SCCAForums.com

seb@scca.com

 

The compromise is letting the current situation continue.

Now to see how people can exploit your rule.

 

Marcus

---

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

sidewinder,

the differance being grade 5 can bend, stretch and deform in a situation a grade 8 would snap.  Im not sure if a seat could  provide adequate force to snap a grade8 bolt.  You could be right though.  Grade 8 isnt really any more expensive than grade 5.  check out www.boltdepot.com

"The current situation" as opposed to a complete rule take-back?

Yeah, that makes sense, but only in the SEB logic. Class participation thinning? Initiate new rules that drive current class participants out so new people might come in.

 

---

Bob Beamesderfer '94 CSP Miata
Cal Club and SDR

ESP89:

You seem to understand the problems with stupid seats so write a rule that is better than this one.  This rule as are many is a compromise and the best we could come up.  Do a better job and I am sure the current SEB will thank you.  :)

 

I did, it was obviously ignored. 

I submitted a more complete version of this from another post on this subject:

 http://sccaforums.com/forums/2/260506/ShowThread.aspx

 

Steve Hoelscher:

I have always thought that the weight requirement for seat mounting, in the name of safety, was silly.  A heavy seal/mount can be just as unsafe as a light one.  Why not simply state:  seats must be securely mounted, incorporating (at a minimum) the OE mounting points/method using metal fasteners and brackets (if utilized).    At a minimum the seat must encapsulate the length of the driver's torso from hips to shoulders.  A headrest must be ultilized to limit the movement of the driver's head beyond the seat back. 

That's just my first cut at a rule but I think it would be effective. 

This version results in an effective head rest.  The existing rule is un-enforceable and in-effective regarding the headrest.

 

 

---

Steve Hoelscher
#27 DP - Toyota MR2
2006 DP National Champion
'98, '99, '00, '02 DSP National Champion
http://www.terriehoward.com

I'm thinking that the more resilient, ie, more likely to bend than snap, bolt might be the better choice in the situation. Either one is substantial enough for the purpose in the over all.

---

Bob Beamesderfer '94 CSP Miata
Cal Club and SDR

3.3.3.b.2) Passenger’s seat back and all cushions, bolsters, headrests,

etc. must be secured. All allowed aftermarket replacement

seats (i.e. driver and passenger) must be securely and safely

mounted. Special care should be taken when using other

than OE mounting points and/or fabricated bracketry.

Does anyone know why the above isn't being enforced on these bullshit stupid seat mounts?  Tech inspectors regularly use "judgement" on battery mounts, why the reluctance to use it here?

Looks like that may happen at national events.  Per the April Fastrack:

SOLO NATIONALS

• The SEB has concurred with a recommendation to check seat weights and attachment methods at

National events for applicable categories such as ST, SP, SM.

Just wondering.  I'm on the SEB, so according to Steve H, my IQ is the same as a my shoe size (which makes me the smartest guy in the group!) :):)

DaveW

 

:) Welcome to the SEB!

And Steve,  It was not ignored just not adopted.

 

Marcus

---

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

47CP:

Does anyone know why the above isn't being enforced on these bullshit stupid seat mounts?  Tech inspectors regularly use "judgement" on battery mounts, why the reluctance to use it here?

Dave, that was my question from the beginning.  Dave, you are on The Board, why can't you answer this question?

47CP:

Just wondering.  I'm on the SEB, so according to Steve H, my IQ is the same as a my shoe size (which makes me the smartest guy in the group!) :):)

Now Dave, you are taking more than a little liberty with my statement.  First, I don't think you were on the board when the rule was drafted and passed and second; you agree with me given the above comment.  If we can write rules for the safe use of harnesses and roll cages and trust our tech inspectors with policing them, why not the seats?  Why write such a convoluted rule for seats when we don't for other similar safety issues?

The SEB has really dropped a real turd in the punch bowl with this one.  I know the SEB has a tough job, I have done it.  I know that there will be differences of opinion on such things but this is so far afield from other safety rules in nature and enforcement.  It makes no sense.  "Removing the incentive" to utilize unsafe seats and mounting is not taking a pro-active measure to ensure safe seats/mounts.   What is most dissapointing about this rule is the clear intent wasn't to ensure safe seats/mounts but to instead to attempt to minimuze budget inequities by eliminating the benefit of spending the money to buy a very light weight seat.   Its really quite sad that it has come to this.

---

Steve Hoelscher
#27 DP - Toyota MR2
2006 DP National Champion
'98, '99, '00, '02 DSP National Champion
http://www.terriehoward.com

47CP:

[SOLO NATIONALS

• The SEB has concurred with a recommendation to check seat weights and attachment methods at

National events for applicable categories such as ST, SP, SM.

I can't wait to see how this works.  I will serve notice now that I ain't workin' impount this year. 

So impound will have to have all of the cars in ST, SP and SM remove their seats to be weighed in impound?  Really?  How long is that going to take?  How will impound track the seats that came out of each car to know that somebody didn't switch seats or add ballast between the car and scale? 

And if only trophy winning cars have their seats weighed, is that because we are only interested in the safety of trophy winning cars?  Or are we more interested in whether or not they saved a couple of pounds by spending the big bucks?

---

Steve Hoelscher
#27 DP - Toyota MR2
2006 DP National Champion
'98, '99, '00, '02 DSP National Champion
http://www.terriehoward.com

Thank you, thank you, thank you, Steve for bringing some very well thought out consequences and pointing out what other motivations may have been behind this asinine rule.  THIS IS NOT A SAFETY RULE!  Any characterization of it being so is at best naive, and at worst disingenuous. 

 

(From an SP driver that had to ADD 2lbs. of ballast to his fibreglass driver's seat and oem pax Lotus Elise seat to make it "safe" per the rules.) 

---

Bill Schenker
CalClub & S.D.R. #14 CSP 10AE Miata

id like to see them take my seat out and weight it.  it was nearly impossible to get it into the car in the first place.

turbozmike:

id like to see them take my seat out and weight it.  it was nearly impossible to get it into the car in the first place.

It's not up to them to take it out...   

---

Rob Leone

'07 Solstice GXP in AS
'87 Toyota Corolla in EP
ex - '91 MR2 Turbo in SM2 <- If you can't set a good example, serve as a horrible warning.

Did you read the last posts? There is talk about making it part of the impound inspection.

mleach:

Did you read the last posts? There is talk about making it part of the impound inspection.

It's not talk.  The seat being securely mounted will be checked at TECH at National Events.  I realize that it is a stretch to assume that the National Staff and SEB aren't a bunch of drunken monkeys, but if you take that leap, you could see that every competitor removing thier seat is not really going to fit in the schedule.  You could then also think that seat weight would more likely be a competitor policed issue.  You know, it's not like the National Staff, Kathy Barnes and the SEB haven't ever been to a National event.  Hell, in most threads, we are accused of being too national focused.

I'm not defending or condoning the current rule.  Reviewing said rule is on the radar, I'm just telling you what will happen this year.

DaveW

Midiv Drunken Monkey

 

47CP:

Midiv Drunken Monkey

 

Might not be far from the truth tonight and tomorrow night.    

Dave G.

Well, at least the drunk part...

 

47CP:

mleach:

Did you read the last posts? There is talk about making it part of the impound inspection.

It's not talk.  The seat being securely mounted will be checked at TECH at National Events. 

DaveW

Midiv Drunken Monkey

 

Drunken Money?  Wow, you guys have graduated from "chuckleheads".  Progress indeed.   

So, if a seat passes Tech (or impound) once, will it be guaranteed to pass the next time?  Unless you have the same folks doing Tech, using exactly the same criteria, there will be variation on interpretation of "safe".  As an example, there was much "to do" at Nationals tech last year by a particularly aggressive inspector regarding a number of P cars.  These same cars had run several national events earlier in the year w/o issue.

*If* Solo were to have licensed Tech inspectors, with standard criteria, and logbooks to record the results, safety could indeed be policed effectively.  When will that program be announced? 

--Andy 

1. The weight limit is not there to make the seat safe. It is there so you don't pay a penalty by installing a seat safely. Some cars can mount very light seats safely. Others can't. The weight limit helps level the playing field a tiny bit. The rule also doesn't force you to buy a very expensive carbon/kevlar seat if your car doesn't easily allow lightweight mounting options, so its also a cost reducing measure.

2. Tech can check for a safely installed seat that meets the seat back height requirement, similar to how they make sure open seater cars meet the roll bar requirements. Fellow competitors would have to file a protest if they thought your seat were underweight.
 

---

Nate Whipple
NER
188/88 DSP ITR

Andy Hollis:

So, if a seat passes Tech (or impound) once, will it be guaranteed to pass the next time?  Unless you have the same folks doing Tech, using exactly the same criteria, there will be variation on interpretation of "safe".  As an example, there was much "to do" at Nationals tech last year by a particularly aggressive inspector regarding a number of P cars.  These same cars had run several national events earlier in the year w/o issue.

Why on gods green earth would you think that a tech item that passed once would be given a lifetime pass?  That doesn't even make sense.  If your battery passes once, is it good for life?

*If* Solo were to have licensed Tech inspectors, with standard criteria, and logbooks to record the results, safety could indeed be policed effectively.  When will that program be announced? 

--Andy 

Solo does have licensed tech inspectors.  SFI standards. About 50 people took the test at the convention.I realize that is not what you meant....:)

I'm not condemning or agreeing with the current rule, just telling people what will be happening. 

DaveW

Midiv Drunken Monkey

Andy Hollis:

*If* Solo were to have licensed Tech inspectors, with standard criteria, and logbooks to record the results, safety could indeed be policed effectively.  When will that program be announced? 

 

Why are seats handled differently than seat belts, harnesses, fuel cells, roll cages, etc... etc... etc.... 

Am I to assume that our current tech proceedure is fine for these items but not seats?  

Why are seats handled differently and why is it the responsibility of fellow competitors to protest unsafe seats?

---

Steve Hoelscher
#27 DP - Toyota MR2
2006 DP National Champion
'98, '99, '00, '02 DSP National Champion
http://www.terriehoward.com

47CP:

Andy Hollis:

So, if a seat passes Tech (or impound) once, will it be guaranteed to pass the next time?  Unless you have the same folks doing Tech, using exactly the same criteria, there will be variation on interpretation of "safe".  As an example, there was much "to do" at Nationals tech last year by a particularly aggressive inspector regarding a number of P cars.  These same cars had run several national events earlier in the year w/o issue.

Why on gods green earth would you think that a tech item that passed once would be given a lifetime pass?  That doesn't even make sense.  If your battery passes once, is it good for life?

I am assuming that nothing was changed between events, other than who the inspector was.  A competitor needs to know what to expect.  If a seat mounting is deemed safe at one national event, what happens the next time when a different inspector thinks it is not?  Batteries are a lot less subjective than seat mountings, IMO.

This is not so much pointed at you, Dave, as it is to those who would suggest that merely putting "seat mountings" into the Tech inspection function solves the whole issue.  I was actually the one who lobbied to have it put in the Tech section, but not as a total solution.  Tech is not currently a very uniform process within SCCA Solo, so relying on it completely to solve safety issues is flawed.  Having objective elements in the applicable allowances gives more clarity for competitors.

--Andy