61 replies to this topic

[Jim Drago]

I added it to SMAC agenda, to specifically spell out whether removing of undercoating is legal or illegal.. Although they shot down my last request for a 1.6 intake..

[Keith Novak]

Once the rules get as lengthy as they are, it's really hard to cover everything, or even keep them consistent.

I jokingly prodded for a couple years about deleting cruise control. I was told that it was in the rules once, then was missed in a major rewrite. It took until last year to get it added back in but people didn't put it back in their cars prior to that. Tech inspectors were curious about that plate covering the fuel filler hose in my car. They'd never seen one in a car before. I've found inconsistencies in the rules after the detailed engine specs were added where things were covered in two sections that didn't agree (didn't bother to send a letter and I've forgotten what they were by now.)

I have to give it to the guys who write the rules...it isn't easy to cover absolutely everything and if you try they become incredibly lengthy, people start pulling out Websters dictionary and diagramming sentences to make it say what they think, and it can create more confusion than anything.

[Cnj]

. http://barking.roadd...ory/mexico-tour

Great blog. I had previously read some of your entertaining karting blog, but not your audio world blog. Did not know you had been in business with my buddy Kenny.

Cnj

[dstevens]

Great blog. I had previously read some of your entertaining karting blog, but not your audio world blog. Did not know you had been in business with my buddy Kenny.

Cnj

Thanks! Do you mean my "Crazy Uncle Kenny B", formerly of central MA? Both Ken and I are keeping low profiles in the biz these days. I'd get a real job but no one would hire me and I'd have to take a cut in pay... There is a well respected acoustical designer with your initials. If you are he we met in Des Moines in 2004 but my mind was fuzzy from spending the previous evening at the Lumberyard. And the don't sell building supplies there....

[Ron Alan]

Jim B, your living up to your profile pic. Call it a gray area in racing or a loophole in the corporate world...it's not criminal until it gets closed or changes color

[Jim Boemler]

Sorry guys. I get pretty riled up at people who know full well what they're doing is illegal, and they just wink and say it's all good as long as they don't get caught. I don't hang out with bank robbers, rapists, serial murderers, or others of that ilk. Is cheating your race car the same thing? Well, it's not AS harmful to others, and the penalties are lower, but yes, it's the same mind at work.

An interesting wrinkle about the difference between government laws and racing rules. We're all stuck with government rules, whether we approve of them or not. One might make a principled stand that we never agreed to obey those laws in the first place. On the other hand, there's racing, where each of us DID agree to abide by the rules. In that arena, breaking the rules is breaking your WORD. I for one take that seriously. For those of you who break their word routinely, well... stiff word or erection to you.

[Keith Novak]

This was a thread on whether removing undercoating was legal. I'm fairly sure it was established as legal or soon will be so I won't feel guilty picking it off as I crawl around under there and more of it gets loose and flaky. The differences between scope creep and manufacturing tolerances can be hashed in a different thread.

[Ron Alan]

What are you really trying to say Jim Seriously though, most completely understand your point and agree with you. I think DS and others were just pointing out(toungue and cheek) the flaws of the system by saying nanananananana...catch me if you can! You took that bait and swallowed it...just how i see it. Question for PS and DD...will you be throwing paper at the next event for those you know have removed this and repainted?

[dstevens]

Sorry guys. I get pretty riled up at people who know full well what they're doing is illegal, and they just wink and say it's all good as long as they don't get caught. I don't hang out with bank robbers, rapists, serial murderers, or others of that ilk. Is cheating your race car the same thing? Well, it's not AS harmful to others, and the penalties are lower, but yes, it's the same mind at work.

Dude? Really? You're wound a bit tight Jimmy. You need to unstress, brother. Nazis, Hitler, rapists, thieves. serial killers? Do you know that USB was a serial killer? When was thte last time you saw an RS232 or 422 on a commercial computer? My granddaughter wasn't born then. To make your point you are using exaggerations that make you look unstable. I don't know you except for your posts but dude, you're out in left field on this one. With those analogies you instantly lose cred. Then, to make matters worse, NASA specifically allows the removal of underbody deadening and the SCCA interpretation is that it's legal. Dude, at what windmill are you tilting?

[Jim Boemler]

"Dude", I already agreed about the undercoating -- legal to remove. I was "tilting" at your statement about cleaning up the headers, and the notion that it was just peachy as long as you didn't get caught at it. I admit that simple integrity may be beyond some folks, but I haven't managed to grasp the "anything goes as long as you don't get caught" brass ring yet. I envy those who have, but not the world they leave in their wake.

[Qik Nip]

In some respects, this is the sort of thread that makes me consider calling it quits. I agree that undertcoating can be classified and a coating and that paint is a coating, but the spirit is simply that it is not. Regardless, the eight pounds saved hardly seems woth the effort required to remove it.
Oh well...
Rick

[john mueller]

Regardless, the eight pounds saved hardly seems worth the effort required to remove it.

Agreed, but if you had a new build (tub) and a few spare hours it would be a good way to waste time... I plan to on my current new 1.6 build.

[pat slattery]

I am removing mine, hope the clown doesn't call me out as a criminal.

[Jim Drago]

Just in case anyone is actually doing this to save weight as the primary goal. We swept up what was on the floor, along with any dirt that may have already been there and we got just over 2 lbs.. I can't see a scenario where anyone gets over 3 lbs off the underside of the car. If you are painting, you probably add back 1/2 a lb or more as well.

[Bench Racer]

"Dude", I already agreed about the undercoating -- legal to remove.

IMHJ, if removing undercoating were legal in the SCCA the first post of this page would not be posted.

Jim B., if your saying removing the undercoating is legal in SCCA please provide the rule without strain & or torture.

Question for PS and DD...will you be throwing paper at the next event for those you know have removed this and repainted?

Ron, within the SCCA, the answer would be no......................It's legal in nasa.

There are all sorts of cheats that are regularly talked about & or shown on this site. There are cheats I view at the track. If anyone extends a conversation the first thing that comes out of one of the good ol boy crowd is, that's a weenie protest. Weenie protest my a$$, illegal is illegal, nothing more nothing less.

As a side, I always enjoyed when Dave Wheeler (retired SMAC chairman) srtraight up answered questions about the legality of issues that show up on this site. We have at least two SMAC & two CRB liaison folks that are constantly on this site that could do the same.

[Tom Sager]

Regardless, the eight pounds saved hardly seems woth the effort required to remove it.
Oh well...
Rick

Have to agree there unless there is a car/driver that struggles to get to the minimum. I'd rather have the weight on the underside than the top side anyway and having an extra 3 pounds on the right side won't matter much either.

[Jim Drago]

David
It was answered early in the thread by one of the SMAC members, I later posted that it will be cleared up one way or the other. After emailing CRB and SMAC members, it will be spelled out and made explicitly legal. So anyone uncertain that it was and has been legal, will now know for sure that it is permitted. As far as the exact rule, I think you will find it just below the 180 lb driver rule, so you should have no problem finding it

[Bench Racer]

David
It was answered early in the thread by one of the SMAC members, So anyone uncertain that it was and has been legal, will now know for sure that it is permitted.

yes.

Jim, I didn't miss the post by Mike.

A complete response from a SMAC or CRB liaison member COULD have been. Yes, see SCCA rule XXXX which would have ended this thread after the second post instead of two pages of upsmanship.

Maybe you would like to specify the current SCCA rule specifying that removing undercoating is legal.

[Cnj]

Thanks! Do you mean my "Crazy Uncle Kenny B", formerly of central MA? Both Ken and I are keeping low profiles in the biz these days. I'd get a real job but no one would hire me and I'd have to take a cut in pay... There is a well respected acoustical designer with your initials. If you are he we met in Des Moines in 2004 but my mind was fuzzy from spending the previous evening at the Lumberyard. And the don't sell building supplies there....

Thread hi-jack I suppose (not that it was going in good directions) but yes I am talking about Kenny B. And yes my initials match the name of a known acoustical consultant who desperately looks for respect. 2004? that was back when I was a kid and I can't remember that far back. We should hook up when I come out for InfoComm. We can talk about PM1000's, Drago, Bernie and how to make SM racing better.

Cnj.

[dstevens]

We can talk about PM1000's, Drago, Bernie and how to make SM racing better.

Would love to. We could tell these guys if they have trouble getting enough ballast they could use a PM1000....

Dave