GT4Point6 Posted August 21, 2007 Author Share Posted August 21, 2007 anyone know if Jeff Trask is coming? I don't see him in any of the regional results. Not to say he hasn't ran in other classes which would still qualify him. Don is on the Mid Atl regional so he may make it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Posted August 21, 2007 Share Posted August 21, 2007 i just was wondering cuase i found him rather humerous last year and he kept things interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsim Posted August 22, 2007 Share Posted August 22, 2007 i got the answer i was looking for from Tony and JWL. i'm happy. Thanks Nick Steel for getting JWL involved. Well you could share, couldn't you? Or is it a Texas secret? First you guys grow like nuts. Then you get 2-3 @ nationals, now one of your own is the race director @ MO this year! Oh wait, Todd's not really a Texan. Nevermind... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Posted August 22, 2007 Share Posted August 22, 2007 from Tony G - Hi Glenn, I'm not sure what is going on,as we have had zero issues over here. I see it pretty straight forward. The side supports you mention below are totally fine. Bottom line is that some of the home made ones were a joke,and that is what we are going after. Either it works or it doesn't. Please call me if you need more help with this. Thanks, Tony From John Lindsey: Nick- No one is going to get sent home if they don't have a proper install. We will have experts onsite to help bring them into compliance, but we won't be denying anyone the ability to race if they aren't up to snuff. We're trying to phase in the program sensibly and with the least trouble possible, so this will be our stance. If Glenn or anyone else has a specific question, please have them get in touch with Jerry as he has been managing the compliance program. Thanks and see you soon. -JWL i have the $30 bolt on part from Ultra Shield. oh, you could have a Director from the moon, and the results would be the same. TX 1-2-3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Stone1548534713 Posted August 22, 2007 Share Posted August 22, 2007 OK I think it's time for some wagering. We were thinking more like Ca. 1-2-4-5. we don't want to be rude and not include our friend fom tx Who's buying BBQ and beer. Friday qualifing race would be a good one to bet on if you guys are feeling up to it. PS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchntx1548534714 Posted August 22, 2007 Share Posted August 22, 2007 OK I think it's time for some wagering. We were thinking more like Ca. 1-2-4-5. we don't want to be rude and not include our friend fom tx Who's buying BBQ and beer. Friday qualifing race would be a good one to bet on if you guys are feeling up to it. PS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony G Posted August 22, 2007 Share Posted August 22, 2007 Classic Mitch Tony Guaglione Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nasa-rm Posted August 27, 2007 Share Posted August 27, 2007 Bottom line...come with a side restraint per the rules, make sure it restrains your head (not your shoulders)...and you'll probably be fine. Don't misread this as restrain your head only..... If you restrain the head only and not your body, you run the risk of snapping your neck in a side impact when your head stays and your body and seat don't . Kind of stupid to maim yourself in order to meet a rule to prevent you from maiming yourself . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Posted August 27, 2007 Share Posted August 27, 2007 the way i see it, the 5/6 points belts keep you and your seat where its suposed to be. so the net is really for your head. if you and your seat move in an impact, you got big problems coming your way that a net aint gonna help fix. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Matt1548534716 Posted August 27, 2007 Share Posted August 27, 2007 If you read the description of the conversion kit Kirkey sells (the $300 one) it specifically states that the head restraint must ONLY be used in conjunction with the shoulder support, and the kit contains BOTH parts. Also, even though the NASA rule requires only one or the other, the ideal safety system includes a seat with head and shoulder bolsters AND a right side net. If you look at most pro-built touring cars you'll see this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchntx1548534714 Posted August 27, 2007 Share Posted August 27, 2007 And the lines between Pro-Touring and CMC are getting fainter and fainter. Before long, a 230RWHP car will barely be able to untrack itself, burdened by all "the stuff". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Matt1548534716 Posted August 28, 2007 Share Posted August 28, 2007 Despite having "only" 230 RWHP, a CMC car can still go plenty fast enough to get you killed. Whatever you spend to make it as safe as possible is pretty cheap in comparison to the alternative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony G Posted August 28, 2007 Share Posted August 28, 2007 Well said Matt! Really though, I can't see any reason in the world why anyone would not do everything possible and even more to keep up to date on safety. CMC cars are way way faster than you may think, but not quite as fast as the IRL cars I saw at Infineon this past weekend( I got a chance to talk to Dario,Danica,Tony,and Marco..what a treat that was). Tony Guaglione Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchntx1548534714 Posted August 28, 2007 Share Posted August 28, 2007 Sorry ... my mistake. I should have been more clear. I'm not "anti-safety". Just the opposite, actually. Do I practice 100% what I preach? No. I don't wear gloves when working in the shop all the time, nor do I don eye protection every time I mow the grass or drive a nail to repair the fence or pour bleach into the washing machine. If preaching safety from a pulpit on high, you can't stop thinking about it at the race track, right? right? The potential for injury is a potential for injury whether at the track or at home, right? right?? The point is I see great strides being taken and a willingness to prevent injury during an accident. I applaud that and think it's great. By the same token, I don't see a similar willingness to encourage us to use creativity and ingenuity in preventing an accident in the first place. It's actually quite the opposite. Ingenuity and creativity is discouraged. Time and technology marches on ... Getting back on topic ... and this is not complaining, Jeff ... Had this thread started out with a simple example of what was an acceptable piece and what wasn't, all this hoopla could have been avoided. But I think I've made that point before. Being abundantly clear on where the line is drawn goes a long way in understanding a thought process, the basis of "interpretation". My wife of 30 years and I found out a long time ago neither of us are Kreskin. Maybe most folks are and I'm handicapped in that regard. I don't discount that possibility. But, we do our best to reduce the amount of mind reading and just say what we mean and what we are thinking. We both realize the words exiting our respective heads are not personal attacks, rather attempts at c o m m u n i c a t i n g. I hope all of you understand that about me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Al F. Posted August 28, 2007 Members Share Posted August 28, 2007 I dont get it Mitch, what do you mean? just kidding! well said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FBody383 Posted August 28, 2007 Share Posted August 28, 2007 Really though, I can't see any reason in the world why anyone would not do everything possible and even more to keep up to date on safety. 2. INTENT The intent of the Camaro Mustang Challenge (CMC) racing class is to provide National Auto Sport Association (NASA) members a racing series featuring late model production V8 sedans. The original ruleset for CMC was designed for 1979-1997 model cars with a general 230/300 HP/TQ limitation. With newer, higher horsepower cars now available from the OEMs, CMC-2 was created to provide a place to race these newer, higher horsepower vehicles, while keeping with the same fundamental philosophy of CMC. Modifications will be limited to those necessary to provide for safety, close competition, limited expenses, and positive exposure. [sARCASM = 'On'] ** For Sale - 1994 Camaro CMC Car ** - pro built 8 point cage (2" X .125 tubing) w/ SFI padding on all tubes, 20 litre fire system, custom full containment seat w/ right side net, 3 channel radio system for Safety Broadcast, spotter and pit crew, redundant 2-cooler driver cooling system, fuel cell with double wall case and rollover fuel shutoff, weighs 3400 lbs, engine 150hp/190tq, hazard lights and wipers operational. Carbon fiber driver cell and high density door foam not installed due to delay in rule change. [sACRCASM=Off] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchntx1548534714 Posted August 28, 2007 Share Posted August 28, 2007 Must be something in the Houston area water ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FBody383 Posted August 29, 2007 Share Posted August 29, 2007 Must be something in the Houston area water ... It's your avatar... makes me feel all funny... Personally, I buy some special bottled water from somewhere near Bay City 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.