SCCAForums.com

SCCAForums, proudly providing a location for internet protest rumors for the past 7 years.

Not so proudly, providing a place for Lehman to talk about bodily excrement as well

---

I am Chris Hammond.
2004 Z06 SS

Oh no, you didn't just go there....yup, u did! Oh David...

 

Travis-It sucks to be protested at an event like this, especially after you win. But, you always have to expect it and be prepared for it. Just ask Jason Frank next time you see him...Your car has to be legal and you have to be sure of it as well. Tough learning experience, but hopefully it won't discourage you from coming back.

 

-MK

 

---

Mike King
88 CRX Si - STS2 #99
Jacksonville, FL
Team Bridgestone - King Motorsports - A-Spec Racing

Shades of '87-'90 all over again.

---

Aut tace aut loquere meliora silentio.

Howdy,

SoloTiresdotCom:

Travis-It sucks to be protested at an event like this, especially after you win. But, you always have to expect it and be prepared for it. Just ask Jason Frank next time you see him...Your car has to be legal and you have to be sure of it as well. Tough learning experience, but hopefully it won't discourage you from coming back.

At this point, all we know is that Travis didn't have documentation with him at the DC Pro.  We have no idea if the car is legal or not.

Three national champions that drove 968's doesn't mean a damn thing.  The whole national world wrote off the 2nd gen MR2 as well, and were shown to be wrong about that... This could easily be the same thing.

I certainly have no idea if Travis is legal or not, but right now the process is working as designed.  Let's let it finish before we decide who's wrong.

 

I have a "general protest" question however, related to this a bit.... No service manual I've ever seen in my life has had anything in it about optional / non-optional equipment, required packages for options, etc.  The solo rules say that you have to have a service manual and other information as necessary in Stock.  If you have that, the burden of proof shifts to the protestor, not the protestee.

If you get protested for something and have the service manual, but the service manual doesn't have the proper data, shouldn't the burden shift to the protestor?  I.e., using this situation as an example, if Travis had had the service manual (which I don't think he did), wouldn't the protestor have to prove that A/C was in fact standard equipment on all 1994 968's imported into the US?

If it doesn't work that way, and the burden is always with the protestee, what's to prevent someone for protesting something that wouldn't be in the service manual and essentially automatically ejecting the other driver, since they can't realistically be required to bring every scrap of paper that ever existed about their car?

Mark

Mark,

 

Read the rulebook again.  If the service manual does not have sufficient data, the burden does fall back to the protester. For that matter, if the manual is not available, the burden falls to the protester also I believe.

:)

 

Marcus 

---

Marcus
ESP 89
FS 89 for this year
www.margravemotorsports.com

Howdy,

ESP89:

Read the rulebook again.  If the service manual does not have sufficient data, the burden does fall back to the protester. For that matter, if the manual is not available, the burden falls to the protester also I believe.

The stock section of the required docs bit says:

The official manufacturer’s service documentation for the make, model, and year of the vehicle as entered, if ever available to the consumer from the manufacturer. Additional official manufacturer’s service documentation for other years and/or models may also be required to cover equipment and/or specifications authorized by update/backdate allowances. Other official manufacturer’s documentation, such as the owner’s manual, shop manual, parts catalogs, technical bulletins, sales and marketing literature, or Monroney window sticker may be provided as supporting information. All manufacturer’s documentation must be for non-competition purposes.

Its that "may be required" bit that seems a little dodgy to me... The burden of proof section doesn't address the "may be required" stuff.

Mark

Mark,

 

Look under the protest section of the book.  I don't have it here but I believe there is more information on the burden of proof in that section. 

---

Marcus
ESP 89
FS 89 for this year
www.margravemotorsports.com

8.3.1 Burden of Proof
The entrant of a protested vehicle has the burden of proving that the
vehicle conforms to these rules by the required documentation according
to the class of the vehicle, and must present the required
documentation to the PC at the time that the protest is heard, or else
be disqualified.
If the required documentation does not include sufficient information
on a protested item or specification, the burden shifts to the protestor
to prove the equipment or specification illegal.

---

I live my life one cone at a time........

Howdy,

Whiplash_Motorsports:

8.3.1 Burden of Proof
The entrant of a protested vehicle has the burden of proving that the
vehicle conforms to these rules by the required documentation according
to the class of the vehicle, and must present the required
documentation to the PC at the time that the protest is heard, or else
be disqualified.
If the required documentation does not include sufficient information
on a protested item or specification, the burden shifts to the protestor
to prove the equipment or specification illegal.

Right.

Marcus, my question here is that the "required documentation" section says something "might be required".  WTH does that mean, as regards the burden of proof?  It has to be either required or not required for the Burden of Proof section to make any sense...

Mark

Is this what you're referring to?

 

A. Stock, Street Touring, Street Prepared, Street Modified:

The official manufacturer’s service documentation for the make,

model, and year of the vehicle as entered, if ever available to the

consumer from the manufacturer. Additional official

manufacturer’s service documentation for other years and/or

models may also be required to cover equipment and/or specifications

authorized by update/backdate allowances. Other official

manufacturer’s documentation, such as the owner’s manual, shop

manual, parts catalogs, technical bulletins, sales and marketing

literature, or Monroney window sticker may be provided as

supporting information. All manufacturer’s documentation must

be for non-competition purposes.

---

I live my life one cone at a time........

Howdy,

Yes, that's it exactly.

On an option package or standard vs. option protest, where the service manual (like any I've seen) doesn't have the specifics, who's required to prove that the car could or could not have been available in a particular configuration.

The "may also be required" part implies its (possibly) the protestee, which I think is a little weird.

Mark

marka:

Howdy,

Yes, that's it exactly.

On an option package or standard vs. option protest, where the service manual (like any I've seen) doesn't have the specifics, who's required to prove that the car could or could not have been available in a particular configuration.

The "may also be required" part implies its (possibly) the protestee, which I think is a little weird.

Mark

 

I don't think its weird at all.. The person that should know the most about how the cars is supposed to be configured should be the protestee... Especially in a case like this, where A/C has been removed... I can count on 2 hands the number of sports cars delivered from the manufacturer without A/C in the last 15 years.  

---

Rick Cone
Atlanta Region Director

STS2 #98
1991 Mazda Miata - Aqua

The only thing that says "may be required" is in regards to update/backdate, as would be applicable to components allowed by update/backdate (e.g., street prepared).  So, if you put a '85 4+3 trans in your '97 Vette, you may need to provide an '85 manual if protested over some specification in that earlier trans.  My interpretation of 3.8 doesn't see any other documentation required outside this case for the protestee.

-Steve

Howdy,

Windscreen:

The only thing that says "may be required" is in regards to update/backdate, as would be applicable to components allowed by update/backdate (e.g., street prepared).  So, if you put a '85 4+3 trans in your '97 Vette, you may need to provide an '85 manual if protested over some specification in that earlier trans.  My interpretation of 3.8 doesn't see any other documentation required outside this case for the protestee.

-Steve

Crap.  You're right, that's my read of it too, now that you've pointed that out.

Sorry folks!  I totally missed it.

Rick, while I agree with you that the car owner is likely to be the expert more than the protestor, I think it breaks down if they need to provide required docs to cover essentially any question, without knowing what those questions would be in advance.  I could protest you for not having hair covered plastic a-pillar trim pieces, and you'd need to provide documentation that your car didn't come with them... How would you reasonably do that, particularly if you didn't know what I'd be protesting on in advance?

I'd have liked to have seen what would happen with this protest if Travis had had the factory service manual.  I'm not sure how the protestor would prove that the car wasn't available in that configuration other than by saying "Faulker told me it never came that way".  :-)

Mark

We could solve all these by making any competitor who removes the A/C sit in the car belted up for 30 mins prior to any competition run.

On a serious note. I did a quick look up on a parts program for a 94 968 for serpentine belts (this system has never found non us model parts when I want it to so I believe this to be accurate) and it gave me 2 options.  With a/c or without a/c. Part number came up as 999 192 290 50 .  There are no notes about it not being a US model. Just thought I'd throw it out there.

---

1999 Civic Si SSC

OK, if you were going to make a change to a different configuration of a car that is generally accepted to be configured only one way, don't you think it would be smart to come with the documentation to back it up? Or am I just talking crazy here?

-Mike

---

Mike Shields
1993 BMW 325is | 92/192 DSP

marka:

Rick, while I agree with you that the car owner is likely to be the expert more than the protestor, I think it breaks down if they need to provide required docs to cover essentially any question, without knowing what those questions would be in advance.  I could protest you for not having hair covered plastic a-pillar trim pieces, and you'd need to provide documentation that your car didn't come with them... How would you reasonably do that, particularly if you didn't know what I'd be protesting on in advance?

 

On the flip side, how do I know your car is legal or not in advance of ever seeing the car?  When I finally see it at the event, how am I supposed to come up with documentation to prove your car is missing the hairy a-pillar trim pieces, even if I know they should be there?  Is every competitor supposed to have all documentation for all cars in their class, or should it be left to the protestee in this case, to provide the information? If we all provide our own docs, it will keep everyone from carrying docs for everyone else.

 
This is clear cut case, either you could get the car this way or not.  And since this is at best a limited availability option I see the proper thing is for the protestee to prove the limited availabilitee. 

Kind of like ABS on 2nd Gen MR2 Hardtops... If it was available, you better make sure you can prove it.

---

Rick Cone
Atlanta Region Director

STS2 #98
1991 Mazda Miata - Aqua

Mike Shields:

OK, if you were going to make a change to a different configuration of a car that is generally accepted to be configured only one way, don't you think it would be smart to come with the documentation to back it up? Or am I just talking crazy here?

-Mike

As a member of the BS class at the DC Pro Solo, I would have to agree with you Mike. Travis, should have done his leg work before the event and not afterwards.  He put the entire class in an uncomfortable position, and for his sake, I hope he's able to resolve this issue (and any others on the car) before the Pro Finale/Solo Nats (as it's my understanding that he wishes to attend).

FWIW, on 968forums.com, members there are also unaware of a non-A/C US 968 model, but one member did mention that there was a 399 option code for A/C w/o a condensor (I'm completely unsure of the accuracy of this information). As Travis' car at he DC Pro was missing the condensor, compressor and associated piping, etc., his car wouldn't have fallen in-line with this option code either.

My $0.02 on this protest/appeal...

---

Chike Dellimore - Blue Ridge/Washington DC Regions
2006 Galaxy Gray 6MT Mazda RX-8 (B-stock)
Former 2006 Steel Gray 5spd WRX (D-stock)

"Between now and Nats, f!ck seat time - I'm working on crazy!!!"

I would think in this case, if I were protesting this car, all I would need to provide is a 1994 Porsche brochure which list "automatic tempature control air conditioning" as a standard item. At that point I would think there is enough doubt it would go back on the car owner to show documentation to the contrary. However, it may have never even got to that point depending on what the FSM says, which I understand no one has seen.

 

 

---

Jason Isley
2005-2006-2007 B Stock National Champion

anyone familiar with Porsche knows that it's a company that will spec out a car pretty much any way you want for a price above and beyond the not publicized racing options, those kind of changes aren't within the Stock class rule specs though ... the service and parts manuals will often not be clear or spell out these types of variances or otherwise clarify the situation

---

"Understeer is when you hit the wall with the front of the car and oversteer is when you hit the wall with the rear of the car.
Horsepower is how fast you hit the wall, torque is how far you take the wall with you." --Anonymous