SCCAForums.com

marka:

Howdy,

So the f*cking thing is illegal, to the letter of the rule.

If its not, then I'll happily go install my knife edged crankshaft and supercharger.  Whoops.. I mean "underdrive pulley" and "air filter housing".

Mark

Wow.  Ever thought of competing in the WWF?  Might be a great place to vent some of that anger - and as an added bonus, they'd probably let you run with any mod. you want!  

marka:

modernbeat:

Compared to total cost of my car, $1k is a reasonable price to pay for 10lbs of weight savings. It's reasonable to me, and I'm sure it's reasonable to some others. Just because some people can't/won't buy the best tool for the job, don't handicap those of us that will.

Ok, this makes _no_ sense at all.  $1k is a reasonable price to pay for 10 lbs (and I'll believe that when I see it on a scale btw) of weight savings... When everyone else has seats the same weight?  How in the love of all that's holy does that make any freaking sense at all?  $1k may may sense to save ten lbs vs. your competition, but when your competition is doing it too, all you are is $1k poorer for no competitive gain.

Welcome to Mark's Street Stock Geo Metro class! Sick of modifying your car only to find out that the rules allow your competition to do THE EXACT SAME MOD?!?! Come to Mark's Street Stock Geo Metro class, where we've eliminated the need to spend any money on your car to make it go fast(er). Experience the thrill of 38mph/39mpg straights, 0.62 lateral g's (left hand corners only), and the excitement of brakes overheating half way through the lap! Who wants to run sticky tires if your competition can too? Why spend on coilovers when it only gets you as fast as the competition, but no faster? Raise the bar? NO WAY! We've lowered it to save you money! This season we've added a new twist: Spec Drivers! No need to spend tireless hours practicing and money on driving schools just to catch up to the competition. We bring the competition down to your level! Still intimidated by the competition? Try our new "Solo" series! It puts you against.....nobody! Guaranteed wins, without spending a dime! You don't even have to show up! It doesn't get any cheaper, easier, or safer! Sign up today!

Howdy,

rnoll98:

Welcome to Mark's Street Stock Geo Metro class! Sick of modifying your car only to find out that the rules allow your competition to do THE EXACT SAME MOD?!?! Come to Mark's Street Stock Geo Metro class, where we've eliminated the need to spend any money on your car to make it go fast(er). Experience the thrill of 38mph/39mpg straights, 0.62 lateral g's (left hand corners only), and the excitement of brakes overheating half way through the lap! Who wants to run sticky tires if your competition can too? Why spend on coilovers when it only gets you as fast as the competition, but no faster? Raise the bar? NO WAY! We've lowered it to save you money! This season we've added a new twist: Spec Drivers! No need to spend tireless hours practicing and money on driving schools just to catch up to the competition. We bring the competition down to your level! Still intimidated by the competition? Try our new "Solo" series! It puts you against.....nobody! Guaranteed wins, without spending a dime! You don't even have to show up! It doesn't get any cheaper, easier, or safer! Sign up today!

:-)  Wiseass.

There's no engineering or design (for the consumer) or tuning or "thrill" in an expensive seat vs. a cheaper one though.  One just costs more money than the other one.

Mark

Howdy,

actor:

Oh, and I should also say this:  the implications made by people like Hollis, marka, and solo-x about my intentions are so pathetic and off-base I haven't bothered responding, given the nasty things I might of said. But I just couldn't pass that last one up - too crazy.

Just like the intent behind the rules, I don't have any idea at all what your intentions are with the seat.  I'm not sure how that matters, either.

I just think your ballast plate, as mounted, is illegal.

Mark

marka:

That's dumb.

If you want to spend a ton of money making everything the absolute ultimate even though anyone else can do it too, then go run AM and leave the rest of us alone.  Heck, save the tire wear and just compare salaries with everyone else at the event.

Speaking of dumb... this has to be the dumbest statement you have made in this thread (can't say about any other thread).   This can apply to any modification.  You have said you think its dumb that you can't change the cam in your motor.  Why would you want to spend the money to do that when everybody else would then do the same thing?   You end up back where you started just with more expense. 

Rules that permit modifications are there to provide for creativity and flexibility within the framework of the different catagories.  If you want to spend $1000 to save 5 lbs, you can.  Such instances are self regulating.  Most people could probably spend that $1000 elsewhere more efficently. 

marka:

.

Assuming you're still talking about the CSP miata seat that was posted above, then seat actually doesn't meet the letter of the rule.  I don't give a rat's ass about intent either.  A ballast plate with a flexible strip connected to the seat mount isn't a "seat mount" to anyone that's not trying to torture the rules.  Since he's also not sitting on the ballast plate, its not a "seat" either.  So the f*cking thing is illegal, to the letter of the rule.

If its not, then I'll happily go install my knife edged crankshaft and supercharger.  Whoops.. I mean "underdrive pulley" and "air filter housing".

Mark, define "mounting hardware".  It says in the rule that additional mounting points are permitted.  The parts in question attach the seat to the floor.  As a protestor you would have to prove that those parts do not constitute "mounting hardware".  No matter how many explititves you use, you can't.  "No F'ing Way!" is not an effective argument to prove your case.

The defense is a slam dunk:  Bracket attaches to seat on one end and floor on the other.  Following good practice, washers are used on each side of the sheet metal floor to distribute the load over a wider area so the bolts don't pull through the floor.  Your protest of the "mounting hardware" would then be reduced to arguing the thickness of the bracket and washer.  When does a washer become balast?  If the seat and its mounting hardware weighed exactly 20 lbs and 1 ounce and one of the washers weighed 2 ounces, couldn't that be interpreted as the washer being balast and therefore not meeting the intent of the rule?  So what's the difference if the washer weighs 5 lbs or 2 ounces?  Both are there to make weight.

I can see from the quote above that you are now just frustrated because you like the rule and Bill beat your intent for the rule.  You keep telling us to write a better seat rule.  So why don't you write a better seat fairness rule that has the intent you want but doesn't allow Bill's solution?

Good Luck.  You'll need it.

Howdy,

Steve Hoelscher:

marka:

That's dumb.

If you want to spend a ton of money making everything the absolute ultimate even though anyone else can do it too, then go run AM and leave the rest of us alone.  Heck, save the tire wear and just compare salaries with everyone else at the event.

Speaking of dumb... this has to be the dumbest statement you have made in this thread (can't say about any other thread).   This can apply to any modification.  You have said you think its dumb that you can't change the cam in your motor.  Why would you want to spend the money to do that when everybody else would then do the same thing?   You end up back where you started just with more expense. 

Yes, that's a good point.  I recognize that the different category rules allow you to modify your car to different extents, depending on what you want to do.  I guess I'm just amazed that someone would actually want to run a seat that costs $1k more than another seat that holds them just as well, all to save 10 lbs. 

 

marka:

.

Assuming you're still talking about the CSP miata seat that was posted above, then seat actually doesn't meet the letter of the rule.  I don't give a rat's ass about intent either.  A ballast plate with a flexible strip connected to the seat mount isn't a "seat mount" to anyone that's not trying to torture the rules.  Since he's also not sitting on the ballast plate, its not a "seat" either.  So the f*cking thing is illegal, to the letter of the rule.

If its not, then I'll happily go install my knife edged crankshaft and supercharger.  Whoops.. I mean "underdrive pulley" and "air filter housing".

Mark, define "mounting hardware".  It says in the rule that additional mounting points are permitted.  The parts in question attach the seat to the floor.  As a protestor you would have to prove that those parts do not constitute "mounting hardware".  No matter how many explititves you use, you can't.  "No F'ing Way!" is not an effective argument to prove your case.

The defense is a slam dunk:  Bracket attaches to seat on one end and floor on the other.  Following good practice, washers are used on each side of the sheet metal floor to distribute the load over a wider area so the bolts don't pull through the floor.  Your protest of the "mounting hardware" would then be reduced to arguing the thickness of the bracket and washer.  When does a washer become balast?  If the seat and its mounting hardware weighed exactly 20 lbs and 1 ounce and one of the washers weighed 2 ounces, couldn't that be interpreted as the washer being balast and therefore not meeting the intent of the rule?  So what's the difference if the washer weighs 5 lbs or 2 ounces?  Both are there to make weight.

The parts in question do absolutely nothing material in terms of attaching the seat to the car.  As a test to see if this is the case, remove all the other mounting points and see if the seat mounting retains _any_ security or rigidity.

Now, you'll argue that it doesn't need to provide any security or rigidity of course.  In which case I'd like you to post your definition of the word "mount" as it regards attaching something to a car.

Certainly trying to draw the line between "illegal ballast" and "this is a seat mount" could get fuzzy at times.  I'd tend to err on the side of assuming its all the seat mount in those cases.  That would include your washer comment, and it would also include that exact same steel plate mounted under the floor with a bolt through it, the floor, and any part of the seat or seat mount.  Then you could perhaps call it a "sandwich plate".  Also, if you took out every other mounting point, the seat/mount would still retain some rigidity.

But, in this particular case, there's no attempt whatsoever to make that ballast plate serve any function as a seat mount.  Therefore its illegal.

Is this being picky?  Sure.  Is the location of the ballast plate going to change much if its incorporated propertly?  Nope, not a lot.  Maybe not any.  But just like other cases in the solo rules, its about the letter of the rule, not whether or not there's a performance advantage.

And you'll note that in this thread that while I'm certainly pretty vocal about it, I'm not the only one that sees stuff this way.

But whatever.  Like I said before, show up with that crap at nationals and we'll spend a while in the protest shed.

Mark

Howdy,

CHRISFP78:

Mark is getting very close to the "frictionless rollers" threshold with that last comment. The logic is getting more and more fuzzy.

Um, what?

I mean, if you're gonna compare me to Cole, the comparison that might make sense, given how much I've pushed this, would be to stock street tire classes.  Of course, in this particular case the rules already do what I want them to and _you guys_ are the ones yammering away for a change... :-)

I'm uncertain exactly where I proposed something that violates physical laws like Cole's infamous frictionless rollers.

Mark

(also, nobody has made any stickers.  :-)

marka:

Howdy,

CHRISFP78:

Mark is getting very close to the "frictionless rollers" threshold with that last comment. The logic is getting more and more fuzzy.

Um, what?

I mean, if you're gonna compare me to Cole, the comparison that might make sense, given how much I've pushed this, would be to stock street tire classes.  Of course, in this particular case the rules already do what I want them to and _you guys_ are the ones yammering away for a change... :-)

I'm uncertain exactly where I proposed something that violates physical laws like Cole's infamous frictionless rollers.

Mark

(also, nobody has made any stickers.  :-)

 Stickers. Now that was funny

marka:

rnoll98:

Welcome to Mark's Street Stock Geo Metro class! Sick of modifying your car only to find out that the rules allow your competition to do THE EXACT SAME MOD?!?! Come to Mark's Street Stock Geo Metro class, where we've eliminated the need to spend any money on your car to make it go fast(er). Experience the thrill of 38mph/39mpg straights, 0.62 lateral g's (left hand corners only), and the excitement of brakes overheating half way through the lap! Who wants to run sticky tires if your competition can too? Why spend on coilovers when it only gets you as fast as the competition, but no faster? Raise the bar? NO WAY! We've lowered it to save you money! This season we've added a new twist: Spec Drivers! No need to spend tireless hours practicing and money on driving schools just to catch up to the competition. We bring the competition down to your level! Still intimidated by the competition? Try our new "Solo" series! It puts you against.....nobody! Guaranteed wins, without spending a dime! You don't even have to show up! It doesn't get any cheaper, easier, or safer! Sign up today!

:-)  Wiseass.

There's no engineering or design (for the consumer) or tuning or "thrill" in an expensive seat vs. a cheaper one though.  One just costs more money than the other one.

Mark

I'm glad this 21-page thread still has smiley faces in it.

I think your same point could be made about a lot of people and a lot of parts. There are fast cars out there where the builder did little more than point to products and pay for them to be installed. Every mod has a buy v build decision. You could (unfortunately) pour/mold/weld/lay your own seat for a fraction of the cost. Whether the engineering comes from the consumer/competitor or they pay a contractor (or even Sparco) to make them a product, that's not something we legislate. You may respect one path more than the other, but that's just your opinion.

Wings are a great example in SM/XP. You could buy the tried and true APR wing for <$500. You could cut foam and lay CF and build your own super high downforce wing for probably about $1k. Or you could buy a similar super high downforce wing for anywhere from $3-7k+. We've had all three types in SM, but we don't have anyone pushing to make everyone run the APR wing. Folks understand the playing field and make a conscious cost/benefit decision. Contrary to your statement that I teased you on above, having a limited budget and a multitude of these cost/benefit decisions actually creates differentiation, because each person has their own opinion of how to get the fastest car for their set budget.

The fact of the matter is you won't see everyone with $1k seats, so those who invest in them will have the advantage over those who don't in that area, but may have sacraficed being able to spend the money on something like a wing that makes more downforce. They've "engineered" the car based on their decision on what to buy. You're always going to have the guy with the money who buys ALL the trick items. I think the reason most of us are in this hobby is because we know autox is one of the few motorsport segments that you can't simply buy a win. Those of us on limited budgets, which is most of us, lean on our driving ability to make us competitive, and I think knowing that makes us feel that much better when we have success.

That doesn't mean we don't want the freedom to choose how we spend our money though.

I've just been made aware of this thread. As the "jerk" (according to B.S.), who made the protest, I am compelled to correct some untruths posted by B.S.

1. I did not protest on the fact that the perforated foil tape, connecting the ballast to the seat,  had come loose. Read the protest!  It simply states that the rule requiring the seat w/ it's mount must weigh at least 20 lbs. was violated.

2. I wouldn't exactly call it losing the protest, when the ruling was that it was well founded, that the seat violated the intent and the spirit of the rule, and the letter of the rule could be said to be met by the strap connecting the ballast to the seat (which it wasn't- not much of a connection if it came loose so easily).   B.S. was given a pass on this, w/ a letter to the S.E.B. to request a clarification.

As a side note, the Officials at the event made it clear to me that they didn't want a protest, and certainly no disqualifications, as this was the first event of a new "pro" series.

3. I offered to the P.C. that B.S. could avoid taking the seats out to weigh them, as he had aknowledged to me (in a pre-protest discussion) that he was relying on the ballast to meet the rule. I suggested to the P.C. that they could just rule on the legality of the ballast being part of the seat and it's mount.

Mike McHugh

After more reading here, I'm finding more lies, vitriol, snide sarcasm, and name calling, but not just regarding me- but anyone who disagrees with B.S.'s unreasonable ranting about a rule he doesn't like. He not only mocks the rule in print and practice, when his seats were pulled out for weighing, the black mounting had large white letters painted that said " THE SEAT WEIGHT RULE SUCKS ! " Talk about inviting and expecting a protest!

1. I had never filed a protest before this seat weight issue.  My only Solo 2 history involved a competitor who threatened a protest against me. So I showed him the rule that specifically allowed my modification, and pointed out that his style bar was unsafe, and constituted an illegal chassis brace. He agreed to drop the issue, and we remain friends. On my own,  I took the issue of my mod to the Steering Committee for a clarification, since the concern was raised.

2. I did look over the B.S. car, as some other competitors were complaining that it wasn't legal, and that B.S. had actually taped cardboard to a lowback seat to meet the seat headrest requirement, previously.  Other accusations involved an illegal dashboard configuration, engine modificatons to achieve 165 hp at the wheels, front spoiler extending into the wheel well opening, the heater system modified by removing the a/c evaporator, and the car being lightened beyond the allowances.

Now, I didn't think it fair to accuse the National Championship winning car of cheating, without knowing something concrete, so I did go over to casually examine it.

3.  Seeing the chunk of metal bolted to the floor behind the seat, I asked B.S. if it was ballast, intended to meet the seat weight rule. He gave a rather nasty response, so I persisted, and questioned the legality of it, as it didn't appear to be a part of the seat or mount.  I kept it "gentlemanly", but you can imagine B.S.'s response, if you've read his postings!

4.  This being a Pro event, and the rule being clear, and the competitor admitting that his seat and mount did not meet the rule without the ballast (that clearly was not part of the seat or mount), yet insisting that it was legal (and that I was a #@%&#$),  I  did the sportsmanlike thing, I  filed a protest. I did not go on a witch hunt, just that one item.

5. Just absurd.

Mike McHugh

The above 2 posts should be referenced to posts by Bill Schenker, I apologize for not knowing how to include those posts as a preface.

Mike McHugh

Don't anyone get all torqued up again, especially around the 20th of the month...

DaveW

Howdy,

47CP:

Don't anyone get all torqued up again, especially around the 20th of the month...

DaveW

Is this foreshadowing for those of us who _like_ the rule getting all torqued up after fastrack comes out?

:-)

Mark

After almost 13 years, I am pretty good at judging what makes my wife mad with at least a 50% rate.  I am probably in the 40% range of accuracy on my 6 year old daughter.

However, not even god himself knows what will torque up the general SCCA membership about any particular proposal or tweak.  Remember, the SEB is just a bunch of drunk monkeys protecitng thier contingency purses at the cost of the entire sport. . .

DaveW

http://scca.com/documents/Fastrack/08/0 ... y-solo.pdf

Looks like a change is in the works.

Chris