Real rules vs sorta-rules

[mtwils]

With respect to the eclipse, cage, class and tires:
The mention of race tires was to emphasize that the car was a P car. Maybe I did not make that clear
P cars need cages; there is no breakout provision for them.
The eclipse in question had a cage that did not meet the specifications.
It was therefore illegal by our rules, yet it was allowed into the event.
And the driver was dumb enough to disrespect that allowance by crashing.

My car was legal and you are complaining about me and my car.

The eclipse was there by a sorta-rule.
My car was there by a real rule.

Michael Wilson

[STI NICK]

With respect to the eclipse, cage, class and tires:
The mention of race tires was to emphasize that the car was a P car. Maybe I did not make that clear
P cars need cages; there is no breakout provision for them.
The eclipse in question had a cage that did not meet the specifications.
It was therefore illegal by our rules, yet it was allowed into the event.
And the driver was dumb enough to disrespect that allowance by crashing.

My car was legal and you are complaining about me and my car.

The eclipse was there by a sorta-rule.
My car was there by a real rule.

Michael Wilson

Aren't you disrespecting the breakout rule? The penalty is there for when you break the rule. Therefore I would say you are breaking the rule, and by breaking the rule multiple times you are abusing the rule. Not to mention missing the intent of the rule of which we all know you know the intent of the break out rule.

[agrabau]

I'd like a comparison model made for a homebuilt POS with a 1st timer built cage in a crash test against Nissan GTR with no cage.

Perhaps we should cage motorcycles too just in case.

These arguments continue not because we want Mike to be safe. Half of you don't even like Mike. They are being made for the purpose of exclusion and not safety.

IMO

Alex

[smokey15]

Alex,

You're not being fair to the many NEHA members who spent a significant amount of time researching, evaluating, and proposing this rule. In fact, if you research the original authors of this rule, you will find many of them consider Michael a friend and respect his driving abilities and skills. For example, Michael communicated with me several years ago looking for support for a proposal he wanted to submit at the NEHA meeting that would allow him to run without a cage. In good conscience, I had to refuse him support for the proposal because I felt, and still feel, that any vehicle and individual who can run as fast as he has, should be protected by a cage. Our events leave little room for error in comparison to road racing and, even some of the Pennsylvania events. An excellent example of the safety a cage provides came this past weekend when one of our entrants had an incident after finish, his vehicle had the same potential for speed as Michael's, and although the driver needed a trip to the hospital for further evaluation and x-rays, he survived with no major injuries. This was due to a cage in the car, his harnesses cinched tight, and wearing a neck device, Nex Gen in this case, I think.
I have known Michael for as many years as he has been hill climbing and I consider him a friend, but as Co-Chairman of the Okemo II Hill climb, I refused his request to enter the GTR in the event for obvious reasons. That decision produced ambivalent feelings for me but, long ago, Michael and I have agreed to disagree but continue to remain friends. I'm sure there are individuals who just judge Mike by his desire to run hill climbs without a cage but, many of them were not around when he selflessly chaired the NEHA Annual Meetings and silently contributed to the financial stability of the organization and the hill climbs in particular.

Bob "Smokey" Smolinski

[Mopar 151w2]

Alex - if you go by our experience, a POS cage may well be intentioned as meeting FIA spec, but will be made of poorly welded (good looking welds with poor fusion), thinwall "alloy" tubing. POS cages are welded on top of the .035 floor with no doubler or gusset. A POS car will have a nice looking seat, maybe FIA, but without any mounting reinforcement or back bracing, and seat belts attach to different parts of the structure than the seat does.

You wanna talk seats and belts? 3-points and an airbag, in a stock seat = not much help, especially after the 1st impact. Much better in a 6-point belt, and a correctly mounted seat with sufficent shoulder, thigh, and head support.

IMHO, Mike is layers deep in denial on the whole subject of cages & safety equipment, and it will take a process akin to Freudian analysis to sort it out.

[agrabau]

There should then be no breakout rule if safety is truly the first interest of all the competitors. Allowing the least experienced drivers to compete with the least amount of safety equipment is creating a loophole that people are then upset about later.

Smokey, I know that many (not all) people here are Mike's "friends" however there is a lot of complaining going on about how he is making his own rules or not following them. In this particular case I feel that people are upset because he is following them, so closely that everyone is full of regret for creating a ruleset that is easy to circumnavigate.

I also know that a lot of time is dedicated to making rules. A meeting every year invites these arguments and also lends to the feeling that things are pliable even though they are not.

Building a cage that has FIA spec in mind, or similar design does not make it such. Even with a high spec cage injuries can occur.

I had a friend who did 2 years in Iraq. A grenade was thrown into his Hummer and killed his friend who sat next to him. My friend's arm was cut open and is now full of steel plates. He has an M3 that we built for the track. His engine modifications put him into a class that required a roll bar for DE days. The car is fairly underpowered still. He was told it was too dangerous to run with 200hp. Danger in a car is relative to all the other things around us.

[agrabau]

I should add to all this that I think everyone should have a cage, and that I think Mike is far more safe with one than without. For those who don't know me, my car has a cage.

I think that the series presents itself better if everyone has well prepared cars.

I think also that Don and Walter or whoever else is doing tech should have a large part of the say in that since they probably bear a heavy burden of responsibility.

[sdwarf36]

"I'd like a comparison model made for a homebuilt POS with a 1st timer built cage in a crash test against Nissan GTR with no cage."

How about a comparison between a caged car taking 2 hits-vs. a GTR-would a SECOND airbag come out somewheres?
How about a comparison between a side hit with a racing seat-vs. a stock GTR's?
How about a comparison between a side hit with a 5 point harness vs. a stock seat belt?
How about a comparison between a side hit with a Necksgen-or Rage Hybrid vs. nothing at all?

[Rabbit Farmer]

When we, as a group, sit down to come up with changes to the rules for the next year, we do not take into account individual drivers or specific cars. One rule set should be applied to all drivers/cars. If we feel there are issues with the current rules, we can offer solutions when the rules meeting comes up for the next season and try to come to a consensus.

I would also offer that we, as a small grassroots "organization" (in quotes because we are much more), come up with rules for the safety of all drivers, the best classing that we feel offers equal competition, etc. where many times the language on the paper does not match the true intent of the rule. I believe that if the language does not match the intent, we need to have a gentleman's agreement of how to execute the rule during the season. The goal of the events is to give everyone a chance to drive the hills, and have fun doing it. We are not trying to win sponsorships or larger cash prices (heck, even small cash prizes), we are a group of people trying to have fun hillclimbing. We just need rules to protect the people and organization from all the unknowns that we try to forecast during the rules meetings.

Steve

[STI NICK]

These arguments continue not because we want Mike to be safe. Half of you don't even like Mike. They are being made for the purpose of exclusion and not safety.
Alex

This statement pretty much shows how little you know about the people that participate in this organization.