Jump to content
chip

New fender ruling from TAC section

Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, SonsOfIrony said:

Then why are we using the sidewall to determine whether a car passes/fails?

 

I don't even really have a horse in this tire barn, because I can easily make our car legal if it isn't already, but I do find this implementation a bit odd..

 

Every other racing series seems to have this figured out.  Even Stage rally requires no more than 1" if tire protrusion as viewed from above, and they're not even wheel to wheel really.  I understand the need, but this sudden jump to a zero tolerance policy seems at odds with Ray's comments about preventing 5" tire protrusion.

 

Which brings me to another point, how many cars have actually showed up with half their tires sticking out of the fenders?

 

I'm legitimately curious where this rule came from?  The conflicting responses, and the the fact that it was slyly slipped into the BCCR in hopes that they'd be set in stone by the time everyone figured out, seems a bit out of left field.  Who proposed it?  Who ok'd it?  Was it discussed at a BOD meeting?  I don't remember seeing it when I scanned the minutes, but I could have easily missed it, I'm a sucky speed reader.

I think that you (and most others) are thinking of these flares as immovable objects, when they are not. When you have fender to fender contact, they will certainly deform. How much they deform will vary, but if your fenders cover the bare minimum (only the tread), once they deform a bit they will no longer be sufficient. By extending beyond the tread, you are building in a margin of safety.

Edited by enginerd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Ray Franck said:

  Multiple other series have a rule that states no tire outside the body when looking down from above and to me that looks like the exact same rule we have but we are using a tool , one that has been around for centuries, because it seems like some of you don't LOOK the same . How many have shown up with tires sticking way outside the fenders ?  More than a few but with NO rule everyone could now we have a rule so no one will . And to say it has been sprung on the membership - people you have two and a half months to comply so get to work and fix your cars quit with the complaining ,whining, Bi#$$% and trolling .  And to the members that have responded on this thread in support of this rule THANK YOU !!

 

Since you failed to answer my question, Ill ask it again.  Who proposed this rule?  When was the last incident of a tire climb rollover?

 

If this is truly a safety rule that must be implemented for safety, then clearly there must have been recent incidents that prompted it.  Otherwise this rule stinks of someone, or some small group trying to put a limiter on something one of their competitors did, and that's called a conflict of interest.

 

All I'm asking for, all many of us are asking for, is accountability, and clarity.  No more back room deals, no more handshakes.

 

I'll say it again, I have no worries about making my car compliant if its not already, that's not an issue.  I agree, there should be 'some' rule with regard to this, I just want to know how we got here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, enginerd said:

I think that you (and most others) are thinking of these flares as immovable objects, when they are not. When you have fender to fender contact, they will certainly deform. How much they deform will vary, but if your fenders cover the bare minimum (only the tread), once they deform a bit they will no longer be sufficient. By extending beyond the tread, you are building in a margin of safety.

 

Devils advocate here.

 

If that's your argument, then a flimsy flare does nothing.  What's to stop a Miata with plenty of points from mounting up a set if 335s and putting some 6" ebay plastic flares that only cover from exactly 10-2?  This rule will do Nothing to prevent a tire climb.   If you truly want safety, then factory arches need to mandated.  No rolling, no pulling, no flares.  Bring on the NASCAR style body silhouette gauges...……….

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SonsOfIrony said:

What's to stop a Miata with plenty of points from mounting up a set if 335s

Hubs...or lack of ones that won't break with that extreme offset.            Oh, and a Miata that can stay with the e30's and such doesnt have a lot of points left over. ;)

 

Your point of flares and stretched fenders not adding much if any safety is not wrong in my opinion

 

I don't feel like this was sprung on us suddenly, the 2019 rules have been out for some time now and it was in there from the beginning I think.  The BOD, that we elected, put the rule in.  I just don't see this as nearly the issue that its been made out to be in this thread.  Just my opinion.    

 

And, I don't think the series should wait for death and destruction to implement a rule that tries to add some safety margin.   

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, SonsOfIrony said:

 

 

 

If this is truly a safety rule that must be implemented for safety, then clearly there must have been recent incidents that prompted it.  Otherwise this rule stinks of someone, or some small group trying to put a limiter on something one of their competitors did, and that's called a conflict of interest.

 

All I'm asking for, all many of us are asking for, is accountability, and clarity.  No more back room deals, no more handshakes.

 

 

Are the type of person that puts safety glasses on after you have a piece of metal in your eye?

 

That is not how to keep people safe.

 

You identify hazards and then work on ways to eliminate them.  You don't wait for people to almost get hurt and then do something about it.

 

 

How does this benefit any 1 car or team over another?

 

Again, this is something that everybody should be doing as an aero benefit anyway!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, SonsOfIrony said:

Devils advocate here.

 

If that's your argument, then a flimsy flare does nothing.  What's to stop a Miata with plenty of points from mounting up a set if 335s and putting some 6" ebay plastic flares that only cover from exactly 10-2?  This rule will do Nothing to prevent a tire climb  if people install flimsy ebay plastic fender flares

I agree 100%. I even wrote (perhaps in some other thread) that tech should check for a flares 'reasonable ability to prevent tire contact in a collision', instead of just it's size. I think that was shot down by someone official.

Edited by enginerd
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really, the flare just needs to get in between 2 tires that are spinning.  It will lessen the chance of the tire ahead pulling the tire behind "up".

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, wvumtnbkr said:

Really, the flare just needs to get in between 2 tires that are spinning.  It will lessen the chance of the tire ahead pulling the tire behind "up".

 Finally, some actual logic 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wvumtnbkr said:

Really, the flare just needs to get in between 2 tires that are spinning.  It will lessen the chance of the tire ahead pulling the tire behind "up".

Plastic won't do very well when it's in pieces after the initial contact. I recently put a set of those flares on a drift car for a customer and I doubt they'll survive the kind of incident that the rule is addressing. 

 

Here's a set of plastic fender flares that would (almost) meet the rule's specs but do very little to prevent the contact that could lead to launching. The critical area is exposed both front and rear and the plastic would little to nothing to fend (root of the word fender) off the contact. In side to side contact they wouldn't even protect the area of the tire that they're covering because of the camber, which is fine because that type of contact rarely launches a car.

Image result for fender flares

 

The launching effect would be from the front of one tire climbing up the back of the other car's tire. The way to prevent that would be to extend the front airdam/splitter back to the front fender or at least cover that part to provide a solid surface between the tires. That would be enough to achieve the rule's objective IMO. That would require the 9:00 to 12:00 area in front of the tires to be enclosed. This would be more appropriate:

Image result for fender flares

And of course the aero benefits are obvious. That should appease some of the naysayers. :)

 

I did my metal flares because I don't want any cut tires from minor contact from other people's protruding body pieces - and yes, I think they look better than tires sticking out. One of my drivers got hit hard enough in the RR from a car that missed his braking point that he spun off the track and was sure that the tire would have been damaged by the contact. When he came in for the self-report I pulled the rear lower edge out a bit and sent him back out.

 

I think plastic would have shredded, so my pit stop would have been much longer to replace the plastic fender flare with another one in order to be legal at the end of a Champ race.

Edited by mender
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wvumtnbkr said:

Really, the flare just needs to get in between 2 tires that are spinning.  It will lessen the chance of the tire ahead pulling the tire behind "up".

Thanks Rob, I was thinking the same thing, just hadn't come up with a decent way to say it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/14/2018 at 9:25 AM, mhr650 said:

So what if you don’t have fenders at 10 and 2 o’clock?

35474334_2626437944049014_3868455581555621888_n.jpg.cb46244f82626b8cc7173aa7c2aed095.jpg

17_1226a.jpg.7a5a40b07d5289f42e647fcb75057099.jpg

So by my way of thinking, these two cars are properly equipped to prevent launching even though they don't meet the present rule specs. Not sure either has sufficient strength in the appropriate area though.

 

Changing them to meet the minimum rule specs (covered from 11 to 1) would make them more likely to have the issue that the rule is proposing to address IMO.

Edited by mender

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wvumtnbkr said:

Are the type of person that puts safety glasses on after you have a piece of metal in your eye?

 

That is not how to keep people safe.

 

You identify hazards and then work on ways to eliminate them.  You don't wait for people to almost get hurt and then do something about it.

 

 

How does this benefit any 1 car or team over another?

 

Again, this is something that everybody should be doing as an aero benefit anyway!

 

No.

 

I agree there should be some rule.

 

As Mender has shown, this rule really doesn't do anything to prevent a tire climb.

 

If you think a little flimsy plastic flare is not going to either immediately explode, or just peel off and go flying, then you clearly haven't watched enough drifting videos. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SonsOfIrony said:

 

No.

 

I agree there should be some rule.

 

As Mender has shown, this rule really doesn't do anything to prevent a tire climb.

 

If you think a little flimsy plastic flare is not going to either immediately explode, or just peel off and go flying, then you clearly haven't watched enough drifting videos. 

I didn't say anything about flimsy or plastic.  You did.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's simplify this fender issue, drive down tire costs and stop the steady creep in wheel and tire widths, which IMHO have gotten ridiculous on some cars...Limit tires to no more than a 205 width or the narrowest stock tire fitted to a given car, (if stock tires are wider than a 205) and wheels to stock width or narrower...

Edited by oddcarnut

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Hurljohn said:

Our car "failed" but cant imagine how we would have the type of incident covered (see what I did there) by this new rule. 

received_10104308070369256.jpeg

 

Who is that cool lookin dude behind the wheel?  He looks really fast in that picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Burningham said:

 

Who is that cool lookin dude behind the wheel?  He looks really fast in that picture.

I don't know for sure, but it looks like he is singing! 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, wvumtnbkr said:

Really, the flare just needs to get in between 2 tires that are spinning.  It will lessen the chance of the tire ahead pulling the tire behind "up".

 

2 hours ago, wvumtnbkr said:

I didn't say anything about flimsy or plastic.  You did.

 

 

 

Youre implying that any flare will do the job.  Being a budget based series, it stands to reason that some percentage of membership will go the cheapest and easiest route, which is punching a few keys on Amazon, and waiting two days for some Chinese rivet on flares to be delivered.  IMO, the only thing these will do in a tire climb, is add debris to the track.  They don't cover the front of a tire, so they are essentially a loophole.

 

Which gets back to my original post.  There was no membership discussion regarding this rule change, and considering this thread was 6 pages before I wandered in, It seems like maybe there should have been.  That way we don't end up with a half baked rule in the "final" revision of the rules, that must then be rethought, two weeks after the BCCR is released.  I'm sure the BOD doesn't appreciate having to rehash changes like this, and they shouldn't have to.  But when rule changes are made that effect a large percentage of membership are made without member imput that will happen.  Some will argue that nobody uses the forums, but that myth has been pretty well busted.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would really suggest you look back and read the posts from @Jer as he explained it very well that is was looked at as a safety related issue.The BOD and TAC both have the option to make the change in regards to safety within the by laws.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All a 205 tire width limit rule will do is limit the heavier cars.

 

205 for your car.  295 18 40 for a our car Thank you. And it fits under our fenders with slight messaging. The important thing is no points for the massage. 

 

4 hours ago, oddcarnut said:

Let's simplify this fender issue, drive down tire costs and stop the steady creep in wheel and tire widths, which IMHO have gotten ridiculous on some cars...Limit tires to no more than a 205 width or the narrowest stock tire fitted to a given car, (if stock tires are wider than a 205) and wheels to stock width or narrower...

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, SonsOfIrony said:

 

 

Youre implying that any flare will do the job.  Being a budget based series, it stands to reason that some percentage of membership will go the cheapest and easiest route, which is punching a few keys on Amazon, and waiting two days for some Chinese rivet on flares to be delivered.  IMO, the only thing these will do in a tire climb, is add debris to the track.  They don't cover the front of a tire, so they are essentially a loophole.

 

Which gets back to my original post.  There was no membership discussion regarding this rule change, and considering this thread was 6 pages before I wandered in, It seems like maybe there should have been.  That way we don't end up with a half baked rule in the "final" revision of the rules, that must then be rethought, two weeks after the BCCR is released.  I'm sure the BOD doesn't appreciate having to rehash changes like this, and they shouldn't have to.  But when rule changes are made that effect a large percentage of membership are made without member imput that will happen.  Some will argue that nobody uses the forums, but that myth has been pretty well busted.

No, I'm explaining how the flare will work.

 

It needs to be a barrier between the 2 tires to work.  

 

It does not need to be anything stronger than a stock fender (which isn't really that strong).

 

Do these plastic fenders and whatnot litter the track now?

 

What do race cars made out of fiberglass do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×