If you were to build an AI car again what would be different

[b_tone]

So you have holes in the roof skin? That would be what I'd want to avoid...

 

Yes the holes are in the skin, but that entire area is covered by the trim peices so you don't see them at all.

[mwilson7]

I am contemplating some surgery before October.....might need to come up to the shop and look your car over again for ideas. I am going to add a few more bars to the cage and weld the a, b and c pilars to the halo....but the top is probably going to come off....so far I see 119 spot welds to get rid of the unwanted reinforcements....

 

There are FAR more than 119 spot welds to get rid of unwanted reinformements. I became the spot welder removal expert and probably removed from than 500 spot weld by the time we were done.

 

The roof shot that Brian posted was my first piece removed I believe and it took around 30-40 minutes to remove. By the time we were done we were removing the spot welds without going into the second layer of sheetmetal.

 

You can DEFINITELY re-use the skin in you remove it the way we did it. We didn't even have to repaint it.

 

I don't think there is such thing as removing to much weight for weights sake as it can be added back in where ever you want it in many different ways.

 

One thing you definitely don't want to do is to remove so much metal that the body buckles under slight impacts. I've seen a few cars that have gone to this extreme and the owners aren't to happy when they get bumped.

[Grizlbits]

Hey Wilstone-

 

I am waiting patiently for your comments on the 1000 pound gorilla. Is there one more thing you wouldn't do? Comments coming soon, or Notch yet?

 

It a joke folks, calm down. I didn't mean to stir it up again. I'll shut up now.

[bdkline]

If the powers that be knew how to write a rule book there would not be any 1000 lb anything to worry about.

Barry

(Headlight bucket still missing and not being looked for)

[Grizlbits]

If the powers that be knew how to write a rule book there would not be any 1000 lb anything to worry about.

Barry

(Headlight bucket still missing and not being looked for)

 

 

Okay, now I have to comment on this. I am not talking about your situation Barry, but more general of things I have seen which usually leave me shaking my head in amazement. This thread was started before work was done. It is a good idea. I applaud him for asking first. Being on the rules committee for AI I can tell you you would be amazed the things people do, and then beg for permission later. If people would ask first they would save themselves from a lot of work. Every set of rules will have grey areas. People take risks trying to expoit them rather than asking first. Never assume if you have a question. I guess that is my biggest recommendation for anyone building a car or doing anything different. Always ask first.

[bdkline]

You have just made my point for me. A clearly written,CONCISE rule book would eliminate most of the questions. If you want unaltered you need to say unaltered, when you say "must resemble stock build" or something similar it is the rule books fault for not being concise. Everyone will interperate differently. Look at it this way, if your employees are not doing what you want them to, where does the fault lay. Not with the employees. It is the employers fault for not laying down the groundrules and holding everyone to those rules. If your employees are doing things their way and not yours, IT IS THE EMPLOYERS FAULT!

 

Regarding my situation, the whole headlight bucket fiasco was not needed. Even with the bucket removed, you end up with 52% of the weight on the front wheels and the rule book says the GM guys can remove theirs, so it is obviously NOT part of the firewall. and you could pound it flat with a BFH and it would be OK( for clearance only )

So what does it prove to make people put them back in. The whole point is even more remote when you accept the point that my car was built for AIX, remember the unlimited class?

 

I'm not trying to bust your chops here but the rule book needs to be tightened up, and if the rules makers don't think of something, they need to allow for the things that fall through the cracks.

 

Barry

[swhiteh3]

Writing a rulebook that is complete and concise with no cracks in it is impossible, especially considering you're talking about a car that did not even exist when those rules were written.

 

Every single series out there, including NASA road-racing series, sometimes has to make rules changes. And sometimes it catches a few people out, but it's generally done for the benefit of the class. I've seen this happen with every matured sanctioning body I've ever worked with.

[Grizlbits]

Scott and I agree? Crap.

[b_tone]

Scott and I agree? Crap.

 

Let me ask you this.

 

Can you(or anyone) modify the firewall/wiperbucket area to install a cowl induction system? Think of the wiperbucket cowl area on a fox body.

[bdkline]

[quPosted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:06 am Post subject:

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Writing a rulebook that is complete and concise with no cracks in it is impossible

ote

I could not disagree with you more. There are several series around that have very stable rules established and that are clearly understandable. Do they have occasional issues? Of course. But they usually revolve around a required piece of equipment that may no longer be available from an OEM and might have to be sourced as a reproduction. It is not enough to just lift your basic rules from another sanctioning body and than play fill in the gaps to start another class. You need a clear vision of what you wanted to create and than the commitment to lay out a clear and concise set of rules to follow. If you leave any gray area, any good racer/fabricator will dive right in. If you do not think this way as you are writing the rules, you are just kidding yourself. It is not enough to say"thats not what I meant or intended". All that shows is that the rule was not completely thought thru and was incomplete. People who take advantage of poorly written rules should not be punished. The great racer/fabricators of the past did not get their reputations by saying that "I bet they didn't intend for me to do this"( insert Penske,Yunnick, et al). They looked at the rules(as written) and said " the rule book says we can't do this but it doesn't say we can't do that". We have had 50 years of road racing in this country, and guess what---we still can't get it right

 

With all apologies for being so long winded

Barry

 

PS Remember what grandma always said," the road to ruin is paved with good intentions(see above)

[mwilson7]

If the powers that be knew how to write a rule book there would not be any 1000 lb anything to worry about.

Barry

(Headlight bucket still missing and not being looked for)

 

 

Okay, now I have to comment on this. I am not talking about your situation Barry, but more general of things I have seen which usually leave me shaking my head in amazement. This thread was started before work was done. It is a good idea. I applaud him for asking first. Being on the rules committee for AI I can tell you you would be amazed the things people do, and then beg for permission later. If people would ask first they would save themselves from a lot of work. Every set of rules will have grey areas. People take risks trying to expoit them rather than asking first. Never assume if you have a question. I guess that is my biggest recommendation for anyone building a car or doing anything different. Always ask first.

 

Chris,

 

Couldn't resist that one could you. While your advise is good you forget one thing. Even asking and getting permission does notch ,I mean not mean that it will be legal when you show up. Tech at Nationals should be very interesting......

 

Funny how we are looked at as asses for making sarcastic comments and supposedly stirring the pot but apparently it's ok when you do it. Have you gotten out of your car yet in the required 10 seconds fully belted in with the door attached? I'll be there waiting for the demonstration at Nationals.....

 

Barry - Clearancing....there's a word that has many meanings in NASA.....

 

P.S. What is the 1000lb gorilla you are speaking of anyway?

 

edited for my bad spelling

[swhiteh3]

Barry- I agree with much of your post, but with all due respect, I strongly disagree with your impression that this is possible without constant tweaking. Technology evolves, new vehicle models become available, competitor's budgets grow, and people's creativity swells as time goes on, and all these things create new issues that need to be dealt with. Any rule book is a living document.

 

To suggest that one person or rules-writing team could see every possible form of "creativity" ahead of time is to suggest their omnipotence.

 

If you can write a flawless set of rules on the first try, I'd respectfully submit that you change your line of work. NASCAR, Grand-Am, the FIA / Formula 1, and every other major series clearly has completely missed the ball and is in dire need of your services and guidance. All of these series are CONSTANTLY fighting rules "interpretations" and updating / clarifying / adding to their rules to combat creativity and loopholes. And despite all these efforts, look at how the cars in those series have evolved!!

 

(The only possible exception is spec racing series, where every part is supplied for you, but that's not what we're talking about.)

 

You mention Smoky. Smoky did a lot of things that were creative. Most of them fell cleanly into one of two categories: Outright cheating which was cleverly hidden (anyone care to suggest we should encourage this?) and rules-bending creativity. Many of things he did in the creativity front could be argued to be legal by some interpretation, but were later made illegal. (This happens nearly every week in nearly every major series.) I don't see how mentioning him does anything but strengthen my point.

 

You mention the word "unaltered". Does that mean that you can't sandblast it in preparation for paint? That does alter the surface of the metal, after all. What happens if the car has been in an accident? If that area has been repaired, then it's been altered, and clearly the car is no longer legal, then, eh? My point is not to attack your wording - but to point out that every word choice has holes in it.

 

So other than your bitter accusations about NASA that they lifted their rule book from another series, that they had no clear vision, and that they didn't think things through, I see little content to your argument. I'm sorry to sound so harsh, but I just don't think you're comments about eliminating all these problems ahead of time are realistic. No one has managed to do it yet.

[bdkline]

I stand by my assertion that a solid rule book is possible. The problem with most rule books is that the are "living" and are to easily manipulated by players with big money that have an agenda that is self serving, usually the long term health of the series is not their primary interest. Fuzzy rulebooks are no more than "guide" books. I understand its hard but it can be done right. (Regarding your assertion that I should be offering my services to a sanctioning body, I'm open, but they would have to bring a big checkbook to take me away from my present gig)

 

I'm sure that there are several people that will not take kindly to your assertion that the proprietor of "The best damn garage in town" should only be remembered as a cheat. As I recall, his cars always got thru tech.I'm sure you feel that Hall was cheating when he showed up with the "sucker" cars and gee why are Penskes cars always lighter than everyone elses.

 

Your picking on the word "unaltered" Is strctly a strawman argument. If its collision damage on an existing racecar,One conversation with an official will establish what is necessary to return the car to the track. ANd then the car would be re-teched before competition. If on a car being built for racing, a car with existing damage to the firewall might not be the car to start with. To compare sandblasting with recontouring or removal is just silly.

 

I fail to understand why you said my comment about the origins of the rules was "bitter". I see no italisized wording or profanity to suggest that what they did was wrong.The GCR is obviuosly lifted from SCCA who may have copied Midwest Council( I believe they are older) who may have borrowed some things from Europe.

 

An orgaization,or person should always be looking to do a better job. Striving for perfection may not be a resonable goal but it is a worthy one.

I guarantee that most people would not like to work for me, but the few that do are highly rewarded

 

Goodnight America and all the ships at sea

 

Barry

[white_2kgt]

Barry, I would MUCH rather have a 9 page rule book than a 900 page one, b/c that's about what it would take to remove all ambiguity from American Iron. This series is to open, as it was intended, to spell out each and every little thing. It took what, a week to get my question sorted out? I don't feel that is unreasonable. Do what is currently spelled out that you can do or if you feel the need to get creative, ask before you cut. If the rule book were 900 pages you'd have people building cars that just barely didn't meet the rules and a few guys running around like bible thumpers getting them disqualified, this is Club Racing, lets keep things simple, easy and fun!