3-24-2011 rules update

#1

I was looking over the rules this weekend when the topic of removing the charcoal canister came up.

Did anyone else notice this (new language in bold):
6.2. Any competition vehicle found to have illegal modifications, either by NASA or Spec E30 Officials at any time during a race event, is subject to penalties per CCR Rule 17.7. Starting January 1st, 2012 violations for non-compliance will result in the disqualification of the prior two races. Those that are found to be in non-compliance during their first race will receive a one race disqualification.

Interesting choice of wording. The original rule cited only “illegal modifications”. The new part of the rule gets you 3 DQ’s for any “non-compliance”. Come in under weight and you just lost 3 races. I don’t know if that is the intent of the rule change but that is pretty harsh.

Another change clarifies the AFM adjustment possibilities:
9.3.1.1.4 The stock air flow meter plastic lid may be opened and a slight adjustment may be made to the internal components to allow proper electrical contact, away from a worn groove. Additionally, the toothed wheel may be rotated, clockwise or counterclockwise, to adjust the fuel mixture.

Also, the camber rules specify that camber is measured with the driver in the car. It doesn’t say WHERE in the car though… :woohoo:

#2

it was just posted and Carter was going to make an announcement about it…
all the changes are in red text.

6.2 is new NASA standard verbiage
9.3.1.1.4 is regarded as a low cost way to protect your engine
thanks,
bruce

#3

The issue I have is that 17.7 says penalties are imposed for “modification(s) to performance items”. The old SE30 rule simply refers to “modifications”. The new NASA language cites “non-compliance”. Those are three different categories of violation.

If I am under weight, I don’t suffer a penalty under 17.7. I am still DQ’d for that session, but not the prior 2 races. However, I would be non-compliant so I assume I would be bounced based on the new class rule, which supersedes the CCR…

“Non-compliance” catches a whole bunch of stuff. “Modifications”, a slightly smaller universe of violations. “Modifications to performance items” is a still smaller universe.

Just curious.

For convenience, here is 17.7…
17.7 Class Rule Compliance
Each competition vehicle must conform to a published set of rules for its class. Any competitor found to have qualified or raced a competition vehicle found to have unauthorized modifications may be penalized. NASA Impound Inspectors will determine legality of modifications to competition vehicles. Any modification(s) to performance items, whether it is a performance advantage or not, will be termed “illegal,” and subject to penalties. Performance items are those items that, if modified, could potentially increase performance. For example, a missing headlight would not necessarily be considered illegal, and normally, the competitor would be required to make corrections without penalties. Class rules supersede rules found in the CCR anytime that there is a conflict.

#4

[quote=“Steve D” post=55837][quote=“leggwork” post=55821]
6.2 is new NASA standard verbiage
[/quote]
The issue I have is that 17.7 says penalties are imposed for “modification(s) to performance items”. The old SE30 rule simply refers to “modifications”. The new NASA language cites “non-compliance”. Those are three different categories of violation.

If I am under weight, I don’t suffer a penalty under 17.7. I am still DQ’d for that session, but not the prior 2 races. However, I would be non-compliant so I assume I would be bounced based on the new class rule, which supersedes the CCR…

“Non-compliance” catches a whole bunch of stuff. “Modifications”, a slightly smaller universe of violations. “Modifications to performance items” is a still smaller universe.

Just curious.

For convenience, here is 17.7…
17.7 Class Rule Compliance
Each competition vehicle must conform to a published set of rules for its class. Any competitor found to have qualified or raced a competition vehicle found to have unauthorized modifications may be penalized. NASA Impound Inspectors will determine legality of modifications to competition vehicles. Any modification(s) to performance items, whether it is a performance advantage or not, will be termed “illegal,” and subject to penalties. Performance items are those items that, if modified, could potentially increase performance. For example, a missing headlight would not necessarily be considered illegal, and normally, the competitor would be required to make corrections without penalties. Class rules supersede rules found in the CCR anytime that there is a conflict.[/quote]

Dang Steve, just take out your boosted engine, comply with the rulz and don’t worry about the harsh penalties… :slight_smile:

#5

Starting January 1st, 2012 violations for non-compliance will result in the disqualification of the prior two races.

I could lose a couple 10th place finishes. Oh the humanity.

#6

it is odd that they didn’t just add the new text to the CCR 17.7 rule instead of doing it in all the rules of the various series.

Steve, you make several good points - I wouldn’t hesitate to email Jerry K at jerry@drivenasa.com. He is usually very receptive to suggestions that remove ambiguity.

bruce

#7

I laughed. :laugh:

#8

Reading the rule, literally and specifically as written, the current event is not included for drivers that previously competed, only the last two. A driver in his second race only loses the first one.

#9

It would sure stink to be DQ’ed retro active due to weight. I understand the illegal modifications things and even understand better the illegal performance modifications thing. As it stands, you can punt someone off the back straight and get less penalty then under weight.

How many of you guys have gone across the scales and they say you are 100 lbs light? I have. I made them re-position the scales and try again. The second time I was good. Take that forward to a weighting before a race and due to how you are positioned on the scales the reading is 10 lbs light. Nothing you would notice. You plan accordingly and leave that last gallon of gas out of the car. Now post race you are under weight. You just lost your last two races. No nationals qualification now, no toyo bucks.

Michael

#10

Class rules supersede CCR in this case, so we have the power to change it.

I was DQ’ed in 2009 at Putnam for coming in under weight by 6lbs. I say the scales were not set up the same as at Mid-Ohio. I should’ve still had a 10lb buffer. Regardless, I can understand completely being DQ’ed for that race. What I thought was unreasonable was that the 0-point finish could not be one of the “dropped” races when you tally up season points. That put me out of contention for the regional championship and I didn’t attend 2 events later that year that I otherwise would have. That was less income for NASA and less competition for a small class. I don’t think that that was the desired outcome of that rule. I don’t understand the point of DQ’ing previous races, other than that it’s assuming that if you’re cheating now, you were cheating then.

I think that the rule should be rewritten so that coming in underweight is not considered a “vehicle non-compliance”. Then, the car is only DQ’ed for that race and that 0-point finish can still be dropped from season points.

#11

A 10lb buffer seems pretty iffy to me. That is less that 0.4%. So the scales would have to be at least that accurate and repeatable. Plus 10lb is only one & one half gallons of fuel. While you might mostly get away with that little buffer, I think you’ll occasionally get caught out.

#12

Fair enough. And that’s why I have no issue with being DQ’ed from that race. But in that scenario, should that take me out of contention for the championship? Or, worse yet, DQ me from the prior 2 races??

I think that coming in under weight should be made an exception to that rule.

#13

[quote=“leggwork” post=55844]Steve, you make several good points - I wouldn’t hesitate to email Jerry K at jerry@drivenasa.com. He is usually very receptive to suggestions that remove ambiguity.

bruce[/quote]
Thanks Bruce. I sent Jerry an email today. I assume he will circle back with Carter and the series directors so I will defer to you to post any official response/clarification.

#14

I have always found Jerry to be smart and reasonable. He tends to be a great deligator and will let the series and race directors as well, be reasonable about the situation.

Regarding weight and other potential onetime infractions that are dependant on a measuring tool, I suggest all competitors use the scales that NASA uses, at the event and not rely on there own equipment. If you are off by 100lbs. (yes I have seen the scales get “caught” on the ramps) and you were not earlier in the day, than a re-measure will usually take care of it, and/or your other competitors will show up under weight as well. If you are the only guy 10 lbs under than you are screwed. So the old comment about “you won’t win because of being 5 lbs. under, but you can sure lose” is true. Don’t cut it so close.

I do like the idea that if they catch a guy cheating on an item they they did not test the month before and say he is running a modded Chip, then dinging him a couple events is a greater deterrant, it will wreck a championship run and probably should.

I have only been around for 2 years, but in my breif time it seems that most rulings I have witnessed have been reasonable, even when I have had to admit I am wrong :frowning:

Have Fun!

#15

Let’s not get too focused on weight. There are myriad things that can be non-compliant without being considered “modifications to performance items”.

I try not to cut weight that closely and I always run across the scales before it counts (on those occasions when they are set up). However, one good “off” and your camber can end up over the limit. Should that carry the same penalty as a chip or custom ground cam? I would argue “no”, but I just want to get an official clarification so I know how close to snuggle up to the limit of the rules.

And Rich’s comment is awesomely funny in the “irony” category. Want to give us a list of the changes you’ve had to make since your first race in SE30? :laugh: :laugh: At least you didn’t run a 4.10 (I think).:woohoo:

#16

Considering my car was prepared to CCA KP rules by the PO, I’ve changed pretty much everything on the car and some things twice or more since purchasing last May. It took me a while to figure out why my H&R springs were a different color than everyone elses; in case you didn’t know, the dark blue springs are the H&R sports… It’s all good though and I’m very thankful that the SE clan was patient while I “floundered” about (get it?) with a car that wasn’t at first suitable for our class. Aside from a few toyo bucks here and there (which I haven’t had the pleasure of receiving very often), I see our racing as just good fun and friendly competition.

#17

Did Jerry ever comment on the rule with regard to weight?

#18

I’m reading this again, and not sure it is being read right. Let me lawyer this a bit:

Here is the fule:

6.2. Any competition vehicle found to have illegal modifications, either by NASA or Spec E30 Officials at any time during a race event, is subject to penalties per CCR Rule 17.7. Starting January 1st, 2012 violations for non-compliance will result in the disqualification of the prior two races. Those that are found to be in non-compliance during their first race will receive a one race disqualification.

So, the first line talks about “illegal modifications”, and penalties. I think we are all ok with the 3dq rule for “illegal modifications”. The next line, when it is talking about “non-compliance”, can mean one of two things: any noncompliance, or the noncompliance of “illegal modifications”. I think they are talking about non-compliance with regard to illegal modifications, and not non-compliance as far as weight or other technical non-compliances.

Just my thoughts. I’d love to hear an official answer on this.

-Scott

#19

[quote=“BigKeyserSoze” post=56547]Did Jerry ever comment on the rule with regard to weight?[/quote]I’ve had an email conversation with Jerry, copying Carter. They are aware of the confusion and I believe the next rules revision will clarify that we don’t have different levels of infraction for non-compliance.