18 replies to this topic

[pfrichardson]

...are posted:

 

https://www.scca.com.../cars-and-rules

 

This will be my last month as the CRB Secretary.  It's been my honor to keep you informed since 2012.

 

Pam Richardson

[Johnny D]

Minutes

file:///C:/Users/dirkj/AppData/Local/Temp/December2018Prelim.Minutesa.pdf

 

Tech Bull

file:///C:/Users/dirkj/AppData/Local/Temp/January_TB_Prelims.pdf

 

Recommended Items
The following subjects will be referred to the Board of Directors for approval. Address all comments, both for and against, to the Club Racing Board. It is the BoD’s policy to withhold voting on a rules change until there has been input from the membership on the presented rules. Member input is suggested and encouraged. Please send your comments via the form at www.clubracingboard.com.

 

SM 1. #24725 (Ralph Provitz) Request for Extended Lower Ball Joints to Align with NASA Thank you for your request.  Effective 1/1/19:
In SM, GCR section 9.1.7.c.3.p, revise and add wording as follows:
"For camber adjustment, only one of the following may be utilized: 1) Inner suspension bushings, on the front upper control arms, may be replaced with non-metallic offset bushings. The bushings may use metal (inner and/or outer) sleeve(s). Material and design must be the same in all four positions. The control arm may be modified to allow for pinning the bushing to prevent rotation. Spherical bearings are not allowed. 2) Or, Extended lower ball joints, manufacturer part number BL-ELBJ, with BAUER suspension laser etching (etching MUST be visible on ball joint) may be used in place of stock front lower ball joints."

 
2. #25375 (Jim Drago) Axle cages in SM Thank you for your letter.  Effective 1/1/19:
In SM, GCR section 9.1.7.c.2.i, revise and add wording as follows:
"The half-shaft CV Joints shall be an OEM or OEM equivalent part. The internal cage and bearing dimensions are unrestricted. This rule is effective until 12/31/18."

 

"Rear drive axle assembly consisting of constant velocity Joints (inner and outer), axle shafts, boots and all associated parts that make up a complete drive axle assembly must be an OEM part.  All internal component dimensions are un-restricted but must be ferrous material." 
In SM, GCR section 9.1.7.c, add the wording as follows:
"The use of any painting, coating, plating, or impregnating substance (e.g., anti-friction, thermal barrier, oil shedding coatings, chrome, anodizing, REM, isotropic finishing, etc.) to any internal engine surface, internal transmission, drive axle assembly or differential surface, internal or external surfaces of the intake manifold, exhaust manifold or downtube is prohibited."

 

 

All changes are effective 1/1/2019 unless otherwise noted. NOTE: This preliminary version of the Road Racing Technical Bulletin is provided at this time as a service to the membership. These items may be corrected and will not be official until published on the Fastrack page of the scca.com website on or about December 20.

 

GCR 1. #25618 (Tim Myers) No Laptops Hooked Up to Cars in Post Race Tech/Runoffs Tech In GCR section 5.9.3.A, add wording as follows: "1. During post race impound activities, cars are not allowed to be worked on or touched by anyone unless directed by a tech official."

[William Keeling]

any word on tire (dry and wet) for 2019?

[Tom Sager]

 

...are posted:

 

https://www.scca.com.../cars-and-rules

 

This will be my last month as the CRB Secretary.  It's been my honor to keep you informed since 2012.

 

Pam Richardson

 

 

Thank you Pam. 

[Jamz14]

"SM 1. #24725 (Ralph Provitz) Request for Extended Lower Ball Joints to Align with NASA Thank you for your request.  Effective 1/1/19:
In SM, GCR section 9.1.7.c.3.p, revise and add wording as follows:
"For camber adjustment, only one of the following may be utilized: 1) Inner suspension bushings, on the front upper control arms, may be replaced with non-metallic offset bushings. The bushings may use metal (inner and/or outer) sleeve(s). Material and design must be the same in all four positions. The control arm may be modified to allow for pinning the bushing to prevent rotation. Spherical bearings are not allowed. 2) Or, Extended lower ball joints, manufacturer part number BL-ELBJ, with BAUER suspension laser etching (etching MUST be visible on ball joint) may be used in place of stock front lower ball joints."

 

Not that I would want to or that I would want as much camber as running both solutions would potentially provide, what is the rationale that keeps to the spirit of the class that prevents running both solutions instead of either or? Money? Probably, seeing how it was deemed to expensive for us to consider having multiple restrictor plates on hand for more a more adroit application of BOP.

[Johnny D]

It may be a crazy ass geometry (or not) and I'll wait for some down side feeback here, but i'm for the word "either"

 

Track width still applies.

 

[Ron Alan]

"SM 1. #24725 (Ralph Provitz) Request for Extended Lower Ball Joints to Align with NASA Thank you for your request.  Effective 1/1/19:
In SM, GCR section 9.1.7.c.3.p, revise and add wording as follows:
"For camber adjustment, only one of the following may be utilized: 1) Inner suspension bushings, on the front upper control arms, may be replaced with non-metallic offset bushings. The bushings may use metal (inner and/or outer) sleeve(s). Material and design must be the same in all four positions. The control arm may be modified to allow for pinning the bushing to prevent rotation. Spherical bearings are not allowed. 2) Or, Extended lower ball joints, manufacturer part number BL-ELBJ, with BAUER suspension laser etching (etching MUST be visible on ball joint) may be used in place of stock front lower ball joints."

 

Not that I would want to or that I would want as much camber as running both solutions would potentially provide, what is the rationale that keeps to the spirit of the class that prevents running both solutions instead of either or? Money? Probably, seeing how it was deemed to expensive for us to consider having multiple restrictor plates on hand for more a more adroit application of BOP.

You lost me James in what you wrote...but my guess is, this will keep people from locating the offset bushings in such a way that it changes the original geometry(higher or lower mount point for the UCA)and gains the camber with the ELBJ. 

 

Ralph...thanks for the letter...finally something that makes sense and helps the class with minimal effort and cost! Can you please write another letter for the class that also benefits all? Since the rule was changed to allow the same rear track width on all cars...can you please request it be allowed the NA cars can use the NB uprights? ZERO reason IMO for this to be rejected! Other than doubling the available parts someone can purchase what is the downside????

[38bfast]

You lost me James in what you wrote...but my guess is, this will keep people from locating the offset bushings in such a way that it changes the original geometry(higher or lower mount point for the UCA)and gains the camber with the ELBJ. 
 
Ralph...thanks for the letter...finally something that makes sense and helps the class with minimal effort and cost! Can you please write another letter for the class that also benefits all? Since the rule was changed to allow the same rear track width on all cars...can you please request it be allowed the NA cars can use the NB uprights? ZERO reason IMO for this to be rejected! Other than doubling the available parts someone can purchase what is the downside????

I wrote that letter a while back and it got shot down. Sorry

[Steve Scheifler]

Can someone tell us how much additional camber is provided with the ball joint approach?

[Johnny D]

Both provide camber.

I think James was asking for both at the same time on one side which Ron has touched on.

Is a ball joint on side and a bushing on the other okay ?

 

J~

[Ron Alan]

Can someone tell us how much additional camber is provided with the ball joint approach?

I put these on my non SM miata last year. Know idea what it allows for max or the difference from stock...but if I remember correctly my camber eccentrics are at 12 o'clock and I think I'm running 3.3 degrees camber? I was maxed camber with stock I believe.

[Sean - MiataCage]

any word on tire (dry and wet) for 2019?

 

We (SMAC) anticipate an announcement being made shortly which will indicate the SM7 will be the dry tire for 2019.  Given the Penske shock change, many did not feel a shock change and a tire change were necessary to do all at once for the 2019 season since many of the test vehicles throughout the Penske shock testing exhibited better tire wear.

 

Hoosier did come up with a new Wet tire that has recently finished testing, so we anticipate there will be a new wet tire from Hoosier addressing the request from the community for a tire that is a little harder and has a longer lifespan than the current H2O.   This will likely be made legal for all racers early in the year and made mandatory for Majors/Super Tours races later in the year.  Regional racers would not be required in 2019 to use the new wet tire.

 

Official statement and rules clarifications coming soon.

 

Thanks..... Sean 

[Sean - MiataCage]

Can you please write another letter for the class that also benefits all? Since the rule was changed to allow the same rear track width on all cars...can you please request it be allowed the NA cars can use the NB uprights? ZERO reason IMO for this to be rejected! Other than doubling the available parts someone can purchase what is the downside????

 

Hello Ron,

 

SMAC really shouldn't be writing all of the letters ourselves.   We are here to evaluate letters from the community and what they want the class to look like.   Ralph absolutely did the right thing last time by writing the letter, but maybe you or someone else in the community could submit a letter for us to review this time around.

 

If I recall correctly the last time this was reviewed it was tied into allowing NA's to upgrade to all NB suspension components including subframes and that was too much of a change. 

 

I think the request might get looked at a little bit differently if only asking for the rear upright and not the entire upgrade.

 

Thanks.... Sean 

[Johnny D]

The "Community" is not restricted to SCCA members?

Just askin.

 

J~

[Sean - MiataCage]

The "Community" is not restricted to SCCA members?

Just askin.

 

J~

 

I assume you are referring to NASA.  SMAC communicates often with Xavier so if there are issues or rules enhancements/changes on the NASA side of the house Xavier will generally bring them to our attention.  If it's something SCCA SMAC would like to take up then one of the SMAC members can submit a letter and we can proceed accordingly.

 

It is our intention and has been for a while now to keep both organizations in line with one another outside of the tire.   You may have seen in the latest Fastrack the preliminary approval of the extended lower ball joint.  This was suggested specifically to make it easier for racers to go back and forth from one organization to another.

 

If you are not an SCCA member you can send Xavier an e-mail for NASA consideration and if he deems it something to pursue he will get in contact with us to see about making the same change on the SCCA side of the house.

 

Thanks.... Sean 

[Ron Alan]

Hello Ron,

 

SMAC really shouldn't be writing all of the letters ourselves.   We are here to evaluate letters from the community and what they want the class to look like.   Ralph absolutely did the right thing last time by writing the letter, but maybe you or someone else in the community could submit a letter for us to review this time around.

 

If I recall correctly the last time this was reviewed it was tied into allowing NA's to upgrade to all NB suspension components including subframes and that was too much of a change. 

 

I think the request might get looked at a little bit differently if only asking for the rear upright and not the entire upgrade.

 

Thanks.... Sean 

Submitted to CRB!

[Brandon]

Yeah, that lower ball joint allowance needs to be tightened up to clarify "identical use across the front axle". You pick extended ball joint for the left, and eccentrics for the right...

Not that I can identify why you'd want this but just to keep someone from doing something stupid I guess.

 

Regarding the rear track width, I didn't notice it had changed to reflect identical measurements between NA & NB. As Ron has noted, if it has, allowing the swapping of uprights between generations would alleviate some parts scarcity for some folks I guess.

[RWP80000]

"For camber adjustment, only one of the following may be utilized: 1) Inner suspension bushings, on the front upper control arms, may be replaced with non-metallic offset bushings. The bushings may use metal (inner and/or outer) sleeve(s). Material and design must be the same in all four positions. The control arm may be modified to allow for pinning the bushing to prevent rotation. Spherical bearings are not allowed. 2) Or, Extended lower ball joints, manufacturer part number BL-ELBJ, with BAUER suspension laser etching (etching MUST be visible on ball joint) may be used in place of stock front lower ball joints."

 

I believe the wording is very clear starting with the beginning statement that explicitly states "only one of the following may be utilized:" This clearly means that there can be no intermixing of "methods".  This means that it is either upper control arm offset bushings or extended lower control arm ball joints but no intermixing of the two methods either on same side or on opposite sides as this is a method choice for the vehicle itself.

 

As for how much Camber gain the extended lower ball joints provide, I made a back to back comparison of the two methods for found the lower ball joints to provide a 0.4 degree of additional camber over what the offset bushings provided.  I also confirmed that front track width at maximum camber setting with extended lower ball joints would remain within the 1450mm limitation with 25mm offset wheels but with only one to two mm's to spare per side.  Using 30 mm offset wheels would allow for a small spacer per side but it is the responsibility of the competitor to verify compliance per the track width measurement procedure in appendix G of the GCR.

[Steve Scheifler]

Thank you!