PA Hillclimb

Jeremy, in the thread on ITE/classing of street legal “swapped” cars mentioned “We also wrote the rally rules. Did anyone check those cars for compliance?”
This is something that has bugged me for some time but I’ve never raised the issue since it was usually only us Kennedys running in the class.
At a rally, at tech, a car with a turbo is checked for its restrictor and its size. Of course, this is not being done at PHA events. And I know to a certain extent, we are to monitor our class ourselves (at rally, this is the norm for many legality issues, the restrictor not being one of them because it’s a safety issue).
I wonder if the class winning car at Duryea this year had a restrictor? But, to my error, I didn’t pay much attention to the times on Saturday (I’m primarily running for enjoyment, not trophies) and he left after the first run Sunday and I had no chance to question him on it or I would have. We did ask the second place car and he answered yes.
And the rules state " All cars must meet Rally America’s classing and safety requirements and possess a current rule book from that series." This needs to be re-thought and updated. (Should at a minimum include NASA and CARS, and some other changes).
What is the solution to this for our class? I don’t think it should be ignored any longer as we are getting more entrants than in the past.

Don, I agree with your comments but, when it comes to classing, we are self-regulating. If someone is not following the rules for their class, any competitor is free to protest that car. As a tech inspector, we do not get involved in classing issues. We mainly check driver's safety gear and make sure the car meets the safety requirements for their designated class. That does not mean we are going to catch someone running illegally. If I spot something that is blatant, I will mention it to them and the chief steward but, if it is not a safety issue, that would not prevent the issuance of a tech sticker. Oh, we could always use more tech help, especially someone with intimate knowledge of the rules.

Don, I fully admit i did not have much knowledge on rally rules at the time we wrote those. I now have a much better understanding of the rules from building my cage in my car. We used Rally America as the rules to follow just because it was the biggest sanctioning body in the US (and the old SCCA rally). The issues i see with the rule at the moment are both open and production class all run together. This is something that i understood at the time but, i did not want to get into having to make multiple rally classes. Mostly because they could run other classes like SM (possibly), specials or even ITE!

The whole checking the restrictor size is something that i don't believe anyone will agree to doing unless its the folks in the class. And IMO i believe that the time's run by any rally car to date are still off what a potential Open class car could achieve with a restrictor.

Now the 1 problem i do see that does need to be changed is in regards to safety. We say that they must meet Rally America safety rules. I understand that NASA rally is a little different in safety requirements (specifically the door sill bar and gussets) then RA. We really should allow NASA rally safety rules to be used also.

I love to see the rally class growing!

I have no idea who was on the "committee" that initially wrote the rally rules. But I certainly think they should be reviewed and updated. And at least one "rally" person should be involved. I will volunteer myself to be involved if this happens.

Don, The rules for rally are much better then then were! (there were no rules for rally and any car could run in that class if they wanted). In fact, we almost just dropped the whole class all together.

This gets into the debate on how many classes do we really need?

I would love to hear what you have in mind for Rally rules?

I will put something together and post it here in a couple of weeks. Just don't hold your breath.

that is a good news, hope fully soon ill return back in racing so i can run some of your event. i did spectate couple of weeks ago Weatherly and i liked it a lot. Hope fully my car will pass inspection and ill be allowed to run with codriver as a rally car for practice. Its hard to find places to get a seat time besides rally.
Thanks for thinking about us rally guys.
Rob

Okay, sports fans. I've been mulling this over for several weeks and here is my recommendation. Give it your thoughts. Shoot it down. Make suggestions, etc.

PHA Rally class supplemental rules

1) 2 classes, Forced induction and Naturally aspirated, regardless of the number of driven wheels.
2) Vehicle must meet technical regulations and have a current log book from of one of the following sanctioning organizations.
Rally America
NRS (NASA Rally sport)
CARS (Canadian Association of Rally Sport)
SCCA
3) Vehicle must meet all the class regulations of one of the classes of the above sanctioning organizations.
4) Vehicle must have entered and passed tech inspection in an event in one of the above sanctioning bodies in the last 5 years.
5) Certain items required for rally competition may be removed from the vehicle. The list is as follows
First aid kit
Triangles
Spare tire(s)
Tow rope
Spill kit
Jack
6) The winner of a class is subject to post race inspection for legality before being declared the winner.

Another issue to consider is the issue of a co-driver. Since the SCCA is now sanctioning Rally Sprints with a co-driver under the Time trial insurance program, should a co-driver be allowed? There certainly is no performance advantage to having one on our hills (Mt Washington, for example, is a different story. As might be some of NEHA hills, from the one I ran).

Rational.
#1. While I’m not a proponent of having zillions of classes, the performance difference between Forced induction and Naturally aspirated is significant. If we’re trying to attract more rally entrants, it’s the right thing to do.
#2. There’s more players in the game than just Rally America. I’ve included SCCA because they’re getting back into the Rally Sprint game. While they currently don’t issue log books or have their own rule set, it may come eventually.
#3. Lets make sure the vehicle is legal. Including a restrictor in the classes that require them. See #6.
#4. I think this is the right thing to do to insure that we’re truly getting rally cars. You can argue the time if you want.
#5. These items are not critical to the performance of the vehicle. Other items might be added if someone thinks of others.
#6. This should the norm in all classes IMHO. And since the biggest item to cheat and increase performance is the restrictor size or presence, I’m suggesting that PHA purchase a restrictor inspection tool if we’re serious. I might be willing to help subsidize the purchase of such tool.

I've not included requiring a rule book from one of the sanctioning bodies. Some of them don't print them and supply them freely as in the past and with the internet they can always be accessed easily.

Don, can a NA engine produce as much power as they want? Obviously the HP is restricted with turbo cars. I personally think that trying to have a post race inspection is getting a bit too much. What about every other class that we have. Shouldn't they really being doing that in all classes? (Huge can of worms). I also think that requiring cars to have run a rally in the past 5 years is not a good thing.

It really does get back to "do we need these classes?" Those rally cars could just run specials. Now if you are talking about making this Rally class allow co drivers then I fully support the class. Just my opinion, that really means nothing since I will not be at a meeting to vote.

NA has displacement limits including modifiers for number of valves (and I don't know what else without digging into the rule book) plus minimum weights (which all classes have).
As I mentioned, I think post race could/should be for the winner for all classes (really becomes a headache, I understand, with a zillion classes).
As for the 5 years, So you don't care if someone builds a car and "claims" to meet the specs, but that has never been proven to meet the specs by passing tech for a rally? Without having entered an event or the possibility of a post race, they could be running any motor, any restrictor (or none). Of course, the 5 year rule doesn't insure it currently meets the spec, but at least the car at one time did. And it meets the true element of it being a rally class. It possibly should be a time period of less than 5 years!
So the question comes down to do you want to have a rally class or not. If you do, it needs to be done "right" IMHO. If you don't okay. But you'll never entice the "lower" class cars to enter in S2 (which is where they and most of us will be) when you have cars entered there like Campbell, Danko and others that can build any engine to any power as long as it fits in the displacement limits. You can get an awful lot of power out of 3500 cc when you're not limited..

sounds good for me , although i never run with you guys yet, So i am not sure my opinion matters.
I would if its possible to run with a co-driver. That is a hole purpose for me to run any hill-climb. One is a seat time- second is a practice with co driver both of them is extremely important for me since i have not much time to run so as place with co driver.

But when i can run like a rally set up i am happy to run as much as possible, even drive 12 hours to do that. I did some hill climbs before but only with co drivers , for these reasons.
I usually skip and look for other opportunity if the co -driver not allowed. The small chance i have to race , i rather run as a rally car since my car is a rally car, with all the restrictions and problem with it :)

Thanks
Rob

After thinking about it, I'll concede on my #6 never happening (but it's what happens at all rallies).
But I replace it with the fact that the restrictor must be checked and in compliance with the rules at tech inspection. I know for a fact that the cars that came down from New England several years ago and ran the rally class at Duryea didn't have restrictors. And I doubt the winner this year at Duryea had the appropriate restrictor.
Once again, if you want to eliminate the rally class, that's fine by me. But if we continue to offer it, it needs to be done properly.