marshallmosty Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 I wanted to discuss adding weight legally to an AI without it being considered ballast. Would it be against the rules to: 1. Make a seat mount out of thicker than normal material? 2. Weld in steel plate to the rear floorboard for the purpose of securely mounting other items to that plate (i.e. cool shirt, accusump, battery, etc)? Just a question to get some conversation going. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Corkran Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 Yes. 7.5 defines ballast as "material that serves no other purpose than adding weight." You can make your seat or other mounts as beefy as you deem necessary - just as you can add as many "additional" bars to your cage as you see fit for safety and stiffness. Or make the mounting cage for your fuel cell as "strong" as you like. And of course nothing says you can't have two batterys. You know, in case you alternator dies on the starting grid? Funny, I just came in from the garage after making a raised aluminum plate in the tire well to mount my cool system cooler on. And I went to extra trouble to make sure I could mount ballast under it if needed later. I guess it would have been quicker and easier to just weld in some thickwall steel angle. Maybe when I need ballast I should just mount the cooler and accusump to a 1/2" steel plate that completely covers the tire well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 you got too much ballast in the car! thats not ballast, that a floor pan stiffin'er! w/loopholes like this, the 150lb ballast rule is not very effective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nape Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 w/loopholes like this, the 150lb ballast rule is not very effective. Agreed. Stock passenger seat, 2+ batteries, super tough rear bumper, jacking rails under the car. It's all legal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Corkran Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 w/loopholes like this, the 150lb ballast rule is not very effective. I guess that depends on it's intended purpose, which I don't see explicitly stated in the rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbodleimages Posted August 27, 2007 Share Posted August 27, 2007 NASA rules are for allowing easy compliance while creating a fairly level playing field for competition. Because the rules are often in basic terms its easy for those that want to win at all or many costs to subvert, if not outright break the rules. The alternative is to be far more specific about the rules and far harder in the tech room. The result of that would be a move in the direction of the SCCA rules book and procedures that in large part led to the creation of NASA. The more race cars there are on the grid and the more serious the racing becomes the more its going to move in that direction. I guess there is no way around it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LMan Posted August 27, 2007 Share Posted August 27, 2007 Marshall, I think this method is legal all day long: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshallmosty Posted August 27, 2007 Author Share Posted August 27, 2007 Lman, You're right, however, my wife would rather me add weight just to the car and not the driver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.