Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2018 R-X Rule Change Proposals -- Submit 'Em Here!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    A piggyback is aftermarket management, and reflashes of stock PCMs can do wild things nowadays. I have half a mind to buy a Subaru just so I can play with Carberry!
    '84 RX-7 #9 Mod Rear
    '81 RX-7 #74 Prepared Rear
    '06 S60R #588
    '86 Quantum Syncro #34 Mod AWD

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by redfogo View Post
      1. I am wondering if we can add A/C delete to the prepared class?
      2. Allow for visual modifications to be allowed in prepared. Some folks me included with GC 93-2001 imprezas would like to run wings and scoops off of other subarus. These mods are all more visual than anything else. Could the rule be something like: Allow for use of any OEM wing or scopes? Rallycross is a low speed sport, so the events are never fast enough for any OEM body part to really provide an extra benefit. I can see counter arguments for scoops from some folks because it allows for venting or extra cooling. So if I have to pick one, wings off any OEM car foreign or domestic should be allowed so long as it’s an OEM part in some countries catalog. That way if you want to run a EVO wing on your subaru you can if that's what you feel like and it fits without altercation from its mounting points.

      Personally I just don't see any benefit any kind of wing, scoop, or other body panel would provide anyone other than the look of the car with the current speeds RallyX has.
      At least on some of the Subaru's the hood with the scoop is aluminum and is much lighter than the steel hood with out the scoop (definitely the case with my daughter's '05 WRX and my '03 Impreza Outback Sport) - probably more benefit from the lighter weight than anything else since cooling isn;t really an issue with the car.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by hzl6cm View Post

        At least on some of the Subaru's the hood with the scoop is aluminum and is much lighter than the steel hood with out the scoop (definitely the case with my daughter's '05 WRX and my '03 Impreza Outback Sport) - probably more benefit from the lighter weight than anything else since cooling isn;t really an issue with the car.
        Very true, but the hood itself wouldn't fit from an 05 to a 03. Since they had different lights. But in my opinion if you wanted to put that 05 scoop on your OBS I wouldn't feel you had any better advantage haha, Thus the idea for the rule change.

        Comment


        • #49
          While I do not run a supercharged vehicle, I do see a conflict of turbo vs supercharger in the rules. In Prepared class, item 5, Turbos may change controllers to increase boost however forced induction components may not be changed. This favors turbos and is not equally fair to blowers. Supercharged cars should be allowed to change pulleys for boost regulation since turbos do allow pressure (boost) regulation to be modified either mechanical OR electronically. I think the rule should allow Turbocharger OR supercharger boost regulation systems to be changed. This could specify pulleys for superchargers.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by zblorenc View Post
            3.2.S "Cracks are permitted to outside layer of laminated windshield only"

            It solves everything. It easy to police and check, any inspector can determine whether the crack is on the inside using their finger nail. Any damage that's severe enough to crack both layers is eliminated from competition. Simple and straight to the point.
            I'm very much in favor of ZB's windshield rule recommendation. But for political correctness' sake, we can add in Charles' wording for the following:

            "The RXB recommends that windshields be free of any cracks. Cracks in the outside layer of laminated windshields and which do not affect driver visibility are permitted. Windshields that have experienced object penetration and/or have deformation and/or have cracks to the inside layer closest to the passenger compartment are not allowed." (Unless you have a cage prepared to SCCA IT specs or better.)

            It's a bit wordy, but it should provide more clarity.

            Bee Thao

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by JimR View Post
              Proposed allowance
              3.3.C.4 - Stock Category (protective equipment)

              Front bumpers, rear bumpers, body trim pieces and attachment points may be reinforced to prevent or repair damage from cone or ground contact. Reinforcements that are not visible to the exterior of the car are allowed. Such repairs and/or reinforcements may serve no other purpose.

              Reasoning
              This is a near-direct lift from the 2017 Solo Rules section 13.1. I'm not married to the explicit wording, but I think it's valuable to single out and name as a RallyCross Stock allowance.

              Example: tiny tabs molded into the bumper cover clip to the chassis, but are easily broken with a hit, causing the bumper to sag. The repair options are to either buy an entire bumper cover, or just fab brackets or screws to keep the bumper in place.

              Newer cars especially have a lot of plastic fascias, trays, skirts, finishers, and trim that could be easily broken when RallyCrossing from a cone strike or nose scrape. They are often expensive dealer-only parts. I think it's worth allowing reinforcement and repair to keep these panels in place. The car fully maintains its stock appearance and weight, but may have non-factory brackets, screws, zip-ties, etc., installed.
              Any discussion on my proposal? I would like to add verbiage on reinforcements for lights. Someone in another thread talked about fragile fog lights that fall out with the slightest bump. I think it would be appropriate to maintain the look and mass of factory lights, housings, and lenses in Stock. However, the reality of cones and bumps means competitors should be explicitly able to bulk up the mounting of fragile cosmetic pieces. This would materially increase the car without adding a performance advantage.

              3.3.C.4 - Stock Category (protective equipment)

              Front bumpers, rear bumpers, body trim pieces, light housings and lenses, and attachment points may be reinforced to prevent or repair damage from cone or ground contact. Reinforcements that are not visible to the exterior of the car are allowed. Such repairs and/or reinforcements may serve no other purpose.

              Comment


              • slowautoxr
                slowautoxr commented
                Editing a comment
                3.3.C.4. to 3.3.C.4.a reads "The addition of protective equipment is allowed with the following exceptions:
                The modifications must only provide protection to the car and/or occupants and provide no performance advantage."

                I thought that this rule was already sufficient. I guess it's almost saying what Jim is suggesting but not quite.

            • #52
              I recant. zblorenc's proposal is better than mine.
              Original post that you can ignore:

              To say the windshield rule is controversial would be an understatement. I propose that it be pared down to its least-objectionable form for 2018. That would give time for the RXB to come up with a rule that doesn't exclude people from the sport unnecessarily, but also considers realistic safety considerations.

              Something like:

              "Cracks in the windshield shall not impede the driver's view of the course and obstacles ahead, and they shall not cause any change in the shape of the windshield. Any form of windshield separation or delamination from the body of the car is not allowed."

              The second part of the first sentence needs some refining, but what I'd want it to do is make sure that the crack doesn't break the plane of the windshield, resulting in a crazy example like the picture I've attached.

              Respectfully submitted.
              Jacob
              Last edited by jacob; 06-14-2017, 06:05 PM.

              Comment


              • #53
                I support something like Jacob's suggestion for modifying the windshield rule. The current rule seems overly complicated and far too strict. I don't understand how it addresses the actual issue where a windshield is unsafe. A simple common sense rule that a broken / deformed windshield is not allowed makes sense to me. RallyCross is meant to be easy to enter, let's not create obstacles for competitors. Also, the more complicated the rule gets, the more difficult it is to enforce.

                Comment


                • #54
                  Originally posted by jacob View Post
                  To say the windshield rule is controversial would be an understatement. I propose that it be pared down to its least-objectionable form for 2018. That would give time for the RXB to come up with a rule that doesn't exclude people from the sport unnecessarily, but also considers realistic safety considerations.

                  Something like:

                  "Cracks in the windshield shall not impede the driver's view of the course and obstacles ahead, and they shall not cause any change in the shape of the windshield. Any form of windshield separation or delamination from the body of the car is not allowed."

                  The second part of the first sentence needs some refining, but what I'd want it to do is make sure that the crack doesn't break the plane of the windshield, resulting in a crazy example like the picture I've attached.

                  Respectfully submitted.

                  Jacob
                  fully support this

                  Comment


                  • #55
                    Originally posted by zblorenc View Post
                    3.2.S "Cracks are permitted to outside layer of laminated windshield only"

                    It solves everything. It easy to police and check, any inspector can determine whether the crack is on the inside using their finger nail. Any damage that's severe enough to crack both layers is eliminated from competition. Simple and straight to the point.
                    I'll admit, I read every post before posting, but I didn't give this one the thought that it warrants. I support this idea. It checks all of the boxes, and there's no ambiguity as far as vision. Plus an engineer said it.

                    Jacob

                    Comment


                    • #56
                      The rules are a bit vague on this.

                      Does this mean an external wastegate can be used? Technically it is a mechanical boost control device.

                      And what about charging turbos? It says items must be of manufacturer specification. An STi turbo is of "manufacturer spec". Does that mean I can use it?

                      Originally posted by Dynatorch View Post
                      While I do not run a supercharged vehicle, I do see a conflict of turbo vs supercharger in the rules. In Prepared class, item 5, Turbos may change controllers to increase boost however forced induction components may not be changed. This favors turbos and is not equally fair to blowers. Supercharged cars should be allowed to change pulleys for boost regulation since turbos do allow pressure (boost) regulation to be modified either mechanical OR electronically. I think the rule should allow Turbocharger OR supercharger boost regulation systems to be changed. This could specify pulleys for superchargers.

                      Comment


                      • #57
                        If I recall the preppared rules allow changing of pulleys and belt components why would this not allow the changing of a supper charger pulley. It is technically a accessory.

                        I'm also all for allowing prepared class to remove a/c rounding up all the parts to reinstall air conditioning on my car is/was a nightmare.

                        Comment


                        • #58
                          I know it's kind of late, but why not have SxS class (Yamaha YXZ1000R, Polaris RZR, Can-Am Maverick) in rallycross and rallysprint? No modifications except safety. Closed faced helmets and whatever else needed to satisfy SCCA insurance requirements.

                          Definitely would be cool to see something like that

                          Comment


                          • slowautoxr
                            slowautoxr commented
                            Editing a comment
                            Our rallycross site is at an offroad park. SxSs occasionally get on the RX track. I've seen 2 laying on their side and even if they stay upright, they really don't look good on a RX track. If they are allowed, one laying on it's side should not be considered an incident.

                        • #59
                          Originally posted by wrxguy View Post
                          The rules are a bit vague on this.

                          Does this mean an external wastegate can be used? Technically it is a mechanical boost control device.

                          As long as the turbo sits in the OE location (no rotated mounting or the like), and you're using the OE turbo, that's explicitly allowed, since manifold and downpipe are also unrestricted. The original wastegate can be blocked off (but not removed if it is part of the turbo).

                          I pointed this out in the supercharger pulley discussion thread. Realistically there is little/no benefit to this if you're retaining a stock turbo, which is required in Prepared.
                          '84 RX-7 #9 Mod Rear
                          '81 RX-7 #74 Prepared Rear
                          '06 S60R #588
                          '86 Quantum Syncro #34 Mod AWD

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X