30lb weight penalty

[ekim952522000]

This is a copy of my post I put over on Honda-tech quite a few people seemed to be surprised that everyone was agreeing this was a 30lb weight penalty so I thought I just post it here for the records.

 

So I know I have a 75lb weight penalty for my remote reservoir shocks, I'm trying to figure out the wording of.....

 

4.9 Roll Cage

5) Tubes may be welded at any contact point, or even be “seam welded.â€

[REDRAGN53]

I wonder how long the fly can hang on?

[Jeremy C.]

Yeah, that's 30lbs!

[ekim952522000]

Yeah that's what I thought but I got a bunch of people on Honda-tech sending me PM's saying they did not know that and stuff so I thought I would post it here so we have record if anyone asks thanks for confirming Jeremy.

[Chris F]

Yeah, that's 30lbs!

 

No way dude, that's an "additional mounting point".

 

This rule sucks!

 

-Chris

 

(edit, I'm not trying to be an a$$hole Jeremy, just provoking discussion! If he has "mounting plates", and they're attached to a tube and the frame, maybe it's a mounting point?)

 

(edit #2 fuck nasa's cocksucking censor shit.)

[ghettoracer]

FartMachine has a cracked windshield so I was fabbing up dimple die'd plates to tie cage to A pillar... the way I read the rules that doesn't seem like it is 30 lbs. plates to weld any part of the cage to car seem to be legal under 4.9.1 and 4.9.3.

 

4.9 Roll Cage

All cars shall have a NASA CCR-compliant roll cage. Additionally,

1) Any number of additional mounting points may be used.

3) Any size mounting plate may be used, subject to material and minimum specifications in the

NASA CCR.

 

 

the 30 lbs seems to be for seam welding and/or TWO tubes on each side (FOUR total). welding up A and B pillar seems like "additional mounting points"... 30 lbs isn't a huge deal as FartMachine is over weight anyway... but still. rule clarification from the National office please!!

[ekim952522000]

Now you guys have me confused......

[Jeremy C.]

Chris,

 

I understand what your saying!

 

The way I read the rules, rule 4.9.1 and 4.9.5 are seperate for a reason.

 

4.9.1 says you can use any number of mounting points!

 

4.9.5 says something similar. It uses "contact points" instead of mounting points. It also talking about "seam welding" the tubes to the chassis.

 

4.9.6 says that if you use the allowed 4.9.5, you incure a 30lb penalty.

 

The picture posted as an example shows (at least to me) how to "seam weld" the "A pillar" bar of the cage to the chassis!

 

 

Hope I explained that well enough!

 

Basically, if your going to do this, you should go all out and do it everywhere because it's the same 30lbs as just doing the A pillar!

[ghettoracer]

Jeremy, that doesn't seems like a good example. By what your saying, mounting plates for main loops are "seam welded" to the chassis too. To me, if the A and B pillar plates are considered just mounting points, then it should not matter if you spot weld it or stitch it all the way around...

 

I wonder if 4.9.5 was suppose to read/written as:

"5) Tubs may be welded at any contact point, or even be “seam welded.â€

Edited July 3, 2007 by Guest

[ghettoracer]

This is a copy of my post I put over on Honda-tech quite a few people seemed to be surprised that everyone was agreeing this was a 30lb weight penalty so I thought I just post it here for the records.

 

can you link the HT thread?

[ekim952522000]

http://www.honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=2021906

[H4CRXSi]

The way that I've been told to interpret this is that a "mounting point" is any point at which the *end* of a roll cage bar terminates to the chassis, thus meaning the floor mounting points for your main hoop, floor mounts for the A-pillar bars, floor mounts for the rear leg bars, etc.

 

The picture shown with the "gussetting" attached to the A-pillar is a definition of a "contact point" and would thus be suspect to the 30 lb. weight penalty.

 

Not sure if this helps or not, but this is the verbage that I am using here in the MWHC and haven't had any issues yet. I'll be anxious to see what happens at Mid Ohio in 2 weeks as that is when Colin Botha is debuting his new H1 CRX and supposedly is sporting this style of "gussetting".

 

Regards,

 

Sam

[ghettoracer]

by that interpretation, if you don't use plates but instead add a (or a few) short "stubby" tube and weld a long "mounting plate to the A and B pillar then you don't get the 30 lbs penalty?

[ekim952522000]

The way that I've been told to interpret this is that a "mounting point" is any point at which the *end* of a roll cage bar terminates to the chassis, thus meaning the floor mounting points for your main hoop, floor mounts for the A-pillar bars, floor mounts for the rear leg bars, etc.

 

..............

This is how I took it

 

 

 

by that interpretation, if you don't use plates but instead add a (or a few) short "stubby" tube and weld a long "mounting plate to the A and B pillar then you don't get the 30 lbs penalty?

 

And Yes I think that would be a way to "sneak" by without getting a weight penalty.

[Jeremy C.]

by that interpretation, if you don't use plates but instead add a (or a few) short "stubby" tube and weld a long "mounting plate to the A and B pillar then you don't get the 30 lbs penalty?

 

Umm, no!

 

You still need to follow the rules for "mounting" plates if your trying to "get around" the rule!

You would need to add a LOT of those stubby tubes for the same effect as the plate that connects the A pillar bar to the chassis.

 

Fact is, you guys are worrying about 30lbs!

Hell, my car is 50-60lbs over weight and it's because of the big guy behind the wheel.

We are only talking about 30lbs...

 

Sam is correct though. Now you have 2 series directors telling you the same interpretation of a rule. Take that for what it's worth.

If you want to go about your business and try to use "your" interpretation, by all means, go right ahead. Don't be surprised when your told at your next race though the same thing we've been saying in here!

[civicrr]

For the record, I am one of the original writers of that rule. Jeremy & Sam are correct in both their interpretation & the intent of the rule.

 

Guys, this isn't one of those things where the language is vague or open for individual interpretation. The rule was written using certain givens in terminology in cage building.

 

That section of the rules gives cage builders a chance to build the most awesome cage possible. Where else in club racing do you have as much freedom to construct a cage? You can be creative. You just have to follow the rules.

 

As in anything, you, as the individual, have to weigh the gain vs. the penalty.

Edited July 4, 2007 by Guest

[ghettoracer]

i'm not really worried about 30 lbs... i'm pretty positive my interpretation should be consider legal. consider that:

 

15.6.14 Mounting Plates

Each mounting plate shall be no greater than one hundred (100) square inches and no

greater than twelve (12) inches or less than two (2) inches on a side. Welded mounting

plates shall be at least 0.080-inch thick. Plates may extend onto vertical sections of the

structure. Any mounting plate may be multi-angled, but shall not exceed one hundred

(100) square inches total including vertical sections. Each mounting plate should have

an area of not less than nine (9) square inches.

 

well, a 12"x2" form fitting plate down the A or B pillar is legal. actually per 4.9.3 we're not even limited to any size mounting plates anyway if it meets the minimum size! then you can add as many as short stubby tubings to tie the plate to the pillar. seems perfectly legal and allowed by:

 

4.9 Roll Cage

All cars shall have a NASA CCR-compliant roll cage. Additionally,

1) Any number of additional mounting points may be used.

2) Any number of additional tubes may be used, even for chassis stiffening.

3) Any size mounting plate may be used, subject to material and minimum specifications in the

NASA CCR.

[H4CRXSi]

well, a 12"x2" form fitting plate down the A or B pillar is legal.

 

This is where you're misinterpretting the wording. A mounting plate is not supposed to attach to the side of a tube, or "down" as you say above. A mounting plate is supposed to serve as a "cap" at the end of the tube.

 

I don't know how to paint the picture any clearer without actually standing with you in front of a car and show you what a mounting plate is and what a contact point is. Welding any type of gusseting or plates to the side of a bar, or "down the A or B pillar" is considered a contact point.

 

Interpret the rules the way you will, just don't show up for a MWHC event or the National Championships and expect to not be subject to a 30 lb. weight penalty.

 

Regards,

 

Sam

[ghettoracer]

let me clarity, I don't mean to weld a 12"x2" to tie between the A pillar and along side the cage as legal. if you weld a 12x2" that flattens and curves around the A pillar, isn't that a mounting plate? then, you add a short stubby tube that is notched to fit the the cage on one side, and the open tube faces the "a pillar mounting plate"... wouldn't this be a legal interpretation?

[Jeremy C.]

 

Interpret the rules the way you will, just don't show up for a MWHC event or the National Championships and expect to not be subject to a 30 lb. weight penalty.

 

Regards,

 

Sam

 

And that is exactly the point! If you want to try and ride the "gray" area of anything, don't expect when it bites you.

Doing something that "might" be legal under the current rule because your trying to circumvent them to save 30lbs is kinda pointless. It's much easier for the rules committee to change the rule to include your "idea" in the 30lb weight penalty (does already by Sams point above) than it is for you to change your cage around!

 

Mike already pointed out why the rule is the way it is...

 

If this is just one of those situations Frank where your trying to prove that your right about this point, well, just remember that "you" can interpret the rules whichever way you like, but when you get to the track and the series director says that your illegal, well, your illegal!

[ghettoracer]

it is my opinion that it needs to be clarified if the intent is different. if my interpretation is legally justified by its current definitions then even if the director dislike it he would have to accept it.

 

obviously 30 lbs isn't much i would totally just seam weld and do everything and stiff it to the max...

[Andrie]

it is my opinion that it needs to be clarified if the intent is different. if my interpretation is legally justified by its current definitions then even if the director dislike it he would have to accept it.

 

obviously 30 lbs isn't much i would totally just seam weld and do everything and stiff it to the max...

 

Frank,

 

You got it the other way around. It is your right to argue, but the director has the final say and you have to accept it.

3 of the board member already clarify that it needs the 30 lbs impose, I fail to see where they do not clarify it enough. It looks to me you're the one who refuses to see their way and forcing your own interpretation.

[ghettoracer]

Mike explained the intent of the rules. But the current rules clearly allows multiple mounting points and unlimited sized mounting plates (other than minimum). If someone wants to explore maximum number of mounting points in their cage, how can you declare they are illegal if they are with in the boundary of the words?

[Andrie]

Mike explained the intent of the rules. But the current rules clearly allows multiple mounting points and unlimited sized mounting plates (other than minimum). If someone wants to explore maximum number of mounting points in their cage, how can you declare they are illegal if they are with in the boundary of the words?

 

Isn't Sam also explained to you the definition of the mounting points?

It is obviously differ to your, and all the people in charge agrees, yet you are still adamant about your interpretation, which is wrong and not in the intent of the rule.

 

For the record, my english is not that good, yet I understand their explanations and I do agree with them that your interpretation is totally wrong.

 

This is one of the thing, that you know in your heart that what you are doing is wrong, but yet you still want to do it and asking someone to back you up.

[ghettoracer]

No, Sam said "The way that I've been told to interpret this is that a "mounting point" is any point at which the *end* of a roll cage bar terminates to the chassis, thus meaning the floor mounting points for your main hoop, floor mounts for the A-pillar bars, floor mounts for the rear leg bars, etc."

 

In which case, modifying the A and B pillars as mounting points and adding short stubby roll cage bar with the ends connecting to the mounting plates would seem legal to me. Now I did look up definition of mounting points in CCR it doesn't prohibit you from using the A and B pillar as mounting points since in HC we're allowed unlimited mounting points.

 

15.6.13 Mounting Points

The roll cage shall be mounted to the floor of the car in six, seven, or eight points. The

cage shall not go through the firewall. The seventh and eighth points must attach to the

firewall or front fender wells. All cage attachment points must be mounted to plates.

Each required cage bar shall terminate on a plate with a 360 degree weld to the

mounting plate, except as specified in Section 15.6.14.B. There shall be only one (1)

mounting “pointâ€