SCCAForums.com

SOLO STREET PREPARED CATEGORY

· Per the SPAC, the previously-published proposal regarding seats is recommended to the BOD. The proposal is as follows:

Replace 15.2.E with the following (adapted from 14.2.B and the 2nd half of 15.2.E):

“The driver and front passenger seats may be replaced, with the following restrictions: The seating surface must be fully upholstered.

The top of the seat, or an attached headrest, may not be below the center of the driver’s head. The seat, including mounting

hardware, must weigh at least 20 pounds and must be attached using the standard body mounting holes/studs. Additional

mounting points may be added. Cars may have no fewer than the standard number of seats. The seat tracks are considered part

of the seat and may be substituted. Alternate seat tracks may serve no other purpose. The standard seat belts may be removed

to facilitate the installation of alternate restraints complying with safety requirements.”

 

Being that seat weights in SP have always been open, I was wondering how many of you may feel this will result in replacing your seats with heavier seats, or slapping on some heavy nuts and bolts to the framing?

I think my seat maybe under the 20 lbs weight minimum, and maybe I can weld on some bracketry to stiffen the mounting brackets and add some weight, but those running seats bolted to the floors must have

some issue with this reccomendation.

Don

I'd take issue with the seat height provision, as I don't think I can drive in any SP car with that requirement.  My stock seats and my upgraded stock STi v6 seats both fail to meet a height requirement that is up my head's centerline.  This also serves to make a car legal in class or not, based on who's driving it.  I'd much prefer a height requirement, if there is to be one, include a real measurable number.

-N 

---

#128 FSP - '99 Soloru Wagon - NER

Sorry about the small print in my original post.  Don't know what happened.

I was initially concerned about the weight minimum, but I can see that some drivers of open cars (eg, miatas), seem to have their helmets near the top of the windshield, and I doubt an aftermarket seat would be tall enough to reach the center of the drivers head. 

Perhaps this would require drivers to use the stock seats, in which case the rule is not an issue? 

FYI, the original proposal for member comment was in the May Fastrack earlier this year.

Is it too late for member feedback to the SPAC?

Don

They are trying to make people run real seats that are well mounted and safe instead of junk plastic seats made for karts, etc. that are poorly mounted to save weight.  Hence the minimum. 

 As for the headrest requirement, so what if it makes a car illegal depending on who's driving?  A car driven by someone without a license is also illegal.  And frankly the headrest is there to support the head in case of an accident and as far as I'm concerned it's not really safe to not have one and you end up like a bobble-head in an accident--that's beyond dumb.  

---

Sam Strano
Owner--Strano Performance Parts
800-729-1831

I would argue that a car deemed SP-legal should be SP-legal for all drivers.  Driver-specific requirements like having a driver's license aren't part of a car's class requirements.  All I'm saying is that a reasonable height can be written in instead of something subjective like "center of driver's head" because that's just not helping anyone.

In my case, I would explicitly be restricted from all SP cars and have to move to a car class without a seat height requirement, which doesn't seem to be the desired affect.  If it's a safety rule you want regarding seat height and headrests, then it's place is elsewhere - not the SP rules.  As for my own safety when I know I'm too tall to fit in most cars on the road, I don't fit in formula cars and only compete with a roof over my head and a 3-point belt for a reason.

-N

 

---

#128 FSP - '99 Soloru Wagon - NER

You can't argue that, at least not to where it sticks.  If you drove a CM car and your head was a foot above the roll bar because you are 6'8", but your co-driver is 5'8" you'd have the same issue, wouldn't you?  If you are 4'11", and I'm 6'1" and I have my seat on the floor, I wonder how well you could see out of the car, and that's a safety issue big enough that maybe you couldn't run.  What's a "reasonable height"?  Again, someone 4'11" vs. 6'8" aren't going to be nearly the same, and a little tiny seat is ok for them but not for you. 

And FWIW, and I guess you are missing this.  Nobody is automatically illegal because of this, if you're short and have a tall co-driver, find a seat that meets Lurch's requirements and use expanding foam to make an insert like endurance racers do. 

 I'm an SP driver, and I think something needs to be done about the crap we're seeing that pass as seats that can hold real people and it needs to stop.  If you have a better idea, you need to pass it on.  Until then the weight minimum is so people don't get tricky with mounting and seats. 

---

Sam Strano
Owner--Strano Performance Parts
800-729-1831

I agree that safety should be foremost in the seat requirements.  Considering the forces/stresses that seats must endure, I agree some of the seats I've seen over the years seemed rather weak  in mounting and support.  So if 20 lbs guarantees safety in seat selection, wonderful.  I'll just add some steel to my aluminum seat brackets, which attach my lightweight fully upholstered passenger seat (with full height seatback) to my factory mounting points.  Won't make my seat safer, it will make it heavier, but only minimally.

What about a standard seatback height, rather than a undefined figure that changes depending on height of the drivers upper torso?  Seems perhaps that could eliminate the lawnboy seats and still make it more specific for drivers.  Of course, will never satisfy everyone, but could a standard height have less issues?

 Don

I have to agree with Sam.  Of course somebody will screw with the rules and turn their lawnchair seat into a passenger seat, that certainly meets the letter of the rules.  But at least at 20 pounds, they have a real chance to do the right thing and put in a safe seat. 

 We have a legal seat in our FSP car, but it won't be legal next year.  So what, we will put a legal, safe seat that's attached correctly and live with the new rule. 

---

Jim Mueller
FSP 2003 Focus

The stock seat in a Elise/Exige weighs 15.5 lbs.

 

That would mean this rule would make a bone stock Elise/Exige/ExigeS illegal for ASP.  Could a rule make a car illegal for the class it was already classed in?

 

 

Rambolane:

The stock seat in a Elise/Exige weighs 15.5 lbs.

 

That would mean this rule would make a bone stock Elise/Exige/ExigeS illegal for ASP.  Could a rule make a car illegal for the class it was already classed in?

 

 

No, read the rules, if you "replace" those seats they must meet this rule. 

---

Jim Mueller
FSP 2003 Focus

I have an interesting example.

 Driver 1 is 5' tall, seat meets all rules for the class.  Driver 2 is 6'8" tall, and the seat is not tall enough to meet the rules.  Driver 2 is protested and DSQ'd for seat rule violation.  Driver 1 is summarly DSQ'd because while he is completely class legal, the car is illegal with driver 2 in the car and thus all runs for all drivers must be DSQ'd.

 

 Sounds pretty messed up in my opinion.

I like the rule.  A similar rule was adopted in the Street Touring Classes for this year.  We now have a seat that is attached in a solid manner instead of on some flimsy mounts.

As car as the seat height, I think you people are dissecting the rule too far, if you understand what the rule is intended to prevent and use some common sense (gasp) then it will be fine.  We have a similar rule in regards to the exhaust exiting behind the driver, if I'm taller and my seat is farther back I can be DSQ'd while my co-driver can be legal because th seat is closer.
 

---

Jason Frank
Bridgestone / Redshift Motorsports STS prepared '89 Civic Si -- teamundercoatracing.com

Why can't the rule just say "no kart seats".  Is it really that hard to determine if a seat is designed for a kart or a car?  these seat rules are more stringent then the seats most cars come with.

Why do people look for reasons things won't work instead of looking for ways to make them work? 

 

Marshall - in your (absurd) example (absurd because Driver 1 needs to read the rules before s/he goes to Nationals and gets DSQd for something stupid), why would Driver 2's runs be DSQd?  The seat meets the rule for D2, the CAR is not illegal.

 

Read the rules again.  To paraphrase, "seats may be replaced" and "the headrest must..."

 

Get a seat which has a headrest which meets the rules, which weighs more than 20#.  

 

Lotus people - Jim pointed it out, but the weight/height requirements don't apply to STOCK seats, only replacement seats.

 

Headrests - what's preventing a competitor from making a headrest which bolts to the roof?  Bolts to a rollbar?  Modifying a stock headrest of some sort and attaching some sort of connection mechanism to the nifty hotrod seat?  

 

There are a LOT of ways to address this for the vertically unchallenged.   The three people who drive my car are pretty varied:

 - 5' 9", 299.99999# (give or take 20)

 - 6' 1", 200ish

 - 5' 3", 125ish
 

We've got it wired.  Works pretty well, truthfully.  We have sliders and cushions and expandable foam and KY jelly for the tighter-fitting drivers.  None of us have the headrest issue (although I come close, once you put my ass under my torso, I get pretty "tall").  

The rule fixes far more problems than it creates, IMHO.   

 

.02c!

 

 Iain (at least no one is whining about having to add weight to their bracket:)
 

Marshall Grice:

Why can't the rule just say "no kart seats".  Is it really that hard to determine if a seat is designed for a kart or a car?  these seat rules are more stringent then the seats most cars come with.

 

"No kart seats" seems like it'd work, until some jackass (like me) buys them wholesale and dubs them "Iain's Superlight CAR Seats." 

 

Sorry, Sam;).

 

There has to be some definition in there about what the seat is.  That's been done - fully upholstered, headrest halfway up the noggin, etcetcetc.  Just saying "No _____ Seats" won't work - what if you take an early LBC or Porsche seat (like 50s early), recreate it in carbon fiber, voila, a "car" seat that looks, well, just like a kart seat. 

 

 

 

Iain (hey, at least I'm honest) 

Iain Mannix:

Why do people look for reasons things won't work instead of looking for ways to make them work? 

 

Because they are scared of change....  it's common not only in racing community, but everywhere.

---

Jason Frank
Bridgestone / Redshift Motorsports STS prepared '89 Civic Si -- teamundercoatracing.com

You're probably right.  I love it when rules change, I get to look for other ways to make the car faster. 

 

Iain (I fear change, I have no mirrors) 

Iain Mannix:

  

The rule fixes far more problems than it creates, IMHO.   

obviously you're the short one.

Make the seat dimensions something fixed and driver independant.  Or make the minimum seat weight equal to 10% of the drivers weight.  Allow for using seat brackets that are safe and don't use factory bolt holes (ie, non sliding side mount brackets common on FIA approved seats).  Then I'll stop b*tching. 

This rule is so screwed up.  And yes I wrote a letter outlining all of the issues I found with it.

 First: not all seats mount with "studs/holes".  I drove an SP car for years that didn't use studs or holes to mount the OE seat.  So how am I expected to mount an aftermarket seat in the car?  There is no legal means to mount a seat under this rule!

Second: "seat tracks are considered part of the seat and may be substituted".  REALLY?  When they are welded to the floor as they are in some cars?

The requirement for the seatback be no lower than the center of the driver's head is fine assuming that all seat backs are mounted vertically.  They are not.  So a seat could be mounted with the back positioned exactly vertical and be legal and when reclined to the preferred driving position it would fail.  There would be NO difference in the safety of the seat.

Why were these issues not addressed?

---

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

Mugenlude:

We have a similar rule in regards to the exhaust exiting behind the driver, if I'm taller and my seat is farther back I can be DSQ'd while my co-driver can be legal because th seat is closer.
 

Just because that rule sucks doesn't mean this one has to...