NEHA: 2016 Season Rules Submission

Re: NEHA: 2016 Season Rules Submission

Postby walterclark » Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:59 am

I can confirm that NASA (Road Racing and Rally) WILL be permitting SA2005 helmets until the end of 2016.

Also, I see that RA will accept SA2005 during 2016.

So, maybe we SHOULD follow these leads and delay implementing the SA2010 minimum until 2017.
The older I get the better I was.
User avatar
walterclark
 
Posts: 1442
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 12:57 pm
Location: Dover, MA.

Re: NEHA: 2016 Season Rules Submission

Postby KevinGale » Wed Jan 20, 2016 5:49 pm

walterclark wrote:I can confirm that NASA (Road Racing and Rally) WILL be permitting SA2005 helmets until the end of 2016.

Also, I see that RA will accept SA2005 during 2016.

So, maybe we SHOULD follow these leads and delay implementing the SA2010 minimum until 2017.


One less rule change to argue about this year.

You would think with 5 years to hit a deadline that Snell could time things so 2015 helmets are available in 2015 and not until it is almost 2016.
User avatar
KevinGale
 
Posts: 837
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 3:01 pm
Location: Sutton, NH

Re: NEHA: 2016 Season Rules Submission

Postby Kent Everding » Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:30 pm

Not a rule submission but there was some chatter on the FB page about Rally Class Rules and Reg's and what type of tires are allowed. I checked our documents and we do not have anything written down regarding rally class!
05 STi #109
User avatar
Kent Everding
 
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 11:24 am
Location: Upstate NY

Re: NEHA: 2016 Season Rules Submission

Postby walterclark » Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:27 pm

Kent Everding wrote:Not a rule submission but there was some chatter on the FB page about Rally Class Rules and Reg's and what type of tires are allowed. I checked our documents and we do not have anything written down regarding rally class!


It used to be maintained on the SCCNH web sire under the hillclimb tube, but seems to have been removed. Maybe a good first step would be to either eliminate the hillclimb "rally class" or get the rule set back up somewhere. Personally I am in favor of keeping the class even if it is poorly subscribed since it does attract the occasional rally team now and again.
The older I get the better I was.
User avatar
walterclark
 
Posts: 1442
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 12:57 pm
Location: Dover, MA.

Re: NEHA: 2016 Season Rules Submission

Postby Rabbit Farmer » Wed Jan 27, 2016 11:04 pm

First post was updated with the 7 rules proposals for the 2016 season.

Reminder.... I am not providing copies of the proposals at the meeting. (finger on nose)

Steve
Go Fast VW & Audi parts at FastAddiction.com
User avatar
Rabbit Farmer
 
Posts: 2109
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 11:37 pm
Location: Earth

Re: NEHA: 2016 Season Rules Submission

Postby walterclark » Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:09 am

I like what David did with the tire rule for the rally classes. Simple. By the way I remembered how to use the template I made for checking the voids after rereading the FIA RRR - the tire appendix is now Appendix V. A copy of the 2016 RRR's can be found here: http://www.fiaerc.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/FIA-Regional-Rally-Championship-Sporting-Regulations-2016.pdf

At RNY I ended up amending this statement:

2.2Tread pattern must be moulded. Instead I counted any groove over 1.6mm deep and 2mm wide whether "moulded" or cut.

These are the 3 key lines in the Appendix regarding a litmus test for meeting the FIA 17% void requirement:

2.7 In the control area, the sum of the width of the grooves encountered by a radial line must be at least 16 mm.
2.8 The bridge blocks and sipes must be considered as part of the tread pattern if they are less than 2 mm.
(Which means if a groove is under 2mm wide it doesnt count)
2.9 At least 2 circumferential lines / Minimum total width of circumferential lines = 12mm.

The "control area" above is from a table immediately preceding these statements and from which I made the template. The radial dimension of the template spans the measured tread width minus about 1.5-2" depending on actual tread width and about 5.5" along the circumference. The template I made is placed over the center line of the tire and aligned according to measured tread width. Then the qualifying grooves widths that cross a selected circumferential and selected radial grid line within my template must equal or exceed the above minimums. The grid lines on my template are 4mm spaced to double as a groove width measurement tool. Tech gets to choose which grid line in each direction it will use and these will be based on a fair estimate of which represent a reasonably accurate picture of the qualifying voids created by the tread pattern. Once qualified, all the tires with this pattern must maintain at least 1.6mm depth within the control area during an event or they will be disqualified. Checking and/or rechecking is at the discretion of tech.

I know that by accepting cut grooves I opened the door to using racing slicks which were cut to meet the void requirement. However removing that much rubber (remember this amounts to about 1/5 of the contact patch) significantly changes a tires grip and handling characteristics so they behave less like a full on racing slick and more like a tarmac rally tire. Most rally drivers prefer the feel of such tires (less max grip to be sure but a much more progressive breakaway, making it easier to drive the car sideways under what is accepted as under control). The big downside to going a cut slick route versus a genuine tarmac tire is that the tire life of a slick is reduced dramatically when driven the way rally drivers like to drive, not to mention the slick starts life with a thinner rubber tread layer than the tarmac rally tire. There are other issues as well such as thin sidewalls which limit how low one can go with tire pressure and curb hooking is much more perilous. In practice, at RNY I found no one opting for grooved race slicks in competition. I do recall one team that brought a set of grooved R6's but they ended up not using them for some reason...It might have been a weather thing. All the front runners used genuine tarmac rally tires and the rest went with performance street radials, or in some cases the so called DOT-R tires used in some SCCA racing that look like a street tire but with quite low treadwear ratings and carefully phrased cautions in the printed literature about not being intended for street driving. I was not involved at the ESPR tarmac events, which were run under the NRS rules which have a specific list of prohibited tires rather than the FIA tarmac tyre rules. I did not like the prohibited tire list way of controlling what tires are permitted. To be valid this requires the rule writers constantly survey what is available and update the list on a regular basis. In my opinion that is a work intensive strategy that will always have holes. I guess I have always been the sort that wanted to come up with a timeless formula that anyone who cares to can figure out.

Speaking of treadwear ratings... I dont follow SCCA road racing closely but do read Grassroots Motorsports Magazine. In that mag they often have little announcements regarding tires. It would seem that a couple manufacturers in the last year changed the treadwear number on certain tire models intended for SCCA racing from the 100-150 range to 200. I think this was in response to a change in minimum ratings for some SCCA series. As far as I can tell there was no actual change in the tires and the cynic in me thinks they would have embossed about any number the SCCA wanted to see, to be eligible and if actually tested some of these might come in closer to 50. I know that to carry a DOT label any tire must meet the minimum DOT requirements for tire safety and the numbers embossed on the tires. But as far as I can tell it is completely up to the manufacturers to comply and short of consumer complaints - no enforcement. And what racer is going to go the the federales to complain their race tires dont last as long as the rating on the sidewall suggests, or the tire is too light from a thin tread mould?
The older I get the better I was.
User avatar
walterclark
 
Posts: 1442
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 12:57 pm
Location: Dover, MA.

Re: NEHA: 2016 Season Rules Submission

Postby 3rdgendennis » Fri Jan 29, 2016 1:48 pm

I figured simple wording was all we needed for the actual rule. I doubt it will even be an issue anyway
The youngest David Dennis
"If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much space"
Dennis Motorsports
User avatar
3rdgendennis
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 9:29 pm

Re: NEHA: 2016 Season Rules Submission

Postby Rabbit Farmer » Sat Mar 12, 2016 12:17 pm

Rules have been posted:

http://www.hillclimb.org/rulesregs.html

KSCC, SCCV, and SCCNH need to voice their acceptance of the rules.

(SCCV will discuss next week)
Go Fast VW & Audi parts at FastAddiction.com
User avatar
Rabbit Farmer
 
Posts: 2109
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 11:37 pm
Location: Earth

Re: NEHA: 2016 Season Rules Submission

Postby KevinGale » Sat Mar 12, 2016 5:05 pm

Rabbit Farmer wrote:Rules have been posted:

http://www.hillclimb.org/rulesregs.html

KSCC, SCCV, and SCCNH need to voice their acceptance of the rules.

(SCCV will discuss next week)


KSCC would have to have a meeting to do that. :lol: KSCC pretty much operates on the assumption that the rules are accepted unless some member wants to object. I might even propose we pass a KSCC rule to the effect whenever we do finally have a meeting.
User avatar
KevinGale
 
Posts: 837
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 3:01 pm
Location: Sutton, NH

Re: NEHA: 2016 Season Rules Submission

Postby Rabbit Farmer » Tue Apr 19, 2016 6:17 pm

SCCV has accepted the rules for 2016.
Go Fast VW & Audi parts at FastAddiction.com
User avatar
Rabbit Farmer
 
Posts: 2109
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 11:37 pm
Location: Earth

Previous

Return to NEHA Series

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron

x