Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Please reference the 2022 Petitions at https://champcar.org/web/pdf/bod/2022-BCCR-Member-Petitions.pdf


The voting is open to all ChampCar Car Endurance Series Club Members in good standing.
This form is only used to allow the ChampCar Endurance Series Board of Directors to understand what the membership wants. Member rule change petition comments are due back to Board on April 30th, 2021

Click below to add comments.

https://forms.gle/kBzFbUUXoKR5CcR49

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 358
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This will require teams to spend more money on additional fire gear for crew. It will also be a huge issue for team mechanics working on a car. So now, that person has to be in full gear when laying u

If you make a tire change rule, keep 'em in the pit lane. We don't need people rushing around the paddock like they do in AER. Any fueling and  any tire changes must happen in pit lane, so they can be

Just another Miata team here that races 3-4 times a year with off-shoot team members building 2 more cars for this series for 2022. We LOVE Champcar. As amateur racers, we don’t need a massive pit cre

Posted Images

Petition 1:

Doesn't work if driver puts hands on or off roof when getting into and out of car like some of mine do.  Would recommend if rule is considered a panel be installed on hood at upper left corner by windshield to avoid accidental contact.

 

Petition 2: A lot of cars have gutted doors at this point, seems like it would take a lot to put in place.

 

Petition 4: I would just assume Tech does this anyway if they choose, no need for a rule.

 

Petition 6: I could see some merit to this rule.  Need more pros and cons discussing, I'm torn because I can see where the series may need in times to make a quicker reaction to a incorrectly valued situation.  Maybe in those instances something can be done.

 

Petition 8: I installed a cheap set of $26 dollar flares on my car and then get a point hit for them, does seem kind of silly as I think everyone else just about did the same thing.

 

Petition 9: I've never had a problem with my expansion tanks (stock) on either a Mazda Rx7 or Pontiac Firebird.

 

Petition 10: I think it should be 15-20 points.

 

Petition 11: I like the idea, but the implementation would be slow.  Just think if you B/Fed someone they still have to run a complete lap to get back around to the front. Maybe with the new flagtronics system coming we can have it alert the driver to "Catch Up" or "Pit Now" to get them out of the way.

 

Petition 12: I don't see why someone should get the benefit of a free oil cooler if their competitors car came with one from the factory.  Do not support.

 

Petition 13: No free oil cooler or accusumps

 

Petition 14: I've never needed an accusump to finish a race in 10 years of Champcar, that's rotaries and V8 and numberous other powerplants along the way.  Do not support.

 

Petition 15: Sounds good to me.

 

Petition 16: Sounds good to me.

 

Petition 17:  I understand the petitioner's logic, but I don't think I support the rule.

 

Petition 18:  What stops a team from going 10 feet behind the wall and using their power tools and then just coming right back out?  What if a team needs to remove a tire just to check their suspension/brakes/etc, we now can't use power tools?  Do not support.  

 

Petition 19: If it ain't OEM, it should get points.  Do not support petition.

 

Petition 35:  See Petition 4 notes

 

Petition 39: I want to keep all cars behind me regardless of class. Do not support

 

Petition 46: I just tell my driver's not to hit the curbs...  stay on the track seems to work pretty good.  Do not support.

 

Petition 47: Petitioner comments that the bar doesn't probably add a 1 lap advantage as the penalty for it brings, so I don't think you would need that bar for free if it doesn't provide any advantage.

 

Petition 48: My understanding was that we just need to take tires off in tech and then if additional impound was needed, the team would be asked.  I would think at that time the team should be allowed to get the tools they need, as some request may require a tool sets (for example, a right side valve cover on a LT1 350 requires the removal of the alternator, so you need to relax the belt tensioner, then the alternator has two different bolts, then the valve cover has a different size, etc...   what if you want to remove the back right spark plug on #8, good God we may be there all night!   I don't think we should expect teams to haul their tools all over the track, I don't even take my tools out of the trailer as the tool box is mounted in our trailer.

 

Petition 50: No more free stuff.  Run the OEM tank or pay to upgrade.  Aluminum is a better conductor of heat so they would improve the cooling properties of the cooling system.  Do not support.

 

Petition 52: I like it.

 

Petition 59: I think you are changing a rule that has been in place since the beginning to try and combat speed creep because of other issues with the rulebook.  Just outlaw swaps, problem solved.  Do not support.

 

Petition 63: I like it!

 

Petition 65: I don't think you can police the location given the angles and elevation changes we see from track to track.  I do think the rules should only allow lights to be a solid color, no strobe or flashing effects.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the limit change limit ideas, but I don't know why Troy proposed so many of them. I don't think ChampCar is going to maintain an accurate list of allowed budget tire compounds, so limiting tire changes makes sense to me.

I disagree with Troy on dry brakes. I bought all the hardware for mine for $1,100. That is expensive, but I don't like spilling fuel and really don't want to be on fire. Dry breaks in ChampCar will also allow me to run them in WRL without changing the car. If you want to limit fill speed, you could always limit the size of the vent line or something similar.

I supported all petitions reducing or eliminating the points cost of reliability modifications, and additional points for higher-capacity fuel cells.

Edited by Grant
Link to post
Share on other sites

So petition 55 on ball joints and plates :  "Enforce that Caster or Camber adjusting apparatus are valued as indicated in the BCCR"

 

But 45: free offset bushings 

 

If 45 is allowed, it doesn't enforce the idea of 55. So i can buy offset bushings to adjust camber or caster for 0 points, but not extended ball joints that do the same? Really?

 

If 1 is free both should be free. Or keep offset bushings as points just like the extended ball joints.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, chbright said:

So petition 55 on ball joints and plates :  "Enforce that Caster or Camber adjusting apparatus are valued as indicated in the BCCR"

 

But 45: free offset bushings 

 

If 45 is allowed, it doesn't enforce the idea of 55. So i can buy offset bushings to adjust camber or caster for 0 points, but not extended ball joints that do the same? Really?

 

If 1 is free both should be free. Or keep offset bushings as points just like the extended ball joints.

This has been my argument against 'free e30 offset bushings' that Chris also proposed last year... It is a non-OE caster adjusting apparatus.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, enginerd said:

This has been my argument against 'free e30 offset bushings' that Chris also proposed last year... It is a non-OE caster adjusting apparatus.

 

I'm more pissed that champ has allowed people to add material to oem rubber bushing to make offset bushing for free. That's some BS. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, enginerd said:

This has been my argument against 'free e30 offset bushings' that Chris also proposed last year... It is a non-OE caster adjusting apparatus.

100% agree.  I say keep the current points as they are for these items.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This all seems unnecessarily complex. Why not just let everyone have one free camber adjustment of their choice? You can already slot or drill for free, meaning most cars will be able to get optimal camber. Don't we want the rulebook kept short to focus on $$ for speed parts? Without proper camber settings costs go up, and these complex rules deter cars from other series.

Edited by Grant
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Grant said:

This all seems unnecessarily complex. Why not just let everyone have one free camber adjustment of their choice? You can already slot or drill for free, meaning most cars will be able to get optimal camber. Don't we want the rulebook kept short to focus on $$ for speed parts? Without proper camber settings costs go up, and these complex rules deter cars from other series.

Your suggestion is still more complex than “adding anything to the car which wasn’t there from the factory adds points”.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/26/2021 at 2:23 PM, ross2004 said:

Troy's throwing them out there hoping something sticks 😆

I write them down throughout the year and file them on the first few days. I did a bunch of options on tires to give them options on what to choose.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Timothy G. Elliott said:

Outside door handles petition 2 shouldn't be, as doors can be welded shut as the rules say already. Moot point.

 

Suggesting outside can openers for 2023

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding coolant reservoirs - I don't see why that part would be any more stressed on our cars than on the street - the coolant should be at very nearly the same temperature and pressure.  The main cause of failure is most likely thermal cycling which will happen a lot more on a street car (and I bet 99.99% make it past the factory warrantee).  If you want to talk about NLA parts, then that could be a different concern, but that was not mentioned in any of the related petitions.

 

In my view, if it's not stock it should be points.

 

As for oil coolers, free coolers = free speed parts.  From what I can see, the most vocal folks on coolers already had plenty of points to spend.  If your car isn't reliable enough it's your own fault.

 

NO MORE FREE STUFF!!!!!

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree on the no more free stuff part...

 

With that being said, I believe you are already allowed to change from the stock coolant reservoir to a different one as long as the material is the same.

 

That was the ruling I received when I asked tech (rx7 coolant bottles are brittle and over 30 years old).  I just run a generic (dorman) one from Amazon now.

 

Granted,  mine isn't the pressurized type.  But I would assume changing like for like on the pressurized ones is acceptable as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If VPI was being set by a detailed accounting of the various "cost" items figured in, I could see no more free parts. As things stand the VPI continues to be a leftover guess from the AIV days rather than a tool to level the playing field. 

 

Example: two otherwise identical cars, one has an aluminum expansion tank, the other has plastic. Does the better equipped car have a VPI that reflects that? Of course not.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Grufton said:

Regarding coolant reservoirs - I don't see why that part would be any more stressed on our cars than on the street - the coolant should be at very nearly the same temperature and pressure.  The main cause of failure is most likely thermal cycling which will happen a lot more on a street car (and I bet 99.99% make it past the factory warrantee).  If you want to talk about NLA parts, then that could be a different concern, but that was not mentioned in any of the related petitions.

 

In my view, if it's not stock it should be points.

 

As for oil coolers, free coolers = free speed parts.  From what I can see, the most vocal folks on coolers already had plenty of points to spend.  If your car isn't reliable enough it's your own fault.

 

NO MORE FREE STUFF!!!!!

I'm with you. Stock is stock. If we approve non-OE coolant tanks because "it's no better than stock and saves money", next year we will have 150 more petitions where people want their own model-specific exemptions on parts that "are no better than stock and save money".

Edited by enginerd
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Part 2.
Require all people over the wall to be dressed in fire suits during all aspects of a stop. During fuel stops, we get some teams fueling (Car A), while another team (car B) is within a few feet or yards of the team behind or in front working on their car. If an incident happens with Car A, the team at Car B could just be out working on their car, and become quickly part of the incident at Car A. Sometimes pit lane is really packed with cars and this can be a really dangerous situation. Anyone that has worked pit lane will tell you that incidents can happen really fast, without any warning.
ChampCar has been really lucky over the past 12 years of racing with fires on pitlane.
The kickback will be from teams that say they are too hot in a fire suit. Maybe we explain to then that being on fire and having your cool nylon athletic shirt melt to your back or chest could be a lot worse, and is a lot hotter.

This will require teams to spend more money on additional fire gear for crew. It will also be a huge issue for team mechanics working on a car. So now, that person has to be in full gear when laying under the car, trying to stick their head (in a helmet) into a wheel well, under the hood or anywhere else. And they have to wear gloves. Further, if TEAMS have to be in full fire gear on pit lane, then series officials working near those cars on pit lane should be in full fire gear and that includes the media guy walking up and down pit lane. Finally, we all know a full face helmet not only decreases vision but muffles sound. This is going to create a situation where crew over the wall can't see as well, can't hear as well and there will be issues. And this doesn't even begin to address the issue of face shields fogging up (which they will) while crew are exerting themselves during a stop. 

This is another of many recent attempts to solve a fictitious safety issue that doesn't exist just in the name of creating more rules. 

  • Like 12
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

#27 Tire size limit of 285.

 

So a 1900 pound car can be fitted with whatever size is the fastest for it, we've seen 255's on winning lightweight Miata's, while a 3000 pound car is tire limited with this petition.

 

#26 HP limit of 299whp

 

2000 pound car can have 299whp same as a 3000 pound car. I don't think I need to do the math to show why this is senseless.

 

Why not just say you don't want bigger, heavier cars running as that is what these are about as written/petitioned. (I smell GBU hate here...)

 

#74 cam-lifters-valvesprings- 50 points for all as all are generally done at the same time. YES! Does anyone think a cam upgrade is equal performancewise to a turbo? Current points they are the same which is ridiculous.

Edited by Bandit
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Technical Advisory Committee
Posted (edited)
46 minutes ago, enginerd said:

I'm with you. Stock is stock. If we approve non-OE coolant tanks because "it's no better than stock and saves money", next year we will have 150 more petitions where people want their own model-specific exemptions on parts that "are no better than stock and save money".

 

The only purpose of a coolant expansion tank is to keep coolant in the car.  The only consequence of a failure is at best a car is out of the race, at worst it could result in engine failure.  There is no performance impact at all.  I'm not sure why we even are having this discussion, you should be able to use what you want to use that protects your car, regardless of material it is made from.

Edited by Burningham
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bandit said:

#74 cam-lifters-valvesprings- 50 points for all as all are generally done at the same time. YES! Does anyone think a cam upgrade is equal performancewise to a turbo? Current points they are the same which is ridiculous.

A 50pt turbo is worse than a cam.  You need Atleast a 70 point turbo likely a 95 point turbo to get use out of it, then the fuel consumption is still way worse than NA.  

Link to post
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.


×
×
  • Create New...