Wing Wing Bling Bling

[Glenn]

I've read a lot of "big wings arent in the spirit of cmc" comments, or derivatives of that comment. I've also read a lot of "Cobra Rs arent allowed so you shouldnt have Cobra R parts" or some derivate of that. What bothers me most are the "that wing rule is there because one guy wanted to run a Cobra R wing" or some other thinly veiled insult to that effect.

 

So I'll say it once and I'd say it louder if I could: you guys thinking along any of those lines are all either flat out wrong or really late to the party.

 

 

Al-why is it wrong to say that Cobra R's aren't allowed so you shouldn't have Cobra R parts? I don't understand where the logic lies and where the line is drawn.

 

 

Copied from a post by Mitch:

 

Al ... for the record, forced me to put it those terms when you said in a private e-mail

 

Quote:

 

Anyway, here are three questions I ask myself when contemplating any change:

1) Will it make our racing safer?

2) Will it make our racing less expensive?

3) Will a top shelf driver in a top shelf car post the exact same lap time before and after the change

 

 

Al-just how does a wing make our racing safer, less expensive, and the data that supported zero lap time change when this rule was added whenever it was added?

 

Where is the data to support this rule? This should be another post but along the same line where is the data (who was the test mule driver and test car) that provided the data for the change to 4 piston brakes? I would like to talk to them about their experience and costs.

 

Any idea when the rules will be posted for 2009? Our first race in 09 is end of Jan. and look like I have lots of things to change to max out my car per the rules.

 

some where in here Bryan, Al posted the why's. at one point it was wide open to do what you wanted w/ regards to wings. they used a Cobra R wing as a limiter as to what was going to be allowed from thatpoint on.

 

all Cobra R model specific parts are not legal. since wings are open (w/in the limits set), the Cobra R wing is legal (as would be a wing from a bi-plane if it fell w/in the limits in the rules). the hood and front splitter are the only other two items specific to the Cobra R (other than the wing) and both are not legal.

[Al F.]

Thank you Glenn

 

Al-why is it wrong to say that Cobra R's aren't allowed so you shouldn't have Cobra R parts? I don't understand where the logic lies and where the line is drawn.

 

It is wrong to say that Cobra Rs arent allowed so you shouldnt have Cobra R parts for the same reason it is wrong to say none of our cars ever came with Koni doubles so you shouldnt be allowed to use them. It would also be wrong to say the C5 Corvette is not allowed so we shouldnt be allowed to run C5 calipers. The fact that a particular part is or is not allowed is not always directly tied to where the part came from.

 

Cobra R wings are allowed because they fit the rule the way it is written today. You could've built your own, or bought one off of a Ferrari...doesnt matter the source at this point in time.

 

With regards to my 3 primary questions, you're choosing to apply it to determine whether a component in its entirety should be allowed. Fine. You're forgetting that is my test to see whether a rule supports my intent. The three questions are not the goal, they are a test to see if the goal is being met and they are not the only test.

 

The goal includes: "Modifications will be limited to those necessary to promote safety, close competition, and flexibility to enable drivers to learn and experiment with the principles of race car setup within boundaries intended to limit expenses, thereby providing the drivers with fun, exciting, and challenging yet approachable racing." as I posted previously.

 

Does any wing promote safety? No Does any wing reduce cost? Maybe, maybe not, more on that later. Does any wing result in same lap times before and after? No So, as a first pass at a wing rule you land with two nos and one maybe. Not good! However, that is not where the story ends:

 

1) We didnt start with "no wings" and consider adding wings. We started with almost unlimited wings and were considering limiting them. Going from unlimited to limited does indeed limit expenses and also aids in assuring close competition. The question was, really, where to draw the line.

 

2) If you limit wings all the way to "oem only" then you are going to find that certain cars have an advantage. Some of those Saleen wings look pretty damn functionaly to me. Havent seen one up close recently so I dont know if they stick out past the body etc. Similarly, have a look at 3rd gen noses and decide for yourself, if you had to run it bone stock without provision for an air dam, which nose you would buy. No matter what else you can be sure that if you limit wings to oem only that eventually the different platforms will migrate to "the wing" and "the nose" that works best for that platform. That part becomes the de-facto standard everyone has to buy. That may or may not be a part that is cheap and readily available. It certainly wont be a part you can make in your garage. Does that limit expenses? No. Does that ensure close racing? Only if all platforms happen to have equivalent oem parts. Otherwise we've just added yet another dimension to our already complex "platform parity" equation. Either way, not good.

 

So, at the time, defining some limits to what you could do with a rear wing made a lot more sense than defining something that would lead us down the part of "the wing". As has been said, we did not look at rear wings alone, rather a package of front AND rear aero. We figured there would be a practical limit to rear wings because there are limits to front downforce. I think plenty of guys have found that is true.

 

Do I think playing with aero is within the intent of CMC? Depends on how much you buy in to the "flexibility to enable drivers to learn and experiment with the principles of race car setup within boundaries intended to limit expenses, thereby providing the drivers with fun, exciting, and challenging yet approachable racing" part of my intent. Happy to let drivers play with spring rates, damping rates, gears, ride heights, alignment settings, bla bla bla...is aero too complex and/or expensive? Perhaps, perhaps not. Since its on the table for revision I will have to decide, and that is how I will approach this years revision to that rule, while keeping an eye on ensuring my vote doesnt paint drivers into a corner or make platform parity more complicated than it already is.

[AllZWay]

We can argue how well they work and how much drag we are pulling around,it is not going to do much good. There are so many variables, who knows.

 

The question in my mind is, "Are wings and air damns in the scope of CMC?"

 

I don't think they are and it is not for me to decide, but I am going to use it, because they are legal. And when the rule is rewritten if they are still allowed I am going to make a new one per the rule.

 

Completely agree... I don't really think that CMC should have ever been allowed any aero stuff.

 

I would gladly pull my spoiler if everyone had to pull theirs.

[King Matt1548534716]

 

all Cobra R model specific parts are not legal. since wings are open (w/in the limits set), the Cobra R wing is legal (as would be a wing from a bi-plane if it fell w/in the limits in the rules). the hood and front splitter are the only other two items specific to the Cobra R (other than the wing) and both are not legal.

Which again makes me wonder why the Cobra Rs are on the eligible models list? If none of the parts with the exception of the 2000 Cobra R rear wing are legal, and that is covered by a completely different rule, what is the point of including the car on the list? Same with Saleen and Roush models. If they have specific aero devices like rear spoilers or wings that are already legal per the wing rule, what is the reason for including the rest of car, along with numerous ineligible parts, on the eligible models list? As has been pointed out, a Ferrari wing might be legal per that rule, but whether or not an F430 is on the eligible models list is irrelevant.

 

On the other hand, Glenn mentions hoods, which were brought up in another thread. I'm not so sure the hoods are illegal, given the fact that the 1995 and 2000 Cobra R body parts are on that list. As long as the hoods don't violate any other rule, they are legal. I'm not certain about the 2000 Cobra R hood, but I know that the 95 Cobra R hood is not a functional cowl induction hood. This would be a moot point if those cars were not on the eligible models list, but they are.

[Glenn]

not up to speed on the Ford model list w/ regards to body panels i must admitt.

[ls168camaro]

As I said I understand that you allow parts that didn't come from the factory-no problem. That portion comes down to where do you draw the line. I think we just have to be aware of rules creep. Although didn't my car come with Koni doubles?

 

In the post there isn't any data or explanation as to why the rule was added in the beginning. That would be going back to the writing of the rule allowing a rear wing with zero limits. Of course I doubt there is any data and there was never any testing. Same goes for big brakes. Who did the testing for this? Who has driven a car with big brakes? Al have you driven one?

 

You bring up another grey area as to what is OEM. Is Saleen really OEM? Is Dickey Harrell OEM? Lets discuss that this weekend.

 

I agree with Roadracer and like his outlook. Even though he doesn't think wings should be here he will build one to the limit of the rules if they are allowed. More power to you for pushing the envelope. Thats how rules get modified and people gain an edge which is as much a part of racing is as hanging someone out to dry.

 

Does Charger like Brats?

[Glenn]

as for when the rules were written......... i've been told they were first written on a napkin by a couple guys who were chopping up the A sedan rules.

[mitchntx1548534714]

as for when the rules were written......... i've been told they were first written on a napkin by a couple guys who were chopping up the A sedan rules.

 

I heard it was chiseled in a stone tablet ...

 

The tablet broke and the wheel was subsequently spawned.

[King Matt1548534716]

as for when the rules were written......... i've been told they were first written on a napkin by a couple guys who were chopping up the A sedan rules.

That's how most racing classes are formed. A few guys decide the powers that be have it all wrong, change a few words, and start their own class!

[Adam Ginsberg]

You bring up another grey area as to what is OEM. Is Saleen really OEM? Is Dickey Harrell OEM?

 

Saleen and Roush are manufacturers, whereas Harrell and SLP are tuners.

[Al F.]

I will agree that people pushing the envelope is one of the primary reasons rules get modified. Typically drivers want to push to get things allowed that will help their lap times. Most of our rules revisions are actually designed around establishing where the line is in a more specific fashion. Look at a diff merge between 2003 and 2008, for cmc we have allowed a ton of performance adds:

 

1) you can now move the battery whereas you used to have to have it in the oem location

2) you can now use urethane motor mounts (and this year people are pushing for solid mounts)

3) You can now use any balancer that meets SFI specs and is factory balance

4) Carb guys can use spacers of any material, not just metal ones

5) ID of fuel hoses is now open, used to be 3/8" max

6) you can start with any initial timing if its adjustable from the house

7) you can now choose to run a Tremec and you can change gear ratios

Fords have gained a bit of weight, 3rd gens and 4th gens have both shed a little weight

 

On the flip side, you can now not:

1) run wheels that are lighter than 16lbs

2) spend more than 800$ on a pair of shocks

 

Literally every single other change was made to clarify a rule and make "the line" easier to see. Seems to me if you'd parked your car in 2003 and wanted to compete this weekend you'd be pretty ok. Rules creep? I dont see it.

 

To answer your question directly Bryan, I have no idea why the wing rule was there in the first place. I would guess it was part of the a-sedan rules of the times. No, I dont know of anyone that has done anything other than seat of the pants testing. I'm all for requiring hard data prior to changing a rule though, that would make my job a hell of a lot easier! And yes I've driven several cars that had big giant brakes. I was thoroughly unimpressed because brakes dont slow your car down; tires, suspension geometry, and suspension settings slow your car down. All the brakes do is convert mechanical energy into heat. The cars I've driven were street cars. I'll take my CMC car any day.

[bsim]

But since neither of them manufacture legal parts, does it matter?

 

I know about the Saleen S7 (manufactured by Saleen), but what does Roush manufacture?

[bsim]

I'm all for requiring hard data prior to changing a rule though,...

I can provide hard data that says adjusting both sides of a GM panhard bar 1) fixes the rear roll center issue, 2) makes the car easier to drive, and thus 3) is faster. It's also cheap.

 

Can I have it?

[powerslide91]

Big a$$ wings did not come from A sedan. AG style ice cream scope spoilers might have, but not wings. Just because we have a bad rule now that has been around for a while is not justification for keeping a bad rule, no matter how it is "clarified".

 

It seems interesting to me that I have not seen anyone say outright they felt the wings have to be kept, including several that have already made the investiment...

 

Al - I'm looking forward to Eagles Canyon. I hope to sit down and talk through some of this face to face. Then, if some of this logic keeps going, you will see first hand my head explode, and you will have that on your conscious while redoing the rule book

[Adam Ginsberg]

Then, if some of this logic keeps going, you will see first hand my head explode, and you will have that on your conscious while redoing the rule book

 

[bsim]

Is that scanners? Nice.

 

And BTW, there's 80% of the CMC community that DOESN'T post actively here. Basing an assumption on what you read here is a false impression of the overall CMC crowd.

 

And I've yet to hear a logical reason why it's a "BAD" rule, since there are so few of them, and the anti side just thinks they're ugly.

[King Matt1548534716]

Then, if some of this logic keeps going, you will see first hand my head explode,

I know the feeling! Try to keep your head on your shoulders this weekend!

[CMC#11]

I'm looking forward to Eagles Canyon. Then, if some of this logic keeps going, you will see first hand my head explode,

Your head is going to explode after I whoop your ass in my Fox this weekend!

[roadracerwhite]

And I've yet to hear a logical reason why it's a "BAD" rule, since there are so few of them, and the anti side just thinks they're ugly.

 

For me the reasoning why we should not have them is what brought me into the series in the first place. It is already expensive enough to build the car as it is and the wings are just one more big item ($500+) to add to the list. While they might not make you faster, it will still be the perception that one is needed to be competitive. Both for the people in the class and new people joining the class. In my opinion the aero package should be left to American Iron and we should be running stock body work (no modified panels).

[Tri-Agan]

And I've yet to hear a logical reason why it's a "BAD" rule, since there are so few of them, and the anti side just thinks they're ugly.

 

For me the reasoning why we should not have them is what brought me into the series in the first place. It is already expensive enough to build the car as it is and the wings are just one more big item ($500+) to add to the list. While they might not make you faster, it will still be the perception that one is needed to be competitive. Both for the people in the class and new people joining the class. In my opinion the aero package should be left to American Iron and we should be running stock body work (no modified panels).

 

The $500 comment can be applied to almost every item on the car. You're right, a driver could spend $10,000 on a carbon fiber bling blig wing that has every bell and whistle on it. He could do the same thing valve stem caps. If a fast CMC driver jumped off a bridge, would you follow him? My point is that I don't agree with the argument that it comes down to cost. You could just as easily get a piece of lexan and make one yourself that does the same thing. If a driver is dumb enough to spend money on everything he perceive's he needs to do to win, be my guest. I don't think the rest of should suffer because of a few folks that aren't smart enough to figure out what they need and what they don't. Why dumb down the series to save people from bad decisions.

 

I agree that the rule may need tweaked, but I don't agree that we need to get rid of the wing option.

 

Kent

[Raging Aardvark]

Given that very few of these cars came with wings stock, but plenty had spoilers, why would it be so hard to limit it to spoilers.

 

If I can't dial out enough of the back end looseness from our 'bird, I'll be adding a spoiler, which I can make myself. Easy cheesy.

[bsim]

Ban "wings" except for "stock", and the GM fellas will bitch the Ford camp has an advantage (said Cobra R wing).

 

There's a ton of "rules" I haven't "added" to my car, and I don't have any less fun during race weekends.

[Glenn]

i dont think its about protecting racers from themselves as much as its about protecting the appearance of the "cost of admission" to the series. we want prospective racers to look at us and think "that looks like a fun class that doesnt cost alot to get into."

[Carson]

PRESEPTION IS REALITY

 

a wing is believed to be a benefit when the first WINGED car wins a race

 

it's up to the directors to be consistent when cost and benefits affect the rules...

my opinion... wings belong in AI

 

is somebody counting the yeas + neys ??

[Boudy1548534717]

I'm with Brad and Kent.

 

Some think wings are ugly but that doesn't make it a bad rule.

 

You can buy a $4,000 seat, $6,000 wheels, $2,000 data acquisition, and a $1,400 steering wheel if you chose. The fact that you could spend $500 on a wing if I chose does not make it a bad rule.

 

It's said that wings make CMC cars look like AI cars which is confusing to spectators. Reality Check - We don't have spectators. Besides, there are more AI cars that look like CMC than CMC cars running wings.

 

Boudy