89 replies to this topic

[Jamz14]

Agreed, no ambiguity at all in the SCCA rules regarding this. As I pointed out though, they also do not allow for any type of blocking move. If you impede the forward progress of another driver, you are in violation. In NASA though, you can be moved completely off the track unless you have managed to get door to door. The intent of it is to make trailing drivers ensure that they can make a clean pass. Good intent!!! But it can be misused. I could be wrong but I don't believe NASA intended the rule to be applied to a straight line scenario. I believe the intent was for it to be applied to braking zones and corner entries. But in a recent discussion on and E30 video where a driver had a nose alongside on a straight, and the leading driver moved over into the trailing driver (intentional or not), it was determined by the group that the trailing driver was responsible for the accident as he didn't concede the line when the leading driver moved over. Even though there was zero time for the trailing driver to notice the guy moving over. If applied like I think it was intended, I like the NASA rule better as it allows for blocking(at least one move), it forces people to back out of a bad pass, and it allows strategy and tactics more like we see in pro racing. I like the SCCA rule when dealing with straights, I like the NASA rule when dealing with corners. Except double apex corners. As far as I can tell, NASA treats a double apex corner just like a single apex corner. I have to be fully alongside before the corner entry into the first apex to have a right to inside line for the second apex.

[Bruce Wilson]

Agreed, no ambiguity at all in the SCCA rules regarding this. As I pointed out though, they also do not allow for any type of blocking move. If you impede the forward progress of another driver, you are in violation. In NASA though, you can be moved completely off the track unless you have managed to get door to door. The intent of it is to make trailing drivers ensure that they can make a clean pass. Good intent!!! But it can be misused. I could be wrong but I don't believe NASA intended the rule to be applied to a straight line scenario. I believe the intent was for it to be applied to braking zones and corner entries. But in a recent discussion on and E30 video where a driver had a nose alongside on a straight, and the leading driver moved over into the trailing driver (intentional or not), it was determined by the group that the trailing driver was responsible for the accident as he didn't concede the line when the leading driver moved over. Even though there was zero time for the trailing driver to notice the guy moving over. If applied like I think it was intended, I like the NASA rule better as it allows for blocking(at least one move), it forces people to back out of a bad pass, and it allows strategy and tactics more like we see in pro racing. I like the SCCA rule when dealing with straights, I like the NASA rule when dealing with corners. Except double apex corners. As far as I can tell, NASA treats a double apex corner just like a single apex corner. I have to be fully alongside before the corner entry into the first apex to have a right to inside line for the second apex.

You can defend in SCCA, you just can't block.  there is a difference. 

[MPR22]

Agreed, no ambiguity at all in the SCCA rules regarding this. As I pointed out though, they also do not allow for any type of blocking move. If you impede the forward progress of another driver, you are in violation. In NASA though, you can be moved completely off the track unless you have managed to get door to door. The intent of it is to make trailing drivers ensure that they can make a clean pass. Good intent!!! But it can be misused. I could be wrong but I don't believe NASA intended the rule to be applied to a straight line scenario. I believe the intent was for it to be applied to braking zones and corner entries. But in a recent discussion on and E30 video where a driver had a nose alongside on a straight, and the leading driver moved over into the trailing driver (intentional or not), it was determined by the group that the trailing driver was responsible for the accident as he didn't concede the line when the leading driver moved over. Even though there was zero time for the trailing driver to notice the guy moving over. If applied like I think it was intended, I like the NASA rule better as it allows for blocking(at least one move), it forces people to back out of a bad pass, and it allows strategy and tactics more like we see in pro racing. I like the SCCA rule when dealing with straights, I like the NASA rule when dealing with corners. Except double apex corners. As far as I can tell, NASA treats a double apex corner just like a single apex corner. I have to be fully alongside before the corner entry into the first apex to have a right to inside line for the second apex.

I have raced with both organizations and the NASA rule creates contact!  I have seen many instances where the lead driver decides he will throw a last second block "knowing" the other driver would have to back out.  What if the other driver is committed 10/10s  on the inside of a turn, and the overtaking driver has his nose even with the front fender, how in the heck is supposed to back out at that point.  If he lifts he spins and probably hits the lead car or worse takes out the trailing cars.  

 

If a lead thinks it is ok to block regardless of where the trail car is then there will be contact, often.  As I have suggested, one simple line can be added to the NASA rule, "the lead driver cannot initiate contact while defending their line".  He/She can close the door but they can't create contact by doing so.  Any rule that allows blocking will lead to contact.  I have been behind cars that are a good second a lap slower than me and if the choose to throw blocks in an SM they are nearly impossible to get around.  What usually happens is they are helped off line with a little late nudge in the brake zone or they are just doored at the next available opportunity by the passing car.    

 

SCCA rule works if enforced, but the protest procedure creates animosity between drivers.  

[SaulSpeedwell]

You can't win the Runoffs in a Chumpcar Mark, although many will try.

 

Drago, I think Todd has something to say about the quality of your builds ...  ... I know what Daniels would do in a case like this!!!

[Todd Green]

and the overtaking driver has his nose even with the front fender

The leading car cannot "block" you in this case.  At least by the rules. The NASA rule reads:

 

--

Once the trailing car has its front wheel next to the driver of the other, it is considered that the trailing car has a
right to be there. And, that the leading driver must leave the trailing driver enough “racing room.” In most
cases, “racing room” is defined as “at least three quarters of one car width.”

--

 

That being said, I'd love that rule to read "at least one car width and an inch".  IMO, there is no place in club racing to be running people two wheels off the track.

[MPR22]

MPR22, on 27 Aug 2013 - 14:03, said:

and the overtaking driver has his nose even with the front fender

The leading car cannot "block" you in this case.  At least by the rules. The NASA rule reads:

 

I know the trailing car has the right to dictate the line in my example but my point is there is not enough time to react in those situations, if the lead driver goes to block, right or wrong, the trailing driver has no way to escape the contact.The average reaction time for humans is 0.25 seconds to a visual stimulus, 0.17 for an audio stimulus, and 0.15 seconds for a touch stimulus. If the lead driver sees the trail car and the trail car is closing at 10 mph the trail car will have traveled 3.66 feet before the lead driver can react. If he was at the bumper he is now to the back of the door the trail car sees the block and tries to react, but wait he is another 3.66 feet up, now he is legal eagle right?  We are humans we can only react to stimulus so quickly  

 

There is no reason for any rule to be written that encourages blocking or contact (except bump drafting bwaaahhhaaaahhaaa).  I couldn't agree with you more on the forcing people off the road, i understand their intent is to make the passing driver more aware but instead it is used as a tool to block.  

[Jamz14]

MP22,

 

I agree completely on the suggested wording change. This would address the time between nose coming alongside until the driver is door to door and earned right to line. Great suggestion.

[Caveman-kwebb99]

Great and even good drivers have very little problem they all drive each other clean for most part. Biggest problem is in mid pack when those guys want to be good and let emotion get best of them and run someone off... its not how you ever get better...

[Todd Green]

There is no reason for any rule to be written that encourages blocking or contact (except bump drafting bwaaahhhaaaahhaaa).

 

Agree 100% with you there.  The idea that rubbin' is racin' in NASA is not my favorite part of the organization.  However I have to comment on reaction times.  Sure humans are slow, but we're very good at anticipating and predicting.  That's why we can cut lights in drag racing/Pro Solo etc. that are way better than our reaction time would dictate.  If you see a car closing on you fast, it is pretty easy to decide to leave that car room or move over before they have overlapped you.  What isn't easy is when something unexpected happens.   That's usually when shinola hits the fan.   Also I think 99% of the problems are people intentionally blocking/brake checking/moving over, more than poor reaction times.  At least in my experience.  Sure people run out of talent, but that is usually on corner entry, more than exit or down a straight.

[Ron Alan]

Great and even good drivers have very little problem they all drive each other clean for most part. Biggest problem is in mid pack when those guys want to be good and let emotion get best of them and run someone off... its not how you ever get better...

Don't kid yourself...I've seen plenty of emotion at the front!!!!

[Johnny D]

Don't kid yourself...I've seen plenty of emotion at the front!!!!

From the Bleachers, Pits or on TV?

J~

[Bench Racer]

From the Bleachers, Pits or on TV?

J~

I've seen it from, the bleachers, te pits at track wall is scarry 2-3 feet away at 100 plus mph, TV, videos on this site and from the drivers seat on a race track. 

 

    This is not a slight, I think the two neatest profile pictures are the Jacka$$ and the Lunatic.

[Caveman-kwebb99]

it doesnt happen often at or near the front, contrary to social myths, we all pretty much getalong... We oftne disagree at the track and even online, but nearly never do any of us on purpose run one another off the track.  I have racd agaisnt some that I am pretty sure did not like me yet I feel 100% safe on track with them...  

 

I am sure you can pick out isolated events from the past even the runnoffs of 2011, but it is very small as a percent of total races or miles raced...

 

Racing as hard as we race and as close as we race, there will continue to be contact even resulting in damages or injuries... We all know the risks and accept them. 

[Todd Lamb]

apparently last weekend at Road America would be a bad example

[Michael Novak]

. 

[Johnny D]

.

 

     I think the two neatest profile pictures are the Jacka$$ and the Lunatic.

Did you want one? I can help

J~

 

 

[Caveman-kwebb99]

Did you want one? I can help

J~

 

 

LMAO  does Bench raver actually lok like this???

[Johnny D]

I've never met Dave. I can only go off some of his comments.

One being "I'm older than dirt"

Thus ^^

 

I was serious if you want it.

J~

[Bench Racer]

apparently last weekend at Road America would be a bad example

A couple guys wadded up there cars pretty good this past weekend, both were brought back into shape by the pro prep folks that were there and the skys were clear so they couldn't blame the rain.   

 

I was there the previous weekend also. Would you like the results from drivetrain and tire testing?

 

 

LMAO  does Bench raver actually lok like this???

 

 

Ya  I thought we would have met at the Sprints or the Runoffs this year.  I also wanted to meet Frank who seems to be the normal of the two of you Buckeyes. Ya, you know the definitation of a Buckeye, correct.

 

I've never met Dave. I can only go off some of his comments.

One being "I'm older than dirt"

Thus ^^

 

I was serious if you want it.

J~

 

Johnny, compared to most on this site there's only a few of us older than dirt. Naw, actually I have pretty soild normal brown hair, with a mostly gray fu manchu mustache . TMI, I know. I have had a halloween mask for several years that I need to take a picture of while wearing and post it for a profile picture. The mask is an ol wrinkled face dude with long gray hair with a long gray fu manchu mustache.

 

 

When we meet face to face we'll get along well,if your not to full of yourselves.  

[Caveman-kwebb99]

Bench, I was borned and raised in KC MO!!!!!!  so Show Me the Money!!!!  Frank is NY or New guiney or somewhere exotic but certainly not from Ohio...  for some stupid reason we do live here presently...

 

Maybe if you can hang on for another year I might make an apearance at the June sprinz nexst season... but I really am not excited to race there fo some reason and I just dont know why.