It's been a week. Can we have a rules discussion thread?

In reply to Patrick (Forum Supporter) :

I was just curious what the actual rule update request was. The discussion is jumbled and very vague. Is it-use the word "quicker" not "faster" because an ET represents time not speed, is it "we need to make sure they wear arm restraints", or is it "please clarify that there is an NHRA challenge roll cage rule that is not spelled out in the challenge rules that only mention roll bars". 

Regarding the pavilion...

It wouldn't be that hard to say no running engines inside the pavilion. It sounds like an inconvenience, but with as many people as there are in attendance, it would be easy to get volunteers to help push. 
 

Some of the loudest engines would have no problem pushing their cars through the staging lanes in the drags- they could easily do it in the pavilion as well. 
 

Plus, the pavilion is accessible from 4 sides. A lot of cars could drive right up to the pavilion then kill their engines. 
 

I know it sounds like nit-picking, but it's been a problem for quite a while, and it really would make a pretty big difference in the enjoyment of the event. 

For me, the roll bar confusion can be traced right to the NHRA rule book. It tends to direct you to a class set of rules instead of a simple, generic list and most of us are not building a car to meet any NHRA class. I ran non-DOT slicks on my supercharged Miata in 2017. I absorbed the expense of a new windshield because there a really short rule that says no cracked windshields, but I didn't have a roll bar and missed the bit about DOT tires. I've spent more time since then re-reading different parts of the rule book because of all the exceptions it throws at you. Ex: there are tubing dimensions dictated by how much of the stock floor pan you have altered (in my current case...all of it). Depending on how quick or fast a car is the roll cage rules can run to several pages.

Yes the NHRA roll bar rules are confusing at best.  My confusion with the GRM challenge rule being discussed is: 

you build a 11 second convertible with a NHRA legal Roll CAGE.  The tubing used meets NHRA specs for a CAGE not a 5 point bar (Smaller allowed diameter).   My understanding is this is Legal per NHRA.  A convertible car may have either a 5-point Bar or a Full Cage and still be legal.  

It would not meet the GRM challenge rule as writen.  The rule specifically states that the car must have a 5-point roll bar.  The rule does not state that a convertible faster then 13.49 must posses NHRA legal roll protection for the speed reached.

I am considering having the LMP360 have a fabric roof over the driver for the challenge.  This would save some money and look better then any Metal roof I could cobble together.  I'm not sure the car will actually run faster then 13.49 but if it did if would not be legal per the GRM rule as writen as the car would then be a convertible despite having a full NHRA Legal roll cage.  It does not seem that this is the intention of the GRM rule.  

Maybe a statement like "your car needs a cage / roll bar if it meets any of the following criteria" and then a list with check boxes.  If your build checks at least one box you need a cage or roll bar.  Then a second section describing what cage or roll bar means with illustrations to help show people what is acceptable.

I'm only involving (for lack of a better word) myself because I like tech writing challenges and I would someday like to be in this thing as a competitor.

In reply to nocones :

No one is going to say anything about having safety equipment for a quicker car on board and I think 13.49 is well within the capability of what you're building. Just continue doing what you're doing.

I have a question about cages while we're talking about them. I'm new to this event I was on a team this year but 2021 will be my first year racing. But why does a safety item like a roll cage count against your budget but seat belts do not? I feel like if you want to be competitive in both events you will need a cage no matter what. 

Because a cage can be a complete structural gamechanger and make the entire car work better. 

nocones said:

Yes the NHRA roll bar rules are confusing at best.  My confusion with the GRM challenge rule being discussed is: 

you build a 11 second convertible with a NHRA legal Roll CAGE.  The tubing used meets NHRA specs for a CAGE not a 5 point bar (Smaller allowed diameter).   My understanding is this is Legal per NHRA.  A convertible car may have either a 5-point Bar or a Full Cage and still be legal.  

It would not meet the GRM challenge rule as writen.  The rule specifically states that the car must have a 5-point roll bar.  The rule does not state that a convertible faster then 13.49 must posses NHRA legal roll protection for the speed reached.

I am considering having the LMP360 have a fabric roof over the driver for the challenge.  This would save some money and look better then any Metal roof I could cobble together.  I'm not sure the car will actually run faster then 13.49 but if it did if would not be legal per the GRM rule as writen as the car would then be a convertible despite having a full NHRA Legal roll cage.  It does not seem that this is the intention of the GRM rule.  

This is exactly why it’s a badly written rule. For those of us that follow the rules it doesn’t allow us to exceed safety for a 13 second car or meet NHRA for an 11 second car. 

In reply to kevin bagwell :

In addition to what Patrick said I think it was Andrew Nelson that said by making a cage part of the budget that in itself is a speed bump in that you’re now not spending that money to go faster. The top cars are scary fast and their drivers are capable but if you allowed cages  to be budget exempt that would let just about anyone capable of bolting a turbo to an LS to run 10s. 

This would fix it I think.

Current:

Five-point roll bars meeting item 4:10 of the NHRA's general safety regulations and arm restraints are mandatory in all open-top cars running a 13.49 E.T. or faster or running non-DOT tires.

Proposed:

Roll over protection meeting item 4:10 or 4.11 of the NHRA's general safety regulations and use of arm restraints are mandatory in all open-top cars running a 13.49 E.T. or faster or running non-DOT tires.

or

For all open top cars running a 13.49 E.T. or Faster or running non-DOT tires roll over protection meeting item 4:10 or 4.11 of the NHRA's general safety regulations and use of arm restraints are mandatory

In reply to Patrick (Forum Supporter) :

In reply to Stampie (FS) :

ok that's what I kinda figured it was more for a structural thing that would stiffen the car up

My challenge budget personally would love if Bars or Cages were Exempt however I think it probably changes the game a bit to much and I am not promoting that change.

My budget will be carrying about $350 of 4130 roll cage tubing.  It is not just a safety item as the car would fold in half without it. 

A Jegs Cage kit is $250-300 (Mild Steel).    Pre-bent Roll Bar main hoops are usually about $50-75 and you need about $50 worth of straight tube to finish your bar.  Full DIY would be a bit less if you have the tools to bend.   

I don't think this is an unreasonable amount to expect people to carry in their budget if they want to run ET's that require cages or gain the chassis stiffness of it.  It's a decision that needs to be made during the build. 

This is an area that is a bit unfair to those that can't do the work themselves as any bar/cage you don't weld yourself is a budget wrecker (But almost every car guy knows a Welder).  The most basic Miata bolt in Bar is $500+ and I don't think you could pay a shop to do a weld in cage for less then a Challenge budget.    But I think if you let these be budget exempt it will immediately make those that give the challenge a bad name for "those aren't $2000 cars" have a real point.   If all the challengers show you that their budget sheets have the roll bars/cages in them and they welded them it at least says.. no really this was built for $2000 less labor.  

I also think it's unnecessary because you can be competitive without it.  A open top car running a 13.6 ET was 4th this year, and the car that won didn't run an ET that required a Roll Bar (Closed car ran >11.49 ET).  

Is there a budget neutral, environmentally friendly way to empty the freon out of your air conditioning system for the challenge?  I ended up taking the car to a friend that owned a shop and he pulled out the refrigerant in about 5 minutes and didn't ask for payment.  Technically, I am pretty sure I was supposed to pay $7 for the shop time.

The non-DOT language feels like an SCCA carry over. In Solo Modified classes there is a list of safety exemptions allowed for cars using DOT tires. This, I believe, is based on the premise of increased roll over potential with the use of non-DOT tires. There are also some NHRA regs which are qualified by tire use; driveshaft loop in one that comes to mind.

There are too many "or"s in the current rule. Tacking on more stipulations is causing this Challenge rule, which as written is itself adding stipulations to the NHRA rules, to spiral into incoherence.

Roll protection and arm restraints are mandatory for all open top cars quicker than 13.50 E.T. and/or running non-DOT tires. All required roll protection must satisfy NHRA General Safety Regulations section 4:10 or 4:11.

In reply to ojannen :

I think proper environmentally conscious Freon or any used Fluid disposal should be budget exempt.  I don't want people using $20-30 of challenge budget as the reason they accidentally crack an AC line, or the bucket of used antifreeze gets "spilled" into the rocks in the driveway. 

That said this overlaps with the "don't be a Dick" rule that you shouldn't buy a $1 EPA Superfund site because it comes with a Lamborghini Diablo and use this to justify that that is a $1 Diablo because environmental cleanup costs aren't included.  

In reply to gumby (Forum Supporter) :

I'm fine with your text.  I wanted to respect as much of the original text as possible in my "proposal" but your complete rewrite is clear and concise.  

I'm all for roll over protection being  IN the budget, but there are certainly ways to do it at very low cost. The entire chassis I'm building has less than $100 in it, possibly a little over once I include the welding wire. Andrew's cars will have even less than that normally. You just have to find a source of recyclable material at Challenge friendly pricing. It's just like everything else on these cars, find the bargains so you can buy more speed.

Tom it looks like there's no disagreement here on the first two.  I'm thinking GRM would love to sell more stickers from the store right?

In reply to Stampie (FS) :

I'm going to completely cover my car's paint in GRM stickers for budget-exempt and magazine-friendly concours points. 

slowbird said:

In reply to Stampie (FS) :

I'm going to completely cover my car's paint in GRM stickers for budget-exempt and magazine-friendly concours points. 

I think that's been done at least once. 

Freon... I would personally have no issue with this being left entirely out of the budget. Don't ask, don't tell. The existence or lack of Freon doesn't change the value of the car when you purchase it. Removing it doesn't change the value, and doesn't give a performance advantage.

It would be like removing something you found in the trunk. 
 

The event has too many rules already. Let's not codify Freon. 

Roll bars/ cages have been discussed after the event every year since 2004.  I don't see any budget changes necessary.

Although a wording clarification might be helpful.

I think freon is covered by the wording on other fluids (oil, brake fluid, coolant, etc). If they're free to add to the car, certainly they're free to pay to remove.