CASC Ontario Region Message Forums  

Go Back   CASC Ontario Region Message Forums > CASC-OR Divisions > Time Attack Specific Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-26-2017, 10:23 PM
Dave Barker's Avatar
Dave Barker Dave Barker is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Whitby
Posts: 1,900
Proposed Rule Changes for 2018

The CCC has been actively discussing potential rule changes for next year's OTA. Here is what we are suggesting so far.


1) Propose to allow Toyo 888 , 888R and RA-1 tires as zero PIP tires

2) Propose to allow oil catch cans at zero PIPs (authorized mod)

3) Propose to allow the removal of catalytic converters as long as least 1 functioning converter is in place at zero PIPs (authorized mod)

4) Increase the HI of all cars with dual clutch transmissions by 5

5) Charge 1.5 PIPs for the addition of a sequential transmission

6) Revise the penalty section of the rule book to charge a minimum of 10 PI for every undeclared modification PIP up to expulsion from the event at the choice of the stewards.

7) Increase the HI of the 2015 and up Mustangs by 5 from 45 to 50

8) Propose requiring head and neck restraints for all cars that use a 5 or more point harness for 2019

9) Propose removing the requirement of roll over protection to be able to properly install a 5+ point harness (as per manufacturer's instructions) as long as a head and neck restraint system is used for 2018

Let the discussion begin.
__________________
Mobil 1 Time-Attack # 4, CCC Member
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-26-2017, 11:53 PM
dubya_rx's Avatar
dubya_rx dubya_rx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Speyside
Posts: 424
Re: Proposed Rule Changes for 2018

Quote:
4) Increase the HI of all cars with dual clutch transmissions by 5

5) Charge 1.5 PIPs for the addition of a sequential transmission
How does HI relate to PIPs? I know 5 PIPs is a class increase (but depends on the modification level). How does a HI increase of 5 relate to class increase?
__________________
'11 Red STI #373


Keep right except to pass.
www.aircombatzone.com
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-27-2017, 12:38 AM
Slowpoke's Avatar
Slowpoke Slowpoke is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,629
Re: Proposed Rule Changes for 2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by dubya_rx View Post
How does HI relate to PIPs? I know 5 PIPs is a class increase (but depends on the modification level). How does a HI increase of 5 relate to class increase?

Since your overall PI is 70% wt:hp and 30% handling index, a 5HI change is equal to 1.5PI.
__________________


Stephen, SPDA VP, OTA Director, CCC Member
OTA: MOD? -=- CSCS: SSA #842
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-27-2017, 12:01 PM
Snizzoop Snizzoop is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Barrie, ON
Posts: 926
Re: Proposed Rule Changes for 2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Barker View Post
9)Propose removing the requirement of roll over protection to be able to properly install a 5+ point harness (as per manufacturer's instructions) as long as a head and neck restraint system is used for 2018.
Is it really okay to potentially let a 20+ year old tin can (Civic/Integra for example) rip around Mosport with a seat, harness and H&N restraint without a roll bar? Older cars just don't have the same strength greenhouse (roof structure) that the cars of today have.

Could we also remove the requirement of rollbars for convertibles? Basically the same thing.
__________________
TLMC Autoslalom Co-Director
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-27-2017, 12:20 PM
10gt61's Avatar
10gt61 10gt61 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Newmarket ON
Posts: 516
Re: Proposed Rule Changes for 2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snizzoop View Post
Is it really okay to potentially let a 20+ year old tin can (Civic/Integra for example) rip around Mosport with a seat, harness and H&N restraint without a roll bar? Older cars just don't have the same strength greenhouse (roof structure) that the cars of today have.

Could we also remove the requirement of rollbars for convertibles? Basically the same thing.
Agree with this. When I went wrong side up with no cage & OEM 3-point, the vehicle structure (A pillars & B pillars) held up well (2010 Mustang), but it was tight. There was some intrusion in the centre roof & windshield areas. I needed the flexibility to move within the car. If the rollover had of been more severe (ie multiple roll or hard impact roll), there would likely have been even more intrusion into the occupant space that needed to be avoided.

To be held upright in place by a 5-point and HANS definitely requires a cage to support the roof in a rollover IMHO.
__________________
Kelly B. GT Class Competitor 2011 - 2014
OTA Director 2015
ASN/FIA Committee 2015
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-27-2017, 01:30 PM
kmorris's Avatar
kmorris kmorris is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Whitby
Posts: 418
Re: Proposed Rule Changes for 2018

I think the proposal was for just the harness, not a race seat. A race seat would definitely be a no- go unless it could recline. But how would you attach the top of the harness anyway with no roll structure? Are there reclining race seats with harness attachment points?
__________________
Another quality post from Black Dwarf Racing
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-27-2017, 01:42 PM
Saj5DJ's Avatar
Saj5DJ Saj5DJ is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 1,543
Re: Proposed Rule Changes for 2018

Should be no 5/6 pts permitted without HANS and rollbar. Pretty dangerous and most new comers won't be aware of thst danger unless you enforce it.
__________________
Barry

Citizen Cone Dodger
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-27-2017, 02:51 PM
Grant Galloway Grant Galloway is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 177
Re: Proposed Rule Changes for 2018

My Thoughts..

1) Propose to allow Toyo 888 , 888R and RA-1 tires as zero PIP tires
This is okay by me, I plan to run zero PIP RE71R anyhow

2) Propose to allow oil catch cans at zero PIPs (authorized mod)
Never understood why this was a PIP

3) Propose to allow the removal of catalytic converters as long as least 1 functioning converter is in place at zero PIPs (authorized mod)
Does this mean I can keep the Cat and gut it? I already have a HFC

4) Increase the HI of all cars with dual clutch transmissions by 5
This makes no sense? Car does not handle better, make the car 2 pips higher if equipped with DCT ie the PDK from Porsche

5) Charge 1.5 PIPs for the addition of a sequential transmission
Anyone running these? They are a huge advantage

6) Revise the penalty section of the rule book to charge a minimum of 10 PI for every undeclared modification PIP up to expulsion from the event at the choice of the stewards.
I hate cheaters, so I am good with this

7) Increase the HI of the 2015 and up Mustangs by 5 from 45 to 50
John P will not like this... LOL

8) Propose requiring head and neck restraints for all cars that use a 5 or more point harness for 2019
This makes sense, if you buy a harness, scrape some money together for a HANS device.

9) Propose removing the requirement of roll over protection to be able to properly install a 5+ point harness (as per manufacturer's instructions) as long as a head and neck restraint system is used for 2018
I don't think you want a harness without ROP, I can't imagine being tightly secured in a harness and rolling over with the roof collapsing in on me!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-27-2017, 03:23 PM
Dave Barker's Avatar
Dave Barker Dave Barker is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Whitby
Posts: 1,900
Re: Proposed Rule Changes for 2018

I expected the harness issue to be the biggest point of discussion.

I feel that a high speed frontal impact is far more likely than a rollover in my car (Corvette) and likely the structure is indeed much stronger than a lot of other vehicles. OTOH as our rules state now, I cannot use a head and neck restraint, which I feel is important , because the rules committee insists that I have a VERY expensive roll bar installed in my car. Therefore the rules committee is dictating to me what is the safer option to me (which I thoroughly disagree with) and are preventing me from using what I believe to be the safer option i.e head and neck restraint with a 5+ harness vs OEM 3 points. Proper mounting can be done with the use of harness bar which attaches to the B pillar.

Certainly some groups have the same rules as ours but others such as Chin motorsports, one of the largest lapping groups in the USA, do not dictate the safety rules i.e harnesses are ok in regular cars. BTW rumours are that the USA has about twice the number of lawyers per capita as Canada.

Also at this stage we allow 5+ point harnesses in old convertibles with roll bars where the descent of the A pillar is a lot MORE likely than in my car.

I would see either let the competitor decide what is the safest for him (we do let competitors declare if their car is safe with the safety check list) OR we only allow the use of a harness in a car with a full roll cage. Our present rules are quite inconsistent.
__________________
Mobil 1 Time-Attack # 4, CCC Member
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-27-2017, 04:22 PM
wparsons wparsons is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Whitby
Posts: 673
Re: Proposed Rule Changes for 2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snizzoop View Post
Is it really okay to potentially let a 20+ year old tin can (Civic/Integra for example) rip around Mosport with a seat, harness and H&N restraint without a roll bar? Older cars just don't have the same strength greenhouse (roof structure) that the cars of today have.

Could we also remove the requirement of rollbars for convertibles? Basically the same thing.
Unless you're arguing that a 20+ year old civic needs a rollbar in all circumstances, it's not basically the same thing. A permanent hard top has some protection in a rollover, a convertible has nothing. If you really want to get at how "safe" it is, a lot more context is required. Look at me vs Steve in his car, I doubt the roof could ever collapse enough to get near my head with how low his seats are mounted (even with no cage at all), but it could easily collapse enough to put pressure on his head.

IIRC, we don't require thorough inspection of cages/rollbars either, so it could be a bar made with too thin of tubing to be effective.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grant Galloway View Post
3) Propose to allow the removal of catalytic converters as long as least 1 functioning converter is in place at zero PIPs (authorized mod)
Does this mean I can keep the Cat and gut it? I already have a HFC
Nope, gutted wouldn't be functioning. I'd also suggest we adopt the SCCA rule that the cat can't be more than 6" further back than the furthest aft stock cat.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grant Galloway View Post
4) Increase the HI of all cars with dual clutch transmissions by 5
This makes no sense? Car does not handle better, make the car 2 pips higher if equipped with DCT ie the PDK from Porsche
Unfortunately there's no way to just add 2 pips to a base car with the current classification system. It could be added as a required "mod", but then the CCDB would need to police it.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 10-27-2017, 04:40 PM
13inches 13inches is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Between a Chicago box and an airport loop
Posts: 3,044
Re: Proposed Rule Changes for 2018

What's the premise for 6) ? It seems unduly harsh and unless undeclared mods are becoming a rampant problem, and/or you have an effective method of enforcement, what is it going to solve?
__________________
http://www.pitl.ca
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-27-2017, 05:29 PM
Saj5DJ's Avatar
Saj5DJ Saj5DJ is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 1,543
Re: Proposed Rule Changes for 2018

5/6 point with no HANS device would, I imagine, be a larger risk than a 5/6 point + HANS with no rollbar.

Still. Mixing with 'bits' of a safety solution seems bad to me. In your scenerio Dave, I'd say you're just as likely to hit a wall sideways. Your HANS won't be doing a thing for you without a containment seat at that point and you're back to the 5pt being more dangerous than the 3pt.

Is it not the function of the rules committee to dictate safety equipment?
__________________
Barry

Citizen Cone Dodger
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-27-2017, 05:34 PM
Saj5DJ's Avatar
Saj5DJ Saj5DJ is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 1,543
Re: Proposed Rule Changes for 2018

I would have thought you need either 5/6pt + HANS +containment seat + roll over protection, or OEM.
__________________
Barry

Citizen Cone Dodger
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-27-2017, 05:55 PM
Carguy's Avatar
Carguy Carguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,427
Re: Proposed Rule Changes for 2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Barker View Post
The CCC has been actively discussing potential rule changes for next year's OTA. Here is what we are suggesting so far.


1) Propose to allow Toyo 888 , 888R and RA-1 tires as zero PIP tires - I'm guessing this is because these older tires have been caught up by the latest crop of street tires?
The rest of the proposals look very reasonable to me.

Concerning head and neck restraints without roll-over protection some 4-point belt systems, notably the Schroth Profi with ASM, can be installed using the rear seat belt anchors (provided the strap angles are within the manufacturer's limits) and are compatible with the HANS device. The way #9 is worded doesn't include 4 point belts. Maybe another proposed rule?
__________________
CarGuy - Subaru BRZ #57

Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting. Steve McQueen
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-27-2017, 07:00 PM
Snizzoop Snizzoop is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Barrie, ON
Posts: 926
Re: Proposed Rule Changes for 2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by wparsons View Post
Unless you're arguing that a 20+ year old civic needs a rollbar in all circumstances, it's not basically the same thing. A permanent hard top has some protection in a rollover, a convertible has nothing. If you really want to get at how "safe" it is, a lot more context is required.
You're right, it's not the same thing. I was just making a "proposal" that is equally as ridiculous as what is being proposed here.
__________________
TLMC Autoslalom Co-Director
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.