DISCUSSION CLOSED: Change 3/4 width to 1 car plus 6"

[JSG1901]

NOTE: The suggestion below is to add a rule to the GTS rules which expands on an exsiting NASA CCR rule.

 

Type

Modification to an existing rule

 

Existing rule section (if applicable)

25.4.2 Punting

 

[DELETED] In most cases, “racing room” is defined as “at least three quarters of one car width. [DELETED]

 

Proposed change

Change 3/4 car width rule to 1 car width.

 

Reason

Numerous incidents in NASA plus other organizations have shown misuse and misunderstanding of this rule. Drivers assume they can crowd other cars two wheels off (3/4) and have caused loss of control that results in crashes, damage, or injury. "3/4" is too ambiguous (and could result in a lot of arguing, ex. you needed to move over 6 more inches) and the definition is being interpreted in different manners by drivers. The intent is not to allow drivers to crowd others into the dirt. Hence change references to 3/4 width referred to in section 25.4.2 (and any other areas) from 3/4 car width to 1 car width. Prototyping this in GTS and then will propose to Nationals if successful.

 

Proposed new wording

In most cases, “racing room” is defined as “at least one car width.” (and other references in Notes and illustrations.

[Greg Smith]

For.

[Alan_Wolfe]

For

[Luke P.]

For

[John Graber]

I'm for one car width. Not sure what is gained by having the 3/4 rule. Also, ask three different race directors to define when and where the 3/4 applies and how it is defined and you'll get three different answers.

[MPower6er]

For.

[KTL]

For.

 

3/4 car width always implied to me that leading car can crowd you because it's leading, "using you up" a bit and forcing you to put two in the grass. If we're OK with forcing people to put two in the grass, then we have to be accepting of contact and not penalize for body contact after race end at impound. I'm not supportive of body contact. I've never even touched anybody. I just think most people are not real keen on the "rubbin' is racin'" POV and would prefer to be given a bit of racing room.

[zabuomar]

For.

 

3/4 car width always implied to me that leading car can crowd you because it's leading, "using you up" a bit and forcing you to put two in the grass. If we're OK with forcing people to put two in the grass, then we have to be accepting of contact and not penalize for body contact after race end at impound. I'm not supportive of body contact. I've never even touched anybody. I just think most people are not real keen on the "rubbin' is racin'" POV and would prefer to be given a bit of racing room.

 

I agree. I think most people want to keep there shiny racecars...shiny

[zabuomar]

For.

 

3/4 car width always implied to me that leading car can crowd you because it's leading, "using you up" a bit and forcing you to put two in the grass. If we're OK with forcing people to put two in the grass, then we have to be accepting of contact and not penalize for body contact after race end at impound. I'm not supportive of body contact. I've never even touched anybody. I just think most people are not real keen on the "rubbin' is racin'" POV and would prefer to be given a bit of racing room.

 

I agree. I think most people want to keep there shiny racecars...shiny

[Rokket H.]

Against. In racing what is the point of leaving a 1-car gap? If you can't drive off your "line" in a corner, themn you should do TT where only times count. In GTS the finish line is what counts. Of course, all drivers need to keep safety in mind & use "racing" judgement when going into a corner. Turn 7 at Sebring is an example: I have seen guys go really wide & deep, and there is barely 2 car lanes in that corner, but is is great place to pass if you can hold the inside tight. Otherwise, it would be like giving a point by in a HPDE. b]

[TowDawg]

I'm for this in all classes.

I understand the 3/4 rule in some circumstances, but there are some people who seem to use it in a way I don't believe it was intended. There are some videos out there where the lead driver clearly comes down hard just because the rules state they can, and it can lead to some really bad results.

In general, I think it makes sense. However, it can (and is) being abused by some people and leading to unsafe conditions for the two cars involved and everyone around them. If common sense is used, I don't mind the rule. I just don't know how you can assign blame to a passing car, if the car being overtaken suddenly comes over really hard on them and the passing car has no way to react. Technically, it's the passing cars fault, which doesn't seem right. It might get too confusing to say 3/4 is OK in some instances, but not others.

[kbrew8991]

Since this may get rolled out to all classes I'd love to see you guys also take the opportunity to clear up if/when any curbs/rumble strips/etc count as part of the track width.

 

- KB, always leaves 1 car width plus 1" anyway, not 6", but....

 

Of course, all drivers need to keep safety in mind & use "racing" judgement when going into a corner.

The rule comes into play if/when someone does NOT use good racing judgement, or accidentally makes a mistake, and $#%& happens....

[jvanhouten]

For.

[cstreit911]

Against. In racing what is the point of leaving a 1-car gap? If you can't drive off your "line" in a corner, themn you should do TT where only times count. In GTS the finish line is what counts. Of course, all drivers need to keep safety in mind & use "racing" judgement when going into a corner. Turn 7 at Sebring is an example: I have seen guys go really wide & deep, and there is barely 2 car lanes in that corner, but is is great place to pass if you can hold the inside tight. Otherwise, it would be like giving a point by in a HPDE. b]

 

THIS is one of the reasons why the rule needs clarification.

 

3/4 or 1 car width does not define the gap. It defines how much track you must leave them.

[ILIKETODRIVE]

Against. In racing what is the point of leaving a 1-car gap? If you can't drive off your "line" in a corner, themn you should do TT where only times count. In GTS the finish line is what counts. Of course, all drivers need to keep safety in mind & use "racing" judgement when going into a corner. Turn 7 at Sebring is an example: I have seen guys go really wide & deep, and there is barely 2 car lanes in that corner, but is is great place to pass if you can hold the inside tight. Otherwise, it would be like giving a point by in a HPDE. b]

 

THIS is one of the reasons why the rule needs clarification.

 

3/4 or 1 car width does not define the gap. It defines how much track you must leave them.

100% agreed.

[911.racer]

I agree For.

 

I have been in situations that have become very gray about the interpretation of this where it comes to track out. That it is ok to force a competitor onto the rumble strips or two in the grass on the track out based on the 3/4 width rule.

 

I do not mind being forced to 'put two in the dirt' at the apex since the heavy tires are still planted on tarmac, but that becomes much trickier and dangerous at track out.

 

Thanks

 

Ed

[JoeMag]

Totally for it. Lets race on the black stuff.

[JSG1901]

Since this may get rolled out to all classes I'd love to see you guys also take the opportunity to clear up if/when any curbs/rumble strips/etc count as part of the track width.

 

As someone who's spent the last couple summers doing Race Director work in Great Lakes, I can tell you that my interpretation of "the track" includes everything...curbing, etc. I don't know that there's a specific definition in the CCR and it's quite possible other RDs use a different standard but I figure if it's something I regularly drive on, that's a part of the track.

[kbrew8991]

That's a reasonable approach Scott, I'd just prefer to see it codified / standardized "while we're in there" clearing up and codifing things from 3/4ths to 4/4ths (plus any additional buffer as desired). Would be good timing for it, especially if it works out great for your series and then gets rolled out to all race classes.

 

Otherwise yeah it's still an improvement going to the 4/4ths that most people use and already drive by, but then there's still some ambiguity left over as not all RDs treat driveable curbing the same, etc, etc.

[Brad Waite]

Yes on this.

[D_Eclipse9916]

100% Against.

 

It makes the leading car responsible for whatever the person that is trying to pass does. It is your responsibility as a passing car to pass cleanly when there is space. Great now when someone tries to pass me with no room, I now have to "create" room for them or I get penalized.

 

This lets you cornerdive me with technically not enough room, but then I have to move over to give you width to do it. If you cornerdive me and then end up with not enough room, that's the way it goes. I have never seen someone "push" someone off track except in one video (not even gts). This is a case of 1% "issue" trying to be solved when it will create a 50% problem.

[kbrew8991]

3/4ths or 4/4ths they still have to be far enough alongside to have rights to that space. Otherwise it's a dive bomb and contact is still on them. Nothing would seem to change in that regard, just the amount of space AFTER they've achieved enough overlap that it's fair for them to be granted space to work with.

[D_Eclipse9916]

3/4ths or 4/4ths they still have to be far enough alongside to have rights to that space. Otherwise it's a dive bomb and contact is still on them. Nothing would seem to change in that regard, just the amount of space AFTER they've achieved enough overlap that it's fair for them to be granted space to work with.

 

That totally becomes a gray area, I have had people cornerdive me enough that it could be "considered next to me" but the corner is tightening up on them so they back off the throttle just enough that the pass doesn't stick because they wont have full traction. (because they pulled off a move that isnt sustainable). Make it so that I have to give you more room once you do that means that people will start diving more in unpossible moves and force the guy in front to give you more room.

 

I like the "threat" of being closed off to reduce the number of "unsafe" passes attempted.

[JSG1901]

100% Against.

 

It makes the leading car responsible for whatever the person that is trying to pass does. It is your responsibility as a passing car to pass cleanly when there is space. Great now when someone tries to pass me with no room, I now have to "create" room for them or I get penalized.

 

This lets you cornerdive me with technically not enough room, but then I have to move over to give you width to do it. If you cornerdive me and then end up with not enough room, that's the way it goes. I have never seen someone "push" someone off track except in one video (not even gts). This is a case of 1% "issue" trying to be solved when it will create a 50% problem.

Actually, this is not true. According to the NASA CCR (I'm paraphrasing here, because I'm too lazy to look it up), the overtaking car has no right to any of the track until its front tires are alongside the driver of the car being overtaken. Once that has happened, then he has the right to at least 3/4 of a car width of track. There is absolutely no requirement that the car being overtaken give the overtaking car ANY track room prior to the overtaking car getting sufficiently alongside.

[ILIKETODRIVE]

Actually, this is not true. According to the NASA CCR (I'm paraphrasing here, because I'm too lazy to look it up), the overtaking car has no right to any of the track until its front tires are alongside the driver of the car being overtaken. Once that has happened, then he has the right to at least 3/4 of a car width of track. There is absolutely no requirement that the car being overtaken give the overtaking car ANY track room prior to the overtaking car getting sufficiently alongside.

Not verbatim but 100% correct.