thoughts on a 2010 rule proposal

General Regulations on how a NEHA hillclimb should function, how the series works, etc.

thoughts on a 2010 rule proposal

Postby sdwarf36 » Mon Sep 28, 2009 11:38 pm

I want to get an early start--and input from those who it would affect the most-I think it is time to update a rule. I dunno how long ago things were written -but I bet when the rule of firesuits in P cars became mandatory, nobody envisioned SP1 running in the 2:40s at Ascutney. It seems pretty clear that SP1 is gonna be the fastest class for some time to come. I think it may be time to require fire suits (or minimum single layer protection i think its worded--meaning Nomex underware is ok) in SP.
The question is where--JUST SP1? All SP?--if you go under a certian time?
I'd like to hear from the quick 4wd crew--Joey-Alex- Pierre-Nick- what do you think? Anyone else feel free to chime in.
Translating road racing to hillclimbing:
Proper tire selection== nothing hooks up on moss or wet leaves.
Staying on the racing line==anything paved is considered good.
User avatar
sdwarf36
 
Posts: 820
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 6:06 pm

Re: thoughts on a 2010 rule proposal

Postby jkale » Mon Sep 28, 2009 11:47 pm

The only reason Im not running in P or FL is because it requires a suit and a switch and I havent bought either yet. I'm not against your proposal...
-Joey Kale #111
Kale's Custom LLC.
802-448-3790
jkale
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 10:35 am
Location: Essex Jct., VT

Re: thoughts on a 2010 rule proposal

Postby sachilles » Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:55 am

What about some sort of tie in with whether or not the sp car is caged?
Or maybe a negative adjustment factor similar to the negative 5% for a cage in U.
Sachilles
02 Subaru impreza (Donut) #66
User avatar
sachilles
 
Posts: 1189
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 3:11 pm
Location: Waitsfield, VT

Re: thoughts on a 2010 rule proposal

Postby W.Vaillancourt » Tue Sep 29, 2009 11:52 am

Why not use the same rule as break out? If your running time X you require a cage and a suit. Really simple and straight forward I think. You can get single layer suits not for around $100 bucks. Next to the cost of a cage its really not that bad. Its even better if it saves your but from burning. :D
W.Vaillancourt
 
Posts: 130
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 2:04 pm

Re: thoughts on a 2010 rule proposal

Postby Rabbit Farmer » Tue Sep 29, 2009 12:33 pm

It would affect a lot of people currenly in SP wherein a cage is required (as it has been for many years.... it wasn't until recently that we allowed non-caged cars in SP based on the breakout time), but a suit is not.

I do like the idea of phasing in suits... slowly..... it is a safety item. Good idea making it a discount on the classification just like we do with the cage (hence the phasing).

At this time, I am on the fence regarding mandatory suits in cars that are required to have cages.... I would vote against it at this time. I see it from two sides: financial hardship on driver and safety point of view. I would be in favor of a classification discount (i.e. -5%).

Steve
Go Fast VW & Audi parts at FastAddiction.com
User avatar
Rabbit Farmer
 
Posts: 2110
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 11:37 pm
Location: Earth

Re: thoughts on a 2010 rule proposal

Postby Mopar 151 » Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:02 pm

Some of this depends on if the car is gutted or not, and how "loose" the firewall, windshield, hood, and cowl are. :shock: Gloves are a big part of the picture as well. A good suit lasts for years, and we know a bunch of ways to cut the cost. The same can be said for seats, which are at least as big a concern of mine for the same group.
John and Michelle Reed
KSCC Life Member
NEHA # 151
User avatar
Mopar 151
 
Posts: 470
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 1:03 am

Re: thoughts on a 2010 rule proposal

Postby Mopar 151 » Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:09 pm

$100 for this on Racin' JunkImage 2 layer, sz large.
Containment seat, road race style, down to $499Image
John and Michelle Reed
KSCC Life Member
NEHA # 151
User avatar
Mopar 151
 
Posts: 470
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 1:03 am

Re: thoughts on a 2010 rule proposal

Postby sdwarf36 » Tue Sep 29, 2009 10:03 pm

sachilles wrote:What about some sort of tie in with whether or not the sp car is caged?
Or maybe a negative adjustment factor similar to the negative 5% for a cage in U.


The only problem with that is it would only make a difference if a car was tettering on the fence between 2 classes. I believe that most of the SP1 are "deep" into their class--5% isnt going gain or lose anything.
Translating road racing to hillclimbing:
Proper tire selection== nothing hooks up on moss or wet leaves.
Staying on the racing line==anything paved is considered good.
User avatar
sdwarf36
 
Posts: 820
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 6:06 pm

Re: thoughts on a 2010 rule proposal

Postby sachilles » Wed Sep 30, 2009 9:00 am

How about something like, required for SP1/2, and a negative adjustment for all in SP and U. This way it motivates those not in sp1 or 2 to buy one? Though I agree that -5% doesn't amount to much.
Sachilles
02 Subaru impreza (Donut) #66
User avatar
sachilles
 
Posts: 1189
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 3:11 pm
Location: Waitsfield, VT

Re: thoughts on a 2010 rule proposal

Postby walterclark » Wed Sep 30, 2009 10:58 am

This suit sells for $99 most everywhere and is good quality:
Image
http://www.gforce.com/products/suits/4372.php

With the price being below the cost of any single new race tire, and the knowledge that they are actually suited to the purpose, I see no reason not to wear a fire retardant SFI approved race suit.

I also wear carbon-x underwear except on the hottest days: http://www.safetysupplysouth.com/GroupInfo/GroupID/9932
The brands like Simpson and Oakley, promoted to racers, are considerably more expensive than these guys who sell to firefighters. All the fabrics are from the same place: http://www.carbonx.com/ so the differences will be mainly tailoring and the SFI/FIA labels.

We do not require SFI/FIA labeled clothing or underwear however short of you testing the things you wear, those labels are the best way to know the product is suitable (e.g.: fabric, stitching, and accessories like elastic bands, velcro, zippers).


By the way, if you do order from Safety Supply South, order pants one size larger than you normally wear. They seem to run small.
The older I get the better I was.
User avatar
walterclark
 
Posts: 1442
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 12:57 pm
Location: Dover, MA.

Next

Return to General Regulations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron

x