. I half jokingly suggested to Red0 earlier this year that his vented fenders would be points next year and he didn't think it was funny at all. At the time I was expecting more dramatic changes to the aero rules for 2019 than what we actually got. We don't need to discuss why balooned tanks aren't allowed, I just found it interesting that you had a different take on each scenario as I see the people in favor of those mods using the same "no material added" justification. Edited October 29, 2018 by ABR-Glen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snorman Posted October 29, 2018 Report Share Posted October 29, 2018 1 minute ago, ABR-Glen said: I think the difference is that this is a specific case of building something that's on the FPV list, compared to rolling a fender or venting a hood. I half jokingly suggested to Red0 earlier this year that his vented fenders would be points next year and he didn't think it was funny at all. At the time I was expecting more dramatic changes to the aero rules for 2019 than what we actually got. We don't need to discuss why balooned tanks aren't allowed, I just found it interesting that you had a different take on each scenario as I see the people in favor of those moods using the same "no material added" justification. So now, the series is going to assign points for creativity (as well as for modifying the body of the car). Next, they're going to start giving points for modifying hoods, fenders, etc.. Watch and see. The reason I have a different take on each scenario is because they are completely different scenarios. S. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam Benty Posted October 29, 2018 Report Share Posted October 29, 2018 Point taken. I guess the question we must ask ourselves is have we got to the point were we question ever move a team makes? Do we want to go down this road? I am sure you know I am not happy with some of the decisions that have been handed down lately. As I am sure you have also. We seem to dwell on splitting hairs. And this track is quite technical. Does a flipped boot lip cover the field by 4 seconds? A cam yes. I just don't see it with a flipped boot lid. 30 minutes ago, ABR-Glen said: If you are going to kick ass that much I would think you would want to be "squeeky clean", why risk losing a win over a gray area that probably makes almost no difference, especially on a 500 pt car where it's so obvious. Just makes people think that "doing your homework" probably consists of pushing other things to or past the limits of the rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABR-Glen Posted October 29, 2018 Report Share Posted October 29, 2018 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Cam Benty said: Point taken. I guess the question we must ask ourselves is have we got to the point were we question ever move a team makes? Do we want to go down this road? I am sure you know I am not happy with some of the decisions that have been handed down lately. As I am sure you have also. We seem to dwell on splitting hairs. And this track is quite technical. Does a flipped boot lip cover the field by 4 seconds? A cam yes. I just don't see it with a flipped boot lid. I think that horse bolted from the barn back when we started assigning values to every car and modification in the big shift toward balancing performance instead of cost. IMO that's when it became more about competition than fun and lost some of what got the series off the ground in the first place, but I agree with you there has to be some point we stop trying to turn this into every other road racing series and keep at least some of what got us here. There are certainly a lot of people in favor of the shadetree engineering aspects that are left. I know Mike gets this and he's the one steering the ship, but there are pitfalls to avoid. Edited October 29, 2018 by ABR-Glen 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoparBoyy Posted October 29, 2018 Report Share Posted October 29, 2018 doesn't matter, anyone see that video of Ray in tech with a level? the car didn't pass according to him. can't wait for 2019 to have all these teams rolling on grid with poorly done fender flares. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racer7x Posted October 29, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 29, 2018 12 minutes ago, Cam Benty said: Point taken. I guess the question we must ask ourselves is have we got to the point were we question ever move a team makes? Do we want to go down this road? I am sure you know I am not happy with some of the decisions that have been handed down lately. As I am sure you have also. We seem to dwell on splitting hairs. And this track is quite technical. Does a flipped boot lip cover the field by 4 seconds? A cam yes. I just don't see it with a flipped boot lid. I'm totally with you... But how about front splitters extending back to the gas tank scenario? Don't think that one would fly today... And the bccr states no carbon fiber, but then we got responses of "but that doesn't apply to end plates and dive planes". Oh yes it does, no carbon fiber means no carbon fiber. Flipping a trunk and fabricating a rear spoiler doesn't conform to the keep it somewhat "oe" so as not to take points scenario... The benz at daytona had it back glass/lexan opened up at a 45 degree angle for aero which should of caught techs or an officials eye, not to mention safety concerns. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enginerd Posted October 29, 2018 Report Share Posted October 29, 2018 27 minutes ago, ABR-Glen said: I think the difference is that this is a specific case of building something that's on the FPV list, compared to rolling a fender or venting a hood. You're ignoring the part where the word "spoiler" doesn't appear in the 2018 rulebook a single time. This is the rule you are referring to: • wings/splitters (carbon fiber not allowed): 10 pts/ea And this is what it looks like for 2019: o Spoiler / Wing / Splitter / Diffuser / Aero Pan / Air Dam / Side Skirts: 10 pts/ea Big big difference. This, combined with the "repurpose becomes the new item" clause, will eliminate the freebie spoiler for 2019. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morganf Posted October 29, 2018 Report Share Posted October 29, 2018 5 minutes ago, MoparBoyy said: doesn't matter, anyone see that video of Ray in tech with a level? the car didn't pass according to him. can't wait for 2019 to have all these teams rolling on grid with poorly done fender flares. I think I missed a post. What was being measured with a level? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enginerd Posted October 29, 2018 Report Share Posted October 29, 2018 Just now, morganf said: I think I missed a post. What was being measured with a level? 4.7.1.1. While tire size is open, tires may not extend beyond the cover of the fenders from the 10 to 2 o’clock positions. Fenders can be stretched/rolled to cover wider tires and flares can even be made, however any added materials used to enlarge the fenders will be charged at the material rate in 4.3.2. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.