Jump to content
Al F.

Rules silly season - please read!

Recommended Posts

Al F.

To say we're just now starting the silly season might sound a bit odd to some...but it is that time of year! What time? The time where we begin thoroughly evaluating rules change requests and preparing next season's rules!!

 

For those new folks and to remind our old folks, every year in preparation for the next season we formally request all racers to submit rules changes requests, via email to myself ([email protected]). All requests get added to a spreadsheet, and then each is discussed among the directors and either incorporated into the rules or rejected.

 

Ok, you know and have read everything going on around CMC-CMC2 merger for 2010, that is a sepparate issue. 2009 will be transitional in the sense that we will incorporate what we know for 2010 into 2009 CMC2 (for example, power levels coming down to the 260/310, etc). Therefore what we are mostly looking for is thoughts/comments on existing rules we know are staying that can stand to be made more clear. Of course everything in the current tech bulletin will be incorporated.

 

As you think about this, please write in with a solution and logic around it, not just an observation. "Change rule xxx to state yyy because zzz" is a lot more useful than "rule xxx is confusing".

 

Also, keep in mind that the focus of rules changes is to make the book easier to understand, to make cars/racing safer, to make cars more reliable. Changes that result in improved lap times and nothing else will get written into the spreadsheet with a status of "pending rejection".

 

Thanks everyone for your help in this process!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mitchntx1548534714

Silly as in working on those silly rules or silly as in it's silly to send you an e-mail?

 

Call me silly ... e-mail sent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Glenn

i'm pretty sure the rear wing and fuel rules will be updated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
King Matt1548534716

I'd like to see the CMC rules on car number sizes amended to match the NASA CCRs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Glenn
I'd like to see the CMC rules on car number sizes amended to match the NASA CCRs.

 

i agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
snakebit
i'm pretty sure the rear wing and fuel rules will be updated.

 

What's going on with the rear wings? Will the Cobra R still be legal in '10?

 

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mitchntx1548534714

Yes along with the tail section from an Antonov AN225 Cossack

 

0721841.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
snakebit

How about my ricer red caliper paint, tornado throttle body spacer, and fuel line magnets?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tony G

Yes the Cobra R rear wing is legal and will be for 2009 and on, as its a factory part.

We are just going to adjust the wording in the wing rule for 2009.

Tony Guaglione

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HMark
I'd like to see the CMC rules on car number sizes amended to match the NASA CCRs.

 

I sent that in already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GT4Point6
I'd like to see the CMC rules on car number sizes amended to match the NASA CCRs.

 

You want smaller numbers? NASA 10", CMC 16"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
King Matt1548534716

Yes, I want 10 inch minimum numbers because there is no practical reason why our numbers should be different than what NASA requires for the rest of the cars that are on track with us. It doesn't mean anyone with the bigger numbers needs to change them or that you can't still make your numbers that big or bigger, but it could mean somebody coming to CMC from another class would not need to re-number their car. Plus there is just no logical reason for a rules item like this to vary class by class. The CCR exists to enforce basic standards and uniformity across all classes on items that do not specifically impact the competitive balance of a particular class and that should be sufficient.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mitchntx1548534714

The CCR exists to enforce basic standards and uniformity

 

Well, there is the first conflict right there. Terms like basic, standard and uniformity doesn't appear to exist. However, whim, whatever and whoyaknow ...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tony G

I like the big numbers and CMC was written that way to be more like the stock car look and the old days of Trans Am.

Small numbers for small cars....

Tony Guaglione

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MHISSTC
I like the big numbers and CMC was written that way to be more like the stock car look and the old days of Trans Am.

Small numbers for small cars....

Tony Guaglione

 

Uuuhhh...

 

Have you looked at any pictures of old Trans Am cars lately?

Some numbers were definitely larger than others.

http://www.mlodeent.com/VINTSC/SP/TA/spta05.htm

 

P.S. Edits...I like the bigger numbers too. It makes it much easier for spectators who are not that familiar with a car or driver to spot a particular car...especially if you have several similar solid color cars. Without a doubt our giant "6" on the side of The Pumpkin makes it very easy to distinguish our car from Chris's orange car.

30sml.JPG

 

Incidentally, if the CCR number rules are adopted for CMC, there will be at least one CMC National Event participant who will have to change his numbers.

 

Also a related question:

I recently noticed our "CMC" is in the wrong spot according to the CMC rules. I also noticed we are not the only ones with it in the wrong spot. Is this a critical enough rules violation that we need to get a new set of "CMC"s made and move them to the proper place "behind" the number, or can everyone else live with it? I think the "CMC" looks super darn good where it is and would like to keep it there.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BADVENM

I dont wanna be forced to remove my BIG #6! It looks great on the car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Glenn

the debate here is to allow numbers as small as the CCR allows, not mandate 10" numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MHISSTC

I understand that we can use larger numbers if desired. I was trying to reinforce the point that big numbers are better than smaller numbers by providing a written and visual illustration of my opinion.

 

I think Dave's concern is in regard to my P.S. question. If we are requested to move the "CMC" "rearward" of the number, we may also have to get new "6"s and reposition them in order to achieve the same visual perfection with the new arrangement that we currently possess with the graphics as they are now arranged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Glenn

i asked that question while building my car back in 2004. while we would like all cars to be the same, i cant see anyone making you move it.

also - does the rule want it rearward w/ respects of the car or the number? same difference on one side, not so on the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MHISSTC
The class identification CMC logo stickers will be 5" tall block letters and placed rearward of the door numbers.

 

I interpret "rearward" in this context to mean in regards to the car as a whole. I do not interpret it to mean shall follow the number. If the intent of the rules was the latter, there a going to be a whole mess of CMC folks getting new graphics for 2009.

 

Take another look at the Trans Am cars in the link I provided previously. It appears that if they had a similar rule, it was just as confusing back then as it is now. On some cars the class designation "follows" the number, on others it is "rearward" of the numbers.

 

I didn't think this was going to be that big of a deal, but maybe we do need a clarification on this issue in order to ensure visual consistency for the CMC class(es).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Glenn

i would place it rearward w/ regards to the car myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ls168camaro
Yes the Cobra R rear wing is legal and will be for 2009 and on, as its a factory part.

We are just going to adjust the wording in the wing rule for 2009.

Tony Guaglione

 

So does that mean the Cobra R is allowed or are you just allowing the Cobra R wing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GT4Point6

So does that mean the Cobra R is allowed or are you just allowing the Cobra R wing?

 

Just the wing, just as it has been for a couple of years. not the engine, not the front spllitter, just the wing, not the whole car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Glenn

but isnt the whole car a factory part?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ST#97
but isnt the whole car a factory part?

 

With only 300 produced, I personally wouldn't consider it a production automobile. 500 units has been a long standing marker for "production" car for many other sanctioning bodies.

 

Besides, they are getting hard to come by and are WAY too expensive for what they are. you would be $$$$ ahead looking for a used AI wing where someone either upgraded or was selling out. Atleast it would be adjustable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...