PHA response on roll cage issue

[dspgti]

I have accepted the request to compose an official response to the proposed new roll cage rules on behalf of PHA. Since we (PHA) have nothing to do as a rule making body, we can only give our opinions. That is exactly what SCCA wants at this time. Just comments.

Many of you have known me to be very supportive to an across the board mandatory roll cage requirements in the past. I have since softened my opinion and wish to let SCCA know that many of us are concerened about recruitment and retention. Whatever is submitted will be a consensus of all opinions, if at all possible, and will be available here before being submitted.

My request is first for volunteers to be involved with the draft or giving input. Someone from each participating region should give input reflective of their regions attitude. Everyone concerned or who wants to be heard as an individual should submit their own comments directly to SCCA. Anyone else who isn't comfortable in submitting a comment directly but wants to be heard can contact me.

It is believed that the next Fastrac will have the rules published and start the period for comments which is 60 days so we can't wait for the next meeting to put it to a vote. We should be able to complete this by PM's emails and phone calls. You may contact me by going to my profile here to get my PM or email address, dspgti@aol.com or you can call me on my cell phone. I am free to talk pretty much after 5:00 PM each day or anytime on weekends at 609-517-3129.

[JekylandHyde]

Hello Dave,

Good luck writing a suitable compromise letter. It will be a challenge considering the very polarized opinions on the subject. But, if anyone can do it, I would say it is you.

I still think your initial suggestion of restricted classes was a
perfect start to finding a reasonable solution to the current dilemna.

If you find value in any of the research that I have collected and posted, please feel free to use any or all of it as you feel necessary.

Again, good luck with everything.

[Rich Rock]

Dave,

How about posting a "working" draft of the letter and see what people think of it?

Rich Rock

[dspgti]

I don't think I can make a draft right now. I don't know how everyone feels. I can say that my intent is to say something pretty general in scope. I believe that as a group (PHA), most of us are concerned that roll cage rules for all cars will have a negative affect on recruiting and retention of drivers. I have posted my ideas about exempting some classes from the rules but I don't know how everyone else feels. Only a few that have been giving input on this forum. That is just a small portion of the PHA.
After I get some input, I will post a draft and give it a poll for voting. Keep in mind this is just an opinion poll. Anything we send needs to be approved by the board so anything too restrictive or leanient may get rejected.

Dave Y

[JekylandHyde]

It is believed that the next Fastrac will have the rules published and start the period for comments which is 60 days so we can't wait for the next meeting to put it to a vote.

The new issue of Fastrack is out:
http://www.scca.org/_FileLibrary/File/0 ... y-full.pdf

And, unless I am missing it, it surely doesn't seem to be there.

Matt Green has been indicating since at least November that this will be brought up publicly in Fastrack. Does anyone really know when it will appear?

Matt Rowe indicated on March 21 (on the SCCA forums) that:

Third, I would have responded to this last night but after Fastrack came out without ANY information from the Time Trials program I spent time trying to track down why. Unfortunately I haven't gotten a response yet but nothing has been decided and there will still be oppourtunities to send in your opinions.

Any word on why Time Trials rules, updates, etc are not showing up in Fastrack?

[Rich Rock]

Okay, here's how I feel: I think roll cages should NOT be REQUIRED in any "Street", Vintage or Historic class.

Which is not the same as saying a cage is a bad thing, it's just that I think making them mandatory in those classes will have a seriously negative impact on the program.


Rich Rock

[geowit]

Okay, here's how I feel: I think roll cages should NOT be REQUIRED in any "Street", Vintage or Historic class.

Which is not the same as saying a cage is a bad thing, it's just that I think making them mandatory in those classes will have a seriously negative impact on the program.


Rich Rock

I tend to agree with Rich. All of the CSP entries last year were equipped with only a bar.

[george bowland]

I also agree with Rich Rock. I believe that the turnout is so marginal at so many events, especially here in the South, that the change will kill my sport.

As an open wheel driver, I always assume a very high risk at each event, so I am probably biased when it comes to issues such as this one. But the facts simply don't support the need to change and I would hate to risk ending the sport for a reason that has little to do with reality.

[dlascoskie]

Great to hear others chiming in on this issue. Just for the record, I also oppose cages in street classes.

[Ray Colbert]

All,

As a person who has been trying to get a program going in the western part of this state and attempting to draw from Solo classes, the feed back I am getting is: They do not want to compromise the weight of the car with an expensive piece that is not required for them to have fun at only a few events.

I required bars in all open cars at the Track Trial event at Beaver Run and got only 17 registrations. All of them except for my car were closed. People just will not spend extra money to have more fun.

In addition cages really tend to take the car off the street. Many Solo people who want to do more want/need a triple duty car. (Street/Solo/Track). If some event limits them for a cage, they skip it. I know my needs for the place I autocross requires a vehicle license and inspection and we have been called on it recently by the police.

With that said, the SCCA needs to modify all their current safety requirements to fit or use currently produced automotive safety technology for the street . We require a completely different set of equipment for Solo compared to Hillclimb/Roadrace. I am suggesting that if roll cages were the safest thing in the world all automobiles would have them on the street. Instead they have seatbelts and airbags (many airbags) and so do fighter jets now. Get into the 21st century.

The gap between a street car and a race car to go hill climbing is to great to get people to change their street/autocross car to a hillclimber by our current and proposed rules.

[dspgti]

We are getting ahead of ourselves and behind ourselves. I thought we beat this to death on a half dozen other forums. Ray, your mixing level 3 and 4 requirements. Cage rules are for level 4 which is a hillclimb only. Representaive input from the Steel city region is appreciated.

Since the proposal didn't make this months Fastrac we are delayed another 30 days which gives us more time to compose our response.

Here's another idea. Since the forum and PHA meetings only involve a few members, what do you think about having an informal meeting at Jefferson. Maybe the end of Saturday before dinner?

Dave Y.

[Mazdahead]

I think that everyone agrees about the impact it may have on the sport in general. In keeping street classes and vintage classes exempt from the cage we will at least have new entries that want to give hillclimbing a try. I think it is an excellent idea to discuss this at Jefferson and would be even better if we had a poll taken when the drivers register. That way we would have a concensus from our members for the dicussion.

[Speednation]

[quote="Rich Rock"]Okay, here's how I feel: I think roll cages should NOT be REQUIRED in any "Street", Vintage or Historic class.

Which is not the same as saying a cage is a bad thing, it's just that I think making them mandatory in those classes will have a seriously negative impact on the program.


Rich Rock[/quote]

Rich, I completely agree. All high horsepower Street Mod and SM2 people who are driving at 9/10th or more should be highly encouraged to have a cage, but I don't want to have a blanket policy that makes everyone have a cage.

[crusaderchuck]

the swedish tanks i'm attracted to , have an integral structure built into their roof area. just the rollbar is a bit redundant in my case. in my 1967 H modified sports racer it conforms to 1967 SCCa GCR's and the entire frame with roll over structure weighs less than 80lbs!
in vintage and historic classes i am opposed to requiring cages. in the big bore and rocket ship classes i am a bit worried about safety. on road courses with adequate run off areas , gravel traps and other acomodations , in lower horsepower and weight classes i do not see a need for any form of cage. i've been up on two wheels a few times! while you are doing it you are not frightened at all! but about 30 minutes later you are really freaked out that you came close to an "incident"!
safety. the cost of safety.? i feel very safe in my saab and sports racer on both road courses and hillclimbs. but! as far as vintage and historic classes being required to have a cage , i'm against that! in numerous models the added front bars and side bars will reduce the originality and values. i prefer to compete in a car that reflects my father's era of racing. not a nascar version of an over 40 year old car. dave? i'm not a very eloquent writer or speaker. if i can assist you please contact me. i'm not certain what i can offer or support. but i do have some very good driving time on hillclimbs & east coast road courses. am i a good driver? i will not say as i see myself as a student in the process of learning. ask for my help and i will do my best to assist.
being a second generation driver , i have a very deep rooted desire to see this sport or hobby continue. what are we expected to acomodate , do or modify to ensure this concerns me. i realise my car is a bit annoying to my fellow competitors at events. you did not grow up with 3,4 5 or 6 saab cars in touring 1 , 2 or 3 in the 60's! i did. so , that being said , where are we going with this? interesting banter.


chuck
saab 93F #251

[JekylandHyde]

Ross Wessner would like to add input, but is having technical issues with using this forum. He has also indicated that he can not make Jefferson.

Please see his e-mail that I posted here:
http://www.pahillclimb.org/phpBB2/viewt ... =6414#6414

Thank you,

[RX-Midget]

I added this to the other thread about this issue, but though I should also post it here:

It has been mentioned at lest twice now that a removable cage (or cage section) could be an alternative, but no one that has opposed the cage requirements have acknowledged this. Why? I’m not sure. With a removable forward cage section, you could have a cage for the hills and then in about 10-15 min take it out for the ride back home with only a roll bar near your head (a risk that is acceptable to some of you).

All the energy spent bantering back and forth could have easily been put in to some cleverly designed cages that will come out of the car and leave it as a roll bar only car for the street. These removable sections could even be small enough to be stored in the trunk or storage area for the ride home from a hillclimb. I have spent some time looking at how I would do this for even my daily driven Mazda 3 and feel confident that it would not be a technological break through – just some engineering (and not the kind that put a man on the moon!)

I want to explore the design possibilities that will allow the existing non-caged cars to be modified to use removable cages. This will address the owners desire to drive on the street without a cage, but I think that a cage should be installed for running the hills.

The SCCA GCR provides some insight to removable cage/section requirements under the S/S class rules. These requirements would have to be accepted and carried over to the Street classes and I’m not sure how that process works.


Showroom Stock roll cage requirements per the 2007 GCR.

Section 9.4.2 (page 94)

B. Removable roll cages and braces shall be very carefully designed and
constructed to be at least as strong as a permanent installation. If
one tube fits inside another tube to facilitate removal, the removable
portion shall fit tightly and shall bottom by design and at least two (2)
bolts shall be used to secure each such joint. The telescope section
shall be at least eight (8) inches in length. Minimum bolt diameter is
3/8 inches.



So, what do you guys think about this? You could have your cake, and eat it too.

Brian

[dlascoskie]

see my reply in the other forum.

[JekylandHyde]

see my reply in the other forum.

X2

I don't feel that really solves the problem,
but I applaud your efforts to find a workable compromise.

[dspgti]

I have gotten feedback on the idea of having a group talk on the roll cage issue at Jefferson. Everyone feels that we need input from all the other members and drivers that don't participate in PHA meetings or this forum.

So far, I think we can all agree that the rules will affect recruitment and retention. Even the authors admit to that. The departure is to what extent. Will it return us to marginal particpant numbers at events or even kill the program the rules were meant to protect.

Let me restate what I think is the intent of the PHA response. We as a group express our opinion that some exemptions to the rules should be considered. I don't think we should be specific as to which cars or classes should be exempt. Just as many of you would not sign a statement that doesn't rule out your specific idea, I could not be part of exempting all current street driveable cars. I also don't think we should be part of determining what constitutes saftey on the road. We are a racing organization and should only be concerned with saftey on the track. What someone does with their cars when they aren't racing is there own personal choice. Even though much of my argument is based on a street accident, all references to street accidents don't belong in our group opinion. Those incidents involve the breaking of the laws of the road or nature (something about an object wants to travel in a straight line unless acted upon by some other force).

Now I can just hope I have a car ready in time go to Jefferson.

Thank you all for your input.

Dave Y.

[Roy]

I am suggesting that if roll cages were the safest thing in the world all automobiles would have them on the street.

Is this a serious comment? By that logic, why are convertibles or motorcycles still around?

Because people want them. People also want cheap cars. Adding roll cages to them adds cost. You give the people what they want.

The SCCA's safety requirements are generated with two considerations... safety and liability. Anyone that thinks rollcages aren't safe because production cars don't have them needs to educate themselves.