New fender ruling from TAC section

[Snorman 1,609]

1 minute ago, ablesnead said:

I thought that the flat plate connecting the front roll bar to the windshield  post  in that red car that moparbovy  shows was illegal...aren't  they limited to 6 " at least 3 inches apart...that's a lot more obvious than the tire clearance  , ..

They're not "illegal". They're points. And that car is taking points for them. 

S. 

[Ray Franck 2,067]

3 hours ago, MoparBoyy said:

Not sure how this is "unsafe"  

 

I'd love to see where we've had all this side to side contact, while everyone is going perfectly straight and cars climbing each other.

 Actually if all were as yours there would be no problem unfortunately that is not the case as some have the tires 5" or more outside the body and there are videos of them taking flight .  There had to be a rule to stop this open wheel danger .  The rule was decided for complete coverage as this 1/4" , 1/2" , 5/8" clearance and so on would be hard to Tech . So its simple you are within the body and you race or your not and you don't .  Its also so easy to fix put stock wheels and tire sizes back on . But if you want to stay with the 10" wide's become a flair master cause ka ka ain't going to pass .  More info and particulars will be coming soon 

Edited November 14, 2018 by Ray Franck

[Snorman 1,609]

27 minutes ago, enginerd said:

I think this wreck was caused by wheel contact. If it was fender to fender, I don't think the e30 would have veered so violently off course. Could be wrong though.

I don't see the front tire of either car extending past the fender between 10-2. At least it's nowhere near excessive on either car. And it appears the RX7 has flared front fenders. What part of the new rule do you think would prevent this crash? 

S. 

[enginerd 4,460]

5 minutes ago, Snorman said:

I don't see the front tire of either car extending past the fender between 10-2. At least it's nowhere near excessive on either car. And it appears the RX7 has flared front fenders. What part of the new rule do you think would prevent this crash? 

S. 

Well, it looks like you are right. Thanks for zooming in. I'll redact the post. 

[Snorman 1,609]

Just now, enginerd said:

Well, it looks like you are right. Thanks for zooming in. I'll redact the post. 

To be clear, I'm not looking for an argument. If this is perceived as a safety issue, it should be addressed. 

Is this rule the right way to address it? 

S. 

[JDChristianson 3,528]

I think the part that needs a little help is penalizing a team in Impound for some clown running into you.     Checking in impound is fine but they need to be checking to make sure there were no shenanigans going on, like teching with 195's and racing 245's.      And the mid race check seems overkill.  I suppose if they are checking a car for safet after repairs from movining jersey barriers.      And if I were writing the rule some minimal flare would be no points.  I'd allow the material from 10 to 2 free. Not the martial that extends the flare to the splitter or spoiler.      Racers are very creative and they need to have limits for their own good.  

 

 

 

 

[Huggy 1,779]

8 hours ago, Ray Franck said:

 Actually if all were as yours there would be no problem unfortunately that is not the case as some have the tires 5" or more outside the body and there are videos of them taking flight .  There had to be a rule to stop this open wheel danger .  The rule was decided for complete coverage as this 1/4" , 1/2" , 5/8" clearance and so on would be hard to Tech . So its simple you are within the body and you race or your not and you don't .  Its also so easy to fix put stock wheels and tire sizes back on . But if you want to stay with the 10" wide's become a flair master cause ka ka ain't going to pass .  More info and particulars will be coming soon 

 

Yet Danger #464 is being listed as "fail" when it is spot on even with the fender.  If the idea is to stop cars from flipping, danger's setup is safe.

 

Its getting to the point that we need any judgement/rulings in writing so that we can remember what was said before they are reversed or reassessed.

 

I was told after inspection that one of my cars passes, and one of my cars fails.  The car that fails is due to rust in the wheel arches that I cut out prior to knowing this rule was coming.  I will be cutting and welding to make a repair this winter, no big deal. (ok, its a big deal, but I get it)

  When the "passing" car goes though inspection, I sure hope what I was told will remain true.

 

 

Edited November 14, 2018 by Huggy

[MoparBoyy 735]

10 hours ago, Ray Franck said:

 Actually if all were as yours there would be no problem unfortunately that is not the case as some have the tires 5" or more outside the body and there are videos of them taking flight .  There had to be a rule to stop this open wheel danger .  The rule was decided for complete coverage as this 1/4" , 1/2" , 5/8" clearance and so on would be hard to Tech . So its simple you are within the body and you race or your not and you don't .  Its also so easy to fix put stock wheels and tire sizes back on . But if you want to stay with the 10" wide's become a flair master cause ka ka ain't going to pass .  More info and particulars will be coming soon 

 

Clearly we don't have a 10" wide wheel, in fact they are even stock offset because we wanted them inside the fenders. 

 

There was an easy way to make a ruling, ChampCar didn't want that.  WRL seemed to figure out an easy solution;

 

Quote

Width Extents: No part of the car may extend further than the widest point of the stock side mirrors, or the widest point of the stock body plus 6” total, whichever is less. Tires may not protrude further than 1” from the fender opening/flare as viewed from the top"

 

[Snorman 1,609]

1 hour ago, JDChristianson said:

I think the part that needs a little help is penalizing a team in Impound for some clown running into you.     Checking in impound is fine but they need to be checking to make sure there were no shenanigans going on, like teching with 195's and racing 245's.      And the mid race check seems overkill.  I suppose if they are checking a car for safet after repairs from movining jersey barriers.      And if I were writing the rule some minimal flare would be no points.  I'd allow the material from 10 to 2 free. Not the martial that extends the flare to the splitter or spoiler.      Racers are very creative and they need to have limits for their own good.  

Completely agree. Our renters have had car-to-car contact a few times with the Mazda. I could easily see a pretty harmless hit putting a car out of the race or in the pit box for an extended stay. 

And yes, if this is for "safety", some aspect of it should be free.

S. 

[riche30 656]

14 hours ago, chip said:

I have a few thoughts on this

1- If this is a safety issue, then why would material needed to correct the issue be charged?  Repurposed material from the car should be able to be used without a charge.

2- The video does not follow the explanation given in bullet 2 of Rich’s post.  The video uses the 10 & 2 clock position on the tire and then goes vertical from those points to the fender.  Using the explanation below could possibly measure a point on the fender that isn’t over the tire. This point needs further refinement.

3- Race damage incurred during a race needs to be fixed?  How will this be handled during a race?

1.  No where in the rules does it say you can't use re-purposed materials from your OEM parts to make fender flares
2.  This is a guideline for Tech.  Tech still has the ultimate call on what they deem safe.  If you think you're questionable take some photos and email Tech to make sure you're safe.

3.  We can handle this the same way we'd handle other safety issues during a race.  Window nets falling down, belts not buckled, fuel and oil spills on track....

Edited November 14, 2018 by riche30

[riche30 656]

7 minutes ago, Snorman said:

Completely agree. Our renters have had car-to-car contact a few times with the Mazda. I could easily see a pretty harmless hit putting a car out of the race or in the pit box for an extended stay. 

And yes, if this is for "safety", some aspect of it should be free.

S. 

 

If you have car to car contact, we strongly suggest you bring the car in to be checked for all safety issues.

Smaller wheels and tires, of stock sizes, are free.  We can't think of a car on the road that has this issue with a stock setup.

 

[MoparBoyy 735]

Just now, riche30 said:

2.  This is a guideline for Tech.  Tech still has the ultimate call on what they deem safe.  If you think you're questionable take some photos and email Tech to make sure you're safe.

 

 

so its up to tech interpretation?  So they can deem one car safe and another not even though they both have the same clearance?

[MoparBoyy 735]

2 minutes ago, riche30 said:

Smaller wheels and tires, of stock sizes, are free.  We can't think of a car on the road that has this issue with a stock setup.

 

 

I checked a few sports cars in my shop, 3 of them would not pass with stock wheels and stock suspension setups.  (they are not on the VPI list) but they are bone stock sports cars.

[Snorman 1,609]

10 minutes ago, riche30 said:

1.  No where in the rules does it say you can't use re-purposed materials from your OEM parts to make fender flares

Whoa...re-purposed material from the car is free if using it to make flares? 

S. 

[Wittenauer Racing 251]

While I do agree on the points of "how does this solve" and "being able to get nailed at post-race impound really sucks", I'm most concerned about how sturdy is "sturdy enough" to make tech happy? 

 

I'm not sure if I can get behind "free flares" without some well laid out verbage, not to mention we're talking 10 pts or less for most cars here. Really need to see just how this will be enforced before the pitchforks come out. As @JDChristianson mentioned, big difference between a touch on track and swapping on an inch or more of tire width. 

 

Technically our Supra passes, but I'll probably throw a set of these in the spares bin for if it gets hit....

http://a.co/d/7d6hIyM

 

12 minutes ago, riche30 said:

3.  We can handle this the same way we'd handle other safety issues during a race.  Window nets falling down, belts not buckled, fuel and oil spills on track....

 

I'm not sure if flares warrant the same immediate response time as window nets or belts being unbuckled on track. Stewards should inform the team that they will not be allowed to leave the pit box on their next stop till it's fixed.

 

 

I wonder how many 1/4" plywood flares we'll see in the spring?

Edited November 14, 2018 by Wittenauer Racing

[JDChristianson 3,528]

5 minutes ago, Snorman said:

Whoa...re-purposed material from the car is free if using it to make flares? 

S. 

please build something outrageous with re-purposed material so we can get rid of that stupid hold over rule from the days of past.   I'm kind of serious.  

Edited November 14, 2018 by JDChristianson

[Wittenauer Racing 251]

Just now, JDChristianson said:

please build something outrageous with re-purposed material so we can get rid of that stupid hold over rule from the days of past.   I kind of serious.  

 

[JDChristianson 3,528]

4 minutes ago, Wittenauer Racing said:

I wonder how many 1/4" plywood flares we'll see in the spring?

I was thinking solid Maple.  Want them to hold up you know

[JC_CRapshoot 89]

2 minutes ago, JDChristianson said:

I was thinking solid Maple.  Want them to hold up you know

Oooooo...I can use my woodworking skills now!!!!

[riche30 656]

12 minutes ago, Snorman said:

Whoa...re-purposed material from the car is free if using it to make flares? 

S. 

Not sure why it's a surprise.... I read the same rulebook you guys got.  

17 minutes ago, MoparBoyy said:

 

I checked a few sports cars in my shop, 3 of them would not pass with stock wheels and stock suspension setups.  (they are not on the VPI list) but they are bone stock sports cars.

Genuinely curious, which cars?  

[macheesy 105]

4 minutes ago, riche30 said:

Genuinely curious, which cars?  

 

Stock boxster with stock wheels/offset does not pass (at 2:00 on driver's side rear, 10:00 passenger) and is on the vpi list. There are likely others on the list as well.

  

 

Passes easily with wrl rule.

 

39 minutes ago, MoparBoyy said:

Width Extents: No part of the car may extend further than the widest point of the stock side mirrors, or the widest point of the stock body plus 6” total, whichever is less. Tires may not protrude further than 1” from the fender opening/flare as viewed from the top"

 

[CabotTeg118 207]

2 minutes ago, riche30 said:

Not sure why it's a surprise.... I read the same rulebook you guys got.  

 

Section 4.3.1 says "Repurposed components will be valued as the new component."

Section 4.7.1.1 says "'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."

 

So if we repurpose our trunk skin as a fender flare, does it not get valued as a fender flare (added material)?

[riche30 656]

2 minutes ago, CabotTeg118 said:

 

Section 4.3.1 says "Repurposed components will be valued as the new component."

Section 4.7.1.1 says "'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."

 

So if we repurpose our trunk skin as a fender flare, does it not get valued as a fender flare (added material)?

 

4.3.1 covers the items in section 4.3 (Fixed Point Values).  It has no bearing on 4.7.1.1 unless that material is added (not repurposed) to make those fenders.  We're merely saying if you go buy steel or plastic to build fenders then you need to use those values.

I can see how taking the two together could be a little misinterpreted in this case though.  

[riche30 656]

9 minutes ago, macheesy said:

 

Stock boxster with stock wheels/offset does not pass (at 2:00 on driver's side rear, 10:00 passenger) and is on the vpi list. There are likely others on the list as well.

  

 

Passes easily with wrl rule.

 

 

If you're unsure, email Tech to clarify.  They have the final say... but I don't think i'd have a problem with this from a safety standpoint.  

[JC_CRapshoot 89]

3 minutes ago, riche30 said:

 

4.3.1 covers the items in section 4.3 (Fixed Point Values).  It has no bearing on 4.7.1.1 unless that material is added (not repurposed) to make those fenders.  We're merely saying if you go buy steel or plastic to build fenders then you need to use those values.

I can see how taking the two together could be a little misinterpreted in this case though.  

Then shouldn't the rule read as follows in order to eliminate that possible misinterpretation, or perhaps a statement regarding where re-purposed material is acceptable should be added:

 

Section 4.7.1.1 says "'Fenders can be stretched/rolled to cover wider tires and flares can even be made, however any materials used that were not re-purposed to enlarge the fenders will be charged at the material rate in 4.3.2."4.