2010 Challenge Rules---First Draft

Any additional bars and attachment points added to the roll bar or roll cage, or extending the bar or cage outside of the passenger compartment to the suspension pick up points will negate this allowance and make the entire cage count towards your budget.

I like it! It mimics the SCCA stock class rules quite well in intent. You can add this Safety only device with no penalty.

I am a little confused on how to recoup money on selling parts. I am planning on the 2012 or so challenge.. but the car I want to use is just a shell. I would be buying a parts car for the engine and drivetrain. Could I sell off parts from the parts car to recoup?

You can recoup up to $1005 total. You can recoup on any car or parts car up to the purchase price of that particular car, up to the maximum.

That's pretty well spelled out in the budget section from the first post in this thread.

thanks.. I was just concerned that the sold parts had to come from the challenge car itself.

not to beat the horse to death, but i just wanted t make sure i understand the roll bar rule change. if you are required to run a roll bar by NHRA for going faster than 13.49, can you put in a bar like the one shown in the posted diagram from the NHRA rulebook (single forward bar on the drivers side) without it counting towards the budget? i dont really need this forward bar for chassis stiffness as we can accommodate that in other ways that are totally disconnected from the roll bar. i just need the forward leg to be legal for the drags. thanks!

Is there an official date and location for the $2010 event.

I believe it was announced at the last banquet. October 1-2, 2010.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

splitime wrote: I believe it was announced at the last banquet. October 1-2, 2010. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

That date would make sense, as the Gators have an away game on 10/2/2010 and have a home game on 10/9/2010.

Per Schroeder wrote: He G) Roll bars and roll cages may be added. Roll cages must be bolted (not welded) into the automobile and contained within the passenger/driver compartment. Roll bars may be welded in. A roll cage has more than four attachment points to the body or frame, or has bracing both fore and aft of the main hoop. Roll bars and roll cages must be padded withing 6-inches of the occupants heads with SFI-spec high-density padding. Helmets must be worn in cars with roll bars or roll cages. The safety items may only be used as intended for safety purposes and have no performance advantage.

Not trying to nit pick, but.....

A 4 point bar is safer than nothing, but still not legal. That puts the convertible boys and girls out there in the same disadvantage as they're in now...run a reasonably fast convertible, they need to fit at least a 5 point NHRA legal roll bar in their budget, or they don't get credit for an ET faster than 13.50.

The roll bar thing is a tough one. If you want to make the cars stiff enough to be safe in the event of a signficant impact, they are going to stiffen up the chassis enough to realize some performance advantage. I don't think there is any getting around that.

If you decide to give roll bars a safety credit, at least make them legal to the sanctioning bodies we have to build to. If not, I'm not sure it's worth adding as a safety credit.

Sure, you can put that forward leg in, but then it's a roll cage and has to be a bolt-in design. How is that a problem?

Per

How bout we weld in the back half and bolt in/out the forward leg?

I have a question, probably only relevant to me this year but I expect more will follow, what about the roll bar and support bars extending backwards in a truck? If they do not connect to the suspension support are they "contained within the passenger/driver compartment"?

I am expecting to use a "real" bar/cage in 2010

Aussiemg: short answer: no, that wouldn't be a free upgrade as it's written. Do you really think you'll have that truck in the 11's?

Looking at the results, there aren't many cars that actually need a cage. You need to go faster than a 11.50 in a closed car and for the past few years, the overall winners were slower than that.

Honestly, the free cage allowance will probably slow a lot of you down, but help the few open top cars (Miatas) that manage to get into the 13s.

OK, just a thought didn't even consider the 11.5 to be honest

Per Schroeder wrote: Sure, you can put that forward leg in, but then it's a roll cage and has to be a bolt-in design. How is that a problem? Per

I was stuck on the 4 point...my mistake.

I'm not crazy about bolt in cages, but I'll work with what I need to for the next car.

Is there a reason why only four points are allowed for weld-in rollbars to be "free" and not 5 for a NHRA-legal rollbar? Just wondering as I would have thought that it would take a 6 or 8 point cage to get some structural benefit.

FWIW I think this is an excellent rule change. Bending a hoop requires some serious equipment that not many people have kicking around their home shop. Even if the rule was that any professional labor was "free" and the materials used had to be booked at FMV would have been a good move IMHO. Otherwise the decision would have been $200 in labour (in budget) to get just the hoop bent up at a local shop or the better part of $2,000 to buy a bender (not in budget) to do the same job. Even that really inexpensive bender adds up fast once you include a mandrel, shipping, the protractor tool and maybe a stand - all for a tool that is going to be used for a couple of bends. And that's an expensive way to try to save a few bucks (10%?) of the challenge budget.

Thomas

I may extend that rule to a five point. Let me discuss with the folks here.

So, um, on the "brake parts are free" rule.

Should you limit the selling off of brake parts?

Here's the situation I'm thinking of -- I buy a car, sell off extra bits. Build it up for the Challenge. I'm a little bit over budget, and I have some recoup room left. So I sell off the entire (stock but worn) brake system to someone who is, I don't know, building a Locost. Now I'm under budget, and have a car with no brakes at all. But I can put brakes on the car for free. So I upgrade from stock-but-worn to brand new stock brakes, and I get to actually put money back in to the Challenge budget.

Now, if you sell off a super-trick brake kit because it won't do much for you in a 30-second autox, and mount stock brakes, should you be able to recoup costs? Yeah, probably.

So here's my suggested rule: you can either have free stock brakes, or you can recoup money from your brakes. But you can't do both. Thoughts?

Matt

Do used OE brakes really sell for enough to matter?

200 and up for certain RX7 brakes.

Treb wrote: Here's the situation I'm thinking of -- I buy a car, sell off extra bits. Build it up for the Challenge. I'm a little bit over budget, and I have some recoup room left. So I sell off the entire (stock but worn) brake system to someone who is, I don't know, building a Locost. Now I'm under budget, and have a car with no brakes at all. But I can put brakes on the car for free. So I upgrade from stock-but-worn to brand new stock brakes, and I get to actually put money back in to the Challenge budget.

dang, how did i not see that?

seriously though, if you sell your existing brakes, you're no longer "replacing" worn components, you are now "purchasing and installing" brakes on a car which has none. totally different. so sure, you can credit your budget for the recoup of the old brakes, but now you've got to hit your budget for the cost of the new ones. not such an advantage anymore, is it?

You can't sell the brakes and use the safety allowance to buy new ones.

In reply to Per Schroeder: the only issue with making a 5 point cage a bolt in is the NHRA handbook requires that the floor pan be original and in tact with the singular exception of wheel tubs.

we have fully embraced the first rule of the challenge that the vehicle should be interesting and editorial worthy. so we have had to alter our floor pan a little for some swaps. that would dissallow the bolt in type cage and require that the attachment point be welded in at all 5 points. it appears that the rules do allow the forward bar to be a swing out type. if a swing out type is used, would this satisfy the concern that the forward leg is being used for chassis stiffening?

I think I'll allow a 5-point cage to be welded in to solve that.

Per