Data, facts and questions to ask yourself

[Tim Royer]

Hi all,

That is not and SCCA group. They do use SCCA Solo2 rules and use GCR class structures but that is it. I looked at this group before, they hill climb with seatbelts (OEM) and Snell 95 helmets basicly. The entry fees for most of the hill they run are $65 and it does say they have insurance, what kind or coverage I don't know. After reading the rules I see they don't have many. They should start looking at using a 5 Point harness. Look at some of the hills they run. 1.8 miles with a 1000ft elevation change, not a small hill.

I'm sure most of them use more gear then they ask for as minimum like drivers suites and belts.

Good luck to them.

[george bowland]

I ran their Black Otter Hillclimb, Billings, MT, in 1999 and set the overall hill record. Floyd Schrammeck ran nearly all their hills in the 90s and set records on those that he ran. They are a great group of folks with some very interesting hills and no insurance save liability.

[JekylandHyde]

Hey George, I spoke with someone from their group earlier this year and they indicated that they do, in fact, have insurance beyond what you have described. I suspect things may have changed since you raced with them.

Are you refering to liability for physical objects around the course that could be damaged or are you talking about liability for the driver's injuries?
AFAIK, they do have coverage for hte drivers ... if not, why would they be concerned about safety equipment in regards to the safety set ups:

http://www.nhahillclimb.org/Rules.html

"Section 3
Safety

Compliance with this section is a condition for NHA Sanction and Insurance 3.2.1 By the year 2007, minimum NHA roll bar is required in any car running in a class allowing racing slicks. NHA recommends that all cars run roll bars. "

[Rick Kase]

Posts on this forum speak for themselves, please do not add what you think someone else was thinking, because you would no doubt be wrong.

Debunking and short sided are not my words and it seems to be the opinion of someone else, I asked a question to try to get a full picture of that which was posted. It looked like the info was not complete.

I asked a simple question to try to determine what effect the proposed SCCA rule changes would have on the reporting club. Since they do not follow SCCA rules the change will not affect that event. If you do not use these rules changing them does not matter.


When you come down to the bottom line on this subject (for or against the changes), If you look I have never given an opinion, I have tried to give input to help clarify at times. and have listened to all parties for and against. Both sides have valid positions and I feel have presented them well. I believe that we are close to a point that all facts have been presented and all interested parties should now make their thoughts be known to SCCA.

Please when you submit you opinion keep it on point and give your reasons. If will make your opinion carry more weight if you identify your self (SCCA member carries more weight) any unsigned submissions would probably not be considered.

[george bowland]

Jeff, I was just going from memory, and think that they let the drivers personal medical insurance cover them at that time. I remember asking after looking at the hill in Billings (800 ft drop off midway up and not much to stop you). I had some experience with the SCCA medical when I crashed at Chimney Rock in 1990 and was very happy with how they handled the bills. They made sure I had no out of pocket costs in a total medical expense of about $25,000.

[JekylandHyde]

Debunking and short sided are not my words and it seems to be the opinion of someone else,

I'm sure you know the meaning of the word "if".

As in ...

If the point of your question ...

My apologies if I inferred too much from your question, considering the offices you have held regionally and nationally, I would have thought you knew that EESCC/NHA were not SCCA affiliated; therefore, I "assumed" your question was bated. My apologies if I gave you too much credit for knowing they were not SCCA.

Oh looky here, the response I "assumed" would follow:

I asked a simple question to try to determine what effect the proposed SCCA rule changes would have on the reporting club. Since they do not follow SCCA rules the change will not affect that event. If you do not use these rules changing them does not matter.

If you read my previous post, you might understand that I was not inquiring from these other clubs as to whether or not this rule would affect them, but rather to give another data point on how "drivers in general" would react to the rule and how it would play out in other regions so we could add this information to our base knowledge of what is going on in our area.

If memory serves, I believe you worked in law enforcement in the past. At that time, would you have not see a benefit from learning how different enforcement techiniques and/or laws affected areas beyond your own to surmise how it might work in your area?

If you do not understand the benefit of that and are going to discard their input because of the lack of SCCA affiliation, then that is what I was saying is short-sited.

[Matt Rowe]

Once again it seems we can't have a discussion on this subject without it devolving into thinly veiled insults and personal attacks. A great amount of information has been presented here (although I still haven't seen anything from a PHA member submitted to the SCCA) but unless people can maintain a civil discussion this ceases to be a free exchange of ideas and stops being a benefit to PHA and it's members.

This topic is now locked and if the same hostility continues into other topics those will be locked as well.


If you have opinions or information I strongly suggest you send them in as the discussions within the SCCA TTAC, TTSC and the BOD are based on the letters they receive as they do not frequent this site.