Jump to content

Opening day of rules editing season!


Al F.

Recommended Posts

  • Members

TO: ALL CMC Racers

 

As in the past, we want to get next years rules out by the end of October. Our goal is to only make changes that clarify intent unless the change reduces cost, improves safety, or enables closer competition (closer does not mean lower lap times by the way!).

 

If you have a rule change request (RCR) for the CMC Leadership Team’s consideration, please submit it to your regional director with a cc to me. I want your regional director to be your representative at the discussions, and the two of you discussing your suggestion first should help that greatly. (If you don’t know who your regional director is, look in the back of the current ruleset.)

 

RULE CHANGE REQUESTS (RCR) MUST BE SUBMITTED IN THE FOLLOWING FORMAT TO BE CONSIDERED:

 

---1) Name / Region / Car # / Contact Info (email or phone, etc)

---2) Rule reference # (ex.- Rule 3.2 – Title, Part, section…)

---3) Recommended Revised Wording

---4) Reasoning for change MUST include at least 1 of the following:

---------->a) Willl decrease series cost because…

---------->b) Will increase driver safety because…

---------->c) Will increase series growth because...

---------->d) Will improve competition because…

---------->e) Will provide more clarity because...

 

HINT – Requests which score points in all categories will have better chances of being accepted than those which score points in 1 category (or worse yet, go against the reasonings above.)

 

I’ll collect all change request submissions in a formal RCR log, review them with the CMC Leadership Team and we’ll capture which ones are accepted, rejected & implemented and why. This part is no different than what we've been doing for years.

 

Plese do feel free to create a forum thread for your specific idea. Lets try to keep those threads sepparate so folks dont have to go digging around. Constructive comments welcome, keep it civil.

 

I’m available just about any time if you want to discuss something over the phone or email.

 

Let the fun begin!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Glenn

    12

  • TurboShortBus

    12

  • Al F.

    8

  • mitchntx1548534714

    7

  • Members

A couple of weeks have passed and I just sent out the first collection of requests to your regional directors. To all that have submitted something, thank you!

 

Below is a list of things that have come in so far. These are simply requests from your colleagues right now, nothing more, dont jump to conclusions!

 

Please make sure your regional director knows and understands how you feel about any of these. They are your vote. If he isnt listening, call me! You can of course call me anyway.

 

- Allow 305 vortec heads 12552520 or 12558059 in addition to the L31 heads already allowed for GM CMC2 cars

 

- Clarify allowances for trimming under the dash

 

- Clarify requirements for covering dash openings and replacement of trim pieces such as the 4th gen under windshield cover, glove box doors, etc.

 

- Allow T56 and 6060 transmissions in 4.6 cars to enable alternate 5th gear options

 

- Allow Performer RPM and Performer RPM Air Gap manifolds in GM carbed CMC2 cars as we already do for Fords

 

- Clarify that any of the specified components can be used for a carbed engine, its not that all must be used

 

- Clarify home made air filter assemblies are ok

 

- Enable defeating steering wheel lock, not just removal

 

- Limit driver rearward relocation by requiring pedals to be bolted to OE location and not allowing the combination of custom pedals, shifter, and steering column extension

 

- Allow installation of anti theft defeating devices as long as they are external to the PCM

 

- Allow high temp coatings on exhaust manifolds

 

- Clarify 4th gens can modify PS pumps, but must use an OE pump not an aftermarket one

 

- Clarify CMC min wheel weight is 16, not "more than" 16

 

- Allow aluminum pressure plates as they are stock in some applications

 

- Modify dyno procedure to require water temp between 185 and 205, not at specific temps. Require temp to be measured by something other than the car's gauge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- Limit driver rearward relocation by requiring pedals to be bolted to OE location and not allowing the combination of custom pedals, shifter, and steering column extension

 

Be careful that we don't leave enough room for us fatheads to be able to egress the car. I probably need to move my seat back another inch or so and the pedals and wheel need to come with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are some great suggestions here and I hope they go through. It would be nice to build a "Spec package" but many of us have years of parts setting on the shelf. Being able to mix and match will/is saving me considerable amounts of money trying to get to the HP/TQ numbers. I've got an RPM Airgap setting on a shelf in my basement and just the part I need to help find 10 more hp and 20 more ftlbs that I'm lacking now!

 

I've got a buddy racing SM. He's a mid packer because he's running a stock motor with a $800 Stewart head. No way will he ever run up front because he's not going to spend $10,000 on a "Stock" motor. However, if SM had a dyno rule like CMC all he would have to do is change/pull his restrictor and he's be up front like the rich guys.

 

Allowing these rules and HOLDING TIGHT on the dyno rules/procedures will rock!

 

Sidney Franklin

CMC2 #64

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

hehehe Forgot to add a review of the bolt in strut tower bar to cage mount provision, thats on the list as well.

 

Dont wait too long on submitting things, otherwise we'll have no time to discuss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hehehe Forgot to add a review of the bolt in strut tower bar to cage mount provision, thats on the list as well.

 

Dont wait too long on submitting things, otherwise we'll have no time to discuss.

 

 

What about the Steeda timing adjuster for the 4.6?

 

 

Jerry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote="Al Fernandez"]Modify dyno procedure to require water temp between 185 and 205, not at specific temps. Require temp to be measured by something other than the car's gauge.

 

How about something other than the cars OEM guage.

I'm fairly confident in my cars Autometer guage.

 

 

Also, why did you leave out my spring shimming issue?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- Limit driver rearward relocation by requiring pedals to be bolted to OE location and not allowing the combination of custom pedals, shifter, and steering column extension

This sounds familiar.

 

If you're truly trying to avoid somebody building an Uber-CMC car with, say, 50/50 weight balance, then why not just list a specific front/rear weight balance for the class? 55% front/45% rear, 57% front/43% rear, etc. This is easy enough to detect in impound when you're already weighing the cars, and it will take up much less space in the rule book. Here's your minimum weight, here's your minimum balance, now sit wherever you like and let's go run 'em.

 

In my case, my primary motivation for moving everything back is to leave as much clearance between a full containment seat headrest and the FIA/A-pillar reinforcement bar to ease ingress/egress as well as emergency worker access. Improving the weight distribution is a secondary benefit, but there are much easier ways of making a 60/40 car 50/50 than moving 200 lbs rearward by a whopping 8 inches.

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- Clarify allowances for trimming under the dash

I understand that a photo of my particular dashboard setup made the rounds with the CMC directors lately and apparently caused quite a stir. I never saw that email, but if it's the photo that I'm thinking of (showing only the driver's side half of the under-dashboard structure -which holds the steering column up- and the dashboard shell in place), then note that I never considered that particular layout to be CMC-legal, as it was done for TT competition. But, for it to be compliant with CMC rules, I would simply attach the (missing) passenger's side of the dashboard shell with a couple of brackets or tabs, while continuing to leave out the unused structure under the passenger's side of the dashboard (which was likely there as a large bracket to hold the airbag and HVAC box in place). The car would appear to have the stock dashboard shell in place, with only a seam in the middle to show that it is in 2 pieces.

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Al,

 

I spoke to you and Adam earlier this year about the rules concerning carbureted cars and fuel pressure.............so here is a reminder about adjusting the rule.

 

 

---1) Name / Region / Car # / Contact Info (email or phone, etc)

 

Derek L. Tisinger/Calif/57/[email protected] or 661-747-5796

 

---2) Rule reference # (ex.- Rule 3.2 – Title, Part, section…)

 

3.11.1 Fuel Pressure Tolerance shall be +/- 2psi for EFI cars and +/- ½ psi for carbureted cars.

 

---3) Recommended Revised Wording

 

3.11.1 Fuel Pressure Tolerance shall be +/- 2 psi for EFI cars.

 

---4) Reasoning for change :

 

---------->a) Will decrease series cost because… We will not have to buy a separate fuel regulator. Most fuel pumps are internally regulated, but will fluctuate more than +/- 1/2 psi allowed in the rules.---------->

 

---------->b) Will increase driver safety because…the more components you add in the fuel system, the more likely you will have a failure or a leak.

 

---------->c) Will increase series growth because...it simplifies the rules..

 

---------->d) Will improve competition because…A Carbed car is much easier to build and maintain........

 

---------->e) Will provide more clarity because...fuel pressure does not affect the performance and operation of a Carbed car.

 

Thanks,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- Limit driver rearward relocation by requiring pedals to be bolted to OE location and not allowing the combination of custom pedals, shifter, and steering column extension

This sounds familiar.

 

If you're truly trying to avoid somebody building an Uber-CMC car with, say, 50/50 weight balance, then why not just list a specific front/rear weight balance for the class? 55% front/45% rear, 57% front/43% rear, etc. This is easy enough to detect in impound when you're already weighing the cars, and it will take up much less space in the rule book. Here's your minimum weight, here's your minimum balance, now sit wherever you like and let's go run 'em.

 

Mark

 

So what happens when a guy like me who cannot get his car anywhere near minimum weight (50-60lbs over post race) and has a 53% front weight? Should I be required to add weight to the nose to get to 55%? That really makes no sence for this class. It would work if all platforms had to add 150+ lbs to make weight, but thats just not the case.

 

Why is my car so close to 50/50? Cause I clock in at 265 in full gear and I'm 6'3" so I sit really far back. My cage is in the "normal" location, as are my pedals and shifter are in the OEM stock position and are unmodified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- Clarify allowances for trimming under the dash

I understand that a photo of my particular dashboard setup made the rounds with the CMC directors lately and apparently caused quite a stir. I never saw that email, but if it's the photo that I'm thinking of (showing only the driver's side half of the under-dashboard structure -which holds the steering column up- and the dashboard shell in place), then note that I never considered that particular layout to be CMC-legal, as it was done for TT competition. But, for it to be compliant with CMC rules, I would simply attach the (missing) passenger's side of the dashboard shell with a couple of brackets or tabs, while continuing to leave out the unused structure under the passenger's side of the dashboard (which was likely there as a large bracket to hold the airbag and HVAC box in place). The car would appear to have the stock dashboard shell in place, with only a seam in the middle to show that it is in 2 pieces.

 

Mark

 

In the intrest of full disclosure, that was me.

And it was to question the legality of your car to prevent any issues later down the road. Durring that process, things were discovered that made your possible issue look like a lug nut torqued to 95 ftlbs instead of 100 ftlbs. It was truely disapointing what I learned thru that whole process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Duh! Yes, all items listed in the tech bulletin (including Derek's fuel pressure suggestion) are now on the list. Sorry Derek

 

Mark...never knew it was your car, but yes pictures started a good conversation where we realized we had some very opposite views of what happens under the dashboard. I think everyone had good points, and we're working on some words to clarify and standardize. I know everyone wont like it, but at least it'll be more consistent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what happens when a guy like me who cannot get his car anywhere near minimum weight (50-60lbs over post race) and has a 53% front weight? Should I be required to add weight to the nose to get to 55%? That really makes no sence for this class. It would work if all platforms had to add 150+ lbs to make weight, but thats just not the case.

 

Why is my car so close to 50/50? Cause I clock in at 265 in full gear and I'm 6'3" so I sit really far back. My cage is in the "normal" location, as are my pedals and shifter are in the OEM stock position and are unmodified.

I'm just trying to understand the reasoning behind not allowing the seat/pedals/steering/shifter to be moved rearward if a more favorable weight balance isn't the issue.

 

OK, so your car is 53 front/47 rear. Mine is currently closer to 60 front/40 rear. So, my options for getting closer to 53/47 are pretty limited per the current rules and proposed rules clarifications. So, what can I do to make mine more even with yours?

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your way off. You will be allowed to modify to the level of the greatest violator.

 

Ignore Glenn's posts on this subject. Refer to Al's earlier reply.

 

-chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what happens when a guy like me who cannot get his car anywhere near minimum weight (50-60lbs over post race) and has a 53% front weight? Should I be required to add weight to the nose to get to 55%? That really makes no sence for this class. It would work if all platforms had to add 150+ lbs to make weight, but thats just not the case.

 

Why is my car so close to 50/50? Cause I clock in at 265 in full gear and I'm 6'3" so I sit really far back. My cage is in the "normal" location, as are my pedals and shifter are in the OEM stock position and are unmodified.

I'm just trying to understand the reasoning behind not allowing the seat/pedals/steering/shifter to be moved rearward if a more favorable weight balance isn't the issue.

 

OK, so your car is 53 front/47 rear. Mine is currently closer to 60 front/40 rear. So, my options for getting closer to 53/47 are pretty limited per the current rules and proposed rules clarifications. So, what can I do to make mine more even with yours?

 

Mark

 

Eat at Joe's. Isnt your platform allowed to be 100 lbs lighter than mine?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just trying to understand the reasoning behind

 

I quit trying. I'm much happier now

 

All this submitting, justifying and posturing is a waste of time and energy.

 

In the end, you (or some one else) will not be happy depending upon who gets "screwed".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark...never knew it was your car, but yes pictures started a good conversation where we realized we had some very opposite views of what happens under the dashboard. I think everyone had good points, and we're working on some words to clarify and standardize. I know everyone wont like it, but at least it'll be more consistent.

 

Any chance this can be done quickly? I already pulled everything behind my dash in prep for the cage. Please let me know if I've got to put some of the stuff back in. These vague messages (not just this one) are kind of frustrating when I'm trying to plan out my build.

 

Al, can you say when (even a guesstimate) the 2011 rules will be finalized?

 

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Already did! My goal is to have them out by the end of the month. If there are only one or two complex things left we'll publish them and deal with the remainder via tech bulletins or formal revisions prior to the season starting.

 

The dash deal is pretty simple; it isnt something we've discussed much and the vageness of the rule combined with the fact that you can cut interior brackets resulted in some regions allowing a lot more gutting under the dash than others. The guys that were doing it had a perfectly valid point: the dash looks the same, there was precedent and emails from Tony G back in the day. The guys that werent had a perfectly valid point: if you are adding mounting tabs for the dash or steering column then what you cut away was not exactly "unused" was it? Both sides were right in their own mind, and consistent in their own region, but we need to standardize across the regions. The goal of the revision is to ensure clarity around what we're looking for: OE looking (not home built), no giant holes where stuff like the airbag or a/c controls were removed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Buy a 4th-gen F-body.

Badum-bum.

Well then, I smell a new class...Spec Camaro! lol

 

Eat at Joe's. Isnt your platform allowed to be 100 lbs lighter than mine?

It's allowed to be, but like yours, mine also will be heavier than the required minimum (because I'm not gutting the doors, side glass, power mirrors, etc.). Maybe I'll gut it down to the minimum weight someday, but it won't be anytime soon.

 

I'm the kind of guy who only needs a sensible, logical explanation for something I don't necessarily agree with; at that point, at least I can understand the reasoning behind it and accept it. So, why not allow moving the seat/pedals/steering/shifter rearward? Personally, I feel that there are good safety reasons for moving everything rearward (bigger window opening to exit through if the door won't open, driver further away from the A-pillar if it decides to collapse during a crash, feet and pedals further back from the wheelwell if a tire intrudes during a crash, etc.), and I will admit that there is a bit of a performance advantage, although I don't think it's enough to be the difference between having an also-ran car and an Uber-CMC destroyer.

 

In the end, you (or some one else) will not be happy depending upon who gets "screwed".

While you're likely right, I'm not looking at it quite that negatively. The features that I'd like to build into my car are currently legal in 3 other NASA classes, so no matter what happens here, I'll still have a class in which to run my car. I would prefer to be able to run in CMC/CMC2 (and even then, I'd be the only one in the Florida region), but it isn't a necessity for me to have a good time (insert "well then, goodbye and go screw yourself" comments here...lol).

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...