TriniTuner.com  |  Latest Event:  

Forums

Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Official Solodex Forum -
Please visit www.carstt.com for more info on Autocross (aka Solodex)

Moderators: CarsTT, CARSTT SoloDex, 3ne2nr Mods

User avatar
Mr. Fixables
Trinituner Peong
Posts: 460
Joined: April 6th, 2004, 7:28 am
Location: Back in de Sun!!

Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby Mr. Fixables » March 12th, 2012, 10:32 pm

Hey guys,

I had asked this question for clarification, but still awaiting an answer. This is for the common benefit of all who wants to run non applicable cars, but can't.

I had wanted to run my RAV4, but as per the CARS rulebook, I was turned down. NO problem there.

However, I did ask for the reasoning for the disqualification, and got the "no SUV" answer. No problem there. The reasoning for the "No SUV" was due to center of gravity. I did ask if I do install upgraded suspension and lower the RAV4, if it would qualify then. I got a "don't know", "maybe it's the overall height"? I then asked if I lower the car to the same height as a Suzuki Ignis if it will then qualify? I got a further "don't know".

My point here is not the fight to get the RAV4 into Solodex, but instead to bring to light the inconsistencies of qualifying a car for competition. There needs to be a set reason for certain classes of cars not to be able to compete. Please clarify.

Kirk

Advertisement
User avatar
Ignorant Ignis
punchin NOS
Posts: 4017
Joined: August 6th, 2003, 5:23 pm
Contact:

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby Ignorant Ignis » March 13th, 2012, 8:09 am

u do know that even if u drop the suspension height of the rav4 to the height of a ignis it will still be taller and carry a higher center of gravity

whats the weight of the rav4?

User avatar
MG Man
2NRholic
Posts: 20988
Joined: May 1st, 2003, 1:31 pm
Location: trying to make a cinco-moti sandwich

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby MG Man » March 13th, 2012, 2:15 pm

how does the club determine which vehicle has a high CoG?
There are SUVs now that rival performance cars in terms of cornering grip and weight transfer through quick back-to-back corners.........many are more stable than some station wagons........
Maybe roll centre needs to be factored into the equation as well

User avatar
Ignorant Ignis
punchin NOS
Posts: 4017
Joined: August 6th, 2003, 5:23 pm
Contact:

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby Ignorant Ignis » March 13th, 2012, 3:22 pm

MG Man wrote:how does the club determine which vehicle has a high CoG?
There are SUVs now that rival performance cars in terms of cornering grip and weight transfer through quick back-to-back corners.........many are more stable than some station wagons........
Maybe roll centre needs to be factored into the equation as well


well that was the problem to begin with ....so to play it safe ..all suv's and pickups werent allowed to run .... and i dont think they can now allow one and not allow all.

safe before sorry / peter pay for paul = kirk pay for all

User avatar
whizpig
Sweet on this forum
Posts: 316
Joined: February 4th, 2010, 6:05 am
Location: Arouca

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby whizpig » March 13th, 2012, 11:18 pm

I understand the safety concerns associated wit running a SUV or pick up, but kirk has a serious point, some clear quantifiable specifications should be established for why a particular class of vehicle will not be allowed to run, even if the sole motivation is to avoid the responses to difficult questions being "i doh know".
Having said that, unless there are some rules relating to height of vehicle either in our rule book or some autocross rule book, i doh know how we will come up with a fair regulation to address the matter, but it should be done.
Last edited by whizpig on March 16th, 2012, 8:35 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Rudman
Shifting into 6th
Posts: 2069
Joined: August 17th, 2005, 10:35 am
Location: Finding out all the good tyres in life begins with "R".

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby Rudman » March 16th, 2012, 8:14 am

I say let Kirk bring the RAV 4, run it and see what happens. It's the only way to know what will happen for sure. What's the worst that could happen? He rolls, takes out some cones and maybe a marshal or two, but in the interest of science and field testing, acceptable losses.

Why should we discriminate between RAV4's and Forresters for that matter? Who's call was it to let the Forrester run the dex course some years ago?

Kirk, you have my blessings......I say go for it!..... :|

User avatar
MG Man
2NRholic
Posts: 20988
Joined: May 1st, 2003, 1:31 pm
Location: trying to make a cinco-moti sandwich

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby MG Man » March 16th, 2012, 8:56 am

whizpig, the rules that would allow a modified SUV would be fairly complex (not as simple as ride height alone). Imagine the nightmare for the small team of VOLUNTEERS in CARS who would now have to evaluate every lowered SUV and pickup to determine level of preparation and suitability for dex. This is a case of keeping things simple and manageable. Always remember, while we sit here and debate, only a select handful of committed members actually give up their spare time, evenings, weekends etc to keep the club running just for us to show up on a sunday and run!
While it is unfortunate for Kirk, it is, as Amir said, simpler for him to pay the ultimate price

User avatar
Ignorant Ignis
punchin NOS
Posts: 4017
Joined: August 6th, 2003, 5:23 pm
Contact:

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby Ignorant Ignis » March 16th, 2012, 9:41 am

Rudman wrote:I say let Kirk bring the RAV 4, run it and see what happens. It's the only way to know what will happen for sure. What's the worst that could happen? He rolls, takes out some cones and maybe a marshal or two, but in the interest of science and field testing, acceptable losses.

Why should we discriminate between RAV4's and Forresters for that matter? Who's call was it to let the Forrester run the dex course some years ago?

Kirk, you have my blessings......I say go for it!..... :|


the thing is ... kirk wont do that with his experience as a driver.

but then if he is alowed to run ...we cant stop anyone else

and thats where the problem begins

User avatar
whizpig
Sweet on this forum
Posts: 316
Joined: February 4th, 2010, 6:05 am
Location: Arouca

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby whizpig » March 16th, 2012, 6:06 pm

MG, i just don't like the idea of the answer to good questions being "i doh know". If the position is no SUVs or pick ups, regardless of modification, even if thats the rule simply to make the "select handful of committed members actually give up their spare time, evenings, weekends etc to keep the club running just for us to show up on a sunday and run!" lives easier, then kool, i am all for making life easier.


tough luck there Kirk and anyone else that wanted to run in an SUV or pick up.

i still believe rules and regulations that can be quantifiable, should be
example: tire tread depth, they say 2mm, i say cool, i can check it at home before showing up and getting brace.

User avatar
Mr. Fixables
Trinituner Peong
Posts: 460
Joined: April 6th, 2004, 7:28 am
Location: Back in de Sun!!

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby Mr. Fixables » March 16th, 2012, 11:02 pm

Hey all,

Thanks for chiming in with your thoughts and opinions.

I have no issues taking one for the team so to speak but I still am awaiting an official response from CARS detailing the specific nature of the rules disallowing the specific vehicles from participating.

"I don't know" just doesn't seem to cut it for me. So if someone comes with a raised car, what then? or a pickup almost dragging on the ground? what then?

Not trying to be a beyotch, but I think we need an official response here, where people will feel satisfied with the response.

Kirk

User avatar
Midnight_Demon
punchin NOS
Posts: 3962
Joined: April 9th, 2008, 10:07 am
Location: Riding yuh bumpa
Contact:

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby Midnight_Demon » March 16th, 2012, 11:19 pm

:? The said Rav 4 ran Drag and wind.... Won its class and at no point did it look unstable :? :? :?





Image

User avatar
Red Dawg
Chronic TriniTuner
Posts: 605
Joined: April 22nd, 2003, 5:26 pm
Location: On the inside at Zorce
Contact:

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby Red Dawg » March 18th, 2012, 3:15 pm

I understand what Kirk is asking,
It is not about wanting to compete the RAV4, it is about getting a clear definition of the rules.
One of the things that any motorsport needs to grow is a comprehensive set of rules with clear explanations and definitions.
I would like the officials to explain to me why a Porsche Cayenne or a BMW X5 cannot compete, when these cars clearly out handle anything that regularly shows up at Solodex.
Personally I think that Solodex is quickly going the same way that circuit racing has in T&T.

User avatar
wagonrunner
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 12891
Joined: May 18th, 2004, 9:38 am
Location: Distancing myself from those who want to raid the barn but eh want to plant the corn.
Contact:

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby wagonrunner » March 18th, 2012, 3:28 pm

Mr.Fixables wrote: I still am awaiting an official response from CARS detailing the specific nature of the rules disallowing the specific vehicles from participating.

this is not it.

but as mentioned before, in your hands it may be safe.
In the hands of a novice, it may not be as safe.
So it's simply a matter of eliminating risk. Those type vehicles pose a greater risk (rollover / collision) at solodex events.

There have been cars with parts of their suspension fail on the course. (popped tripods / axles). Another "volunteer" would remove vehicle from course. The "club" is not equipped to handle such with those vehicles, so they not allowed to run.

Yes peter paying for paul, but they're not biting off more than they can chew.

User avatar
X2
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 8648
Joined: April 18th, 2003, 1:54 pm
Location: 3 stories above the Batcave...

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby X2 » March 18th, 2012, 10:37 pm

Pickups not allowed either ? Technically low lux and other pickups can easily lower the CoG, so yeah, I guess a more quantitative explanation should be proposed.

User avatar
gt4tified
punchin NOS
Posts: 4357
Joined: May 13th, 2004, 3:17 pm
Location: in de garaqe!

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby gt4tified » March 19th, 2012, 1:34 am

Good thread Fixables.

*lurks in waiting to order the Caldina GT4*

User avatar
crazybalhead
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10873
Joined: April 21st, 2003, 9:41 am

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby crazybalhead » March 19th, 2012, 12:55 pm

Red Dawg wrote:I understand what Kirk is asking,
It is not about wanting to compete the RAV4, it is about getting a clear definition of the rules.
One of the things that any motorsport needs to grow is a comprehensive set of rules with clear explanations and definitions.
I would like the officials to explain to me why a Porsche Cayenne or a BMW X5 cannot compete, when these cars clearly out handle anything that regularly shows up at Solodex.
Personally I think that Solodex is quickly going the same way that circuit racing has in T&T.


Reallllly?????

User avatar
Mr. Fixables
Trinituner Peong
Posts: 460
Joined: April 6th, 2004, 7:28 am
Location: Back in de Sun!!

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby Mr. Fixables » March 19th, 2012, 4:39 pm

Guys,

This is not about me or the RAV4, just requested some information about classing a long time ago, and cannot get a straight answer yet.

The RAV4 is NOT the topic of discussion, but instead looking for the ability to gain a larger cross section of possible entrants to the sport, and the only way to do this is to clarify and set certain rules which are easily explained. The "I don't know" comes across a bit disorganized and unsure of your own rule set.

I am not trying to be a pain here, but the instead forcing the hand of the execs to further the rule set and have a positive direction, regardless of the direction taken. I have evolved from the Solodex gene pool, it has made me into the driver I am today and would love for the sport to continue to grow, so this is not a shots at the execs at all.

I think a clear and defined response from the CARS exec will put this to rest quickly.

Kirk

User avatar
wagonrunner
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 12891
Joined: May 18th, 2004, 9:38 am
Location: Distancing myself from those who want to raid the barn but eh want to plant the corn.
Contact:

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby wagonrunner » March 20th, 2012, 12:03 am

Mr. Fixables wrote:I think a clear and defined response from the CARS exec will put this to rest quickly.

oh definitely. in the meanwhile is me you hadda contend with me. :lol:

Image

It is what it is.

I have evolved from the Solodex gene pool, it has made me into the driver I am today and would love for the sport to continue to grow

IMO other things has to change for that to happen. But these are the present conditions. And i don't all to be comfortable with others rate of "growth".
The biggest obstacle has always been change.

User avatar
Ignorant Ignis
punchin NOS
Posts: 4017
Joined: August 6th, 2003, 5:23 pm
Contact:

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby Ignorant Ignis » March 20th, 2012, 2:45 pm

as far as i remember there were two blocks of wood used to measure ride height
and there was rule concerning ride height
but "no pickups / suv's" superseded this rule anyway

User avatar
MG Man
2NRholic
Posts: 20988
Joined: May 1st, 2003, 1:31 pm
Location: trying to make a cinco-moti sandwich

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby MG Man » March 20th, 2012, 3:28 pm

no pickups / SUV makes life simple for the solodex committee, plain and simple
imagine having to assess every suv that someone wanted to run at DEX.....it is impossible to please everyone anyway, so the line had to be drawn, plain and simple

User avatar
Mr. Fixables
Trinituner Peong
Posts: 460
Joined: April 6th, 2004, 7:28 am
Location: Back in de Sun!!

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby Mr. Fixables » March 20th, 2012, 7:24 pm

I am pretty sure the execs have seen this post, yet they are unable to grace us with a one liner about the topic.

If you are discussing it, say so, your silence makes you guys all the more open to scrutiny.

Are you guys hoping it will go away? Like the protest I made last year, and to date nothing has ever been done?

Kirk

User avatar
Yorkshirelass
CARS Member
Posts: 482
Joined: July 28th, 2005, 11:17 am
Location: up the wall!
Contact:

Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby Yorkshirelass » March 20th, 2012, 9:38 pm

CARS follows the guidelines of the SCCA who state

Unstable vehicles with a high center of gravity and a narrow track, includ- ing SUVs, minivans, and 4WD pickups, must be excluded.

When CARS was established the rules of the SCCA were used as a basis for the rule book. Yes that was a while ago, however, this is one rule that the SCCA have stuck to as when researching this, it is still stated in their current rule book. Also, most of the SSR's for each district also seem to reiterate this rule.

Must have a good reason for it.

We're you allowed to race an SUV when you did Autocross in the States Kirk?

User avatar
wagonrunner
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 12891
Joined: May 18th, 2004, 9:38 am
Location: Distancing myself from those who want to raid the barn but eh want to plant the corn.
Contact:

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby wagonrunner » March 20th, 2012, 9:42 pm

Yorkshirelass wrote:Were SUV's allowed to race when you did Autocross in the States Kirk?

the favoritism thing chick. :lol:

User avatar
mazdamaniac
Trinituner Peong
Posts: 425
Joined: March 25th, 2008, 9:00 pm
Location: Gasparillo

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby mazdamaniac » March 20th, 2012, 10:06 pm

Mr. Fixables wrote:I am pretty sure the execs have seen this post, yet they are unable to grace us with a one liner about the topic.

If you are discussing it, say so, your silence makes you guys all the more open to scrutiny.

Are you guys hoping it will go away? Like the protest I made last year, and to date nothing has ever been done?

Kirk


Kirk, I have been watching your post and it is truly sad to see that you are still upset about a topic that has already been put to rest at our last meeting at SoloDex 1 on 26 February 2012. As I recall you did raise the issue of the Rav 4 or a similar type SUV or pickup with particular mods to ride height and suspension to be afforded entry into SoloDex. You also mentioned that your particular SUV type vehicle was allowed entry in the Drag & Wind event and did win its class without any apparent racing instability.
I did inform you that the CARS club does not allow entry of SUV and pickup vehicles with the primary reason being safety. Also I did inform you that I had checked the SCCA rules and it also confirmed that SUV and pickups are not allowed in Solo 2. I did however say that I will try to investigate further to get a more scientific justification for this rule and also try to find info with regards to any cases of allowances for this type of vehicle that may exist.
I also indicated that the rule change discussions for 2012 was concluded the week before the SoloDex 1 event and the final votes on rule changes was conducted on the morning of SoloDex 1.

I hope this response is satisfactory and as always we welcome all suggestions from our members and participants in an effort to maintain a forward direction of our motor sport club and motor sport in general.

Vishnu Charran
Head of SoloDex

User avatar
gt4tified
punchin NOS
Posts: 4357
Joined: May 13th, 2004, 3:17 pm
Location: in de garaqe!

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby gt4tified » March 20th, 2012, 10:17 pm

^^^ :shock:

[/ched]

User avatar
Mr. Fixables
Trinituner Peong
Posts: 460
Joined: April 6th, 2004, 7:28 am
Location: Back in de Sun!!

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby Mr. Fixables » March 21st, 2012, 12:05 pm

Yorkshirelass wrote:CARS follows the guidelines of the SCCA who state

Unstable vehicles with a high center of gravity and a narrow track, includ- ing SUVs, minivans, and 4WD pickups, must be excluded.

When CARS was established the rules of the SCCA were used as a basis for the rule book. Yes that was a while ago, however, this is one rule that the SCCA have stuck to as when researching this, it is still stated in their current rule book. Also, most of the SSR's for each district also seem to reiterate this rule.

Must have a good reason for it.

We're you allowed to race an SUV when you did Autocross in the States Kirk?


Firstly,

Thanks to CARS for replying to this post.

Glad to see you are following the SCCA format, they have done their research, and continue to modify their ruleset. Maybe the SUV omission may be a good call in order to alleviate any future mishaps.

As per the quote by Yorkeshirelass, the pickup omissions are for 4WD pickups, not 2WD. Maybe you guys have another reason for that as well.

However, to answer the quote above, there were quite a few Foresters competing in the Atlanta Region, with one winning the SM class hands down. Seeing you guys follow the SCCA format, I do look forward to Foresters tearing up the Solodex courses soon.

And Vishnu, by no means am I upset about the RAV4 not being able to run, what I did see was the "I don't know" responses which never really gave me the confidence that the reason was well thought out, thus I exercised my right to question the rule, no more, no less.

If you feel that there was some personal vendetta against CARS, so be it.

Kirk

User avatar
wagonrunner
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 12891
Joined: May 18th, 2004, 9:38 am
Location: Distancing myself from those who want to raid the barn but eh want to plant the corn.
Contact:

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby wagonrunner » March 21st, 2012, 12:31 pm

But as you mention foresters, I recall them racing at dex already. the Lower STI version.
Not the XT, and whatever other (tuscon height at that time) models.
I use that comparison because a buddy had both. sorry.

User avatar
mazdamaniac
Trinituner Peong
Posts: 425
Joined: March 25th, 2008, 9:00 pm
Location: Gasparillo

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby mazdamaniac » March 21st, 2012, 12:34 pm

Mr. Fixables wrote:
Yorkshirelass wrote:CARS follows the guidelines of the SCCA who state

Unstable vehicles with a high center of gravity and a narrow track, includ- ing SUVs, minivans, and 4WD pickups, must be excluded.

When CARS was established the rules of the SCCA were used as a basis for the rule book. Yes that was a while ago, however, this is one rule that the SCCA have stuck to as when researching this, it is still stated in their current rule book. Also, most of the SSR's for each district also seem to reiterate this rule.

Must have a good reason for it.

We're you allowed to race an SUV when you did Autocross in the States Kirk?


Firstly,

Thanks to CARS for replying to this post.

Glad to see you are following the SCCA format, they have done their research, and continue to modify their ruleset. Maybe the SUV omission may be a good call in order to alleviate any future mishaps.

As per the quote by Yorkeshirelass, the pickup omissions are for 4WD pickups, not 2WD. Maybe you guys have another reason for that as well.

However, to answer the quote above, there were quite a few Foresters competing in the Atlanta Region, with one winning the SM class hands down. Seeing you guys follow the SCCA format, I do look forward to Foresters tearing up the Solodex courses soon.

And Vishnu, by no means am I upset about the RAV4 not being able to run, what I did see was the "I don't know" responses which never really gave me the confidence that the reason was well thought out, thus I exercised my right to question the rule, no more, no less.

If you feel that there was some personal vendetta against CARS, so be it.

Kirk


I know that there are no hard feelings and we all will continue to discuss various issues and explore different points of view in an effort to make things better.

User avatar
X2
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 8648
Joined: April 18th, 2003, 1:54 pm
Location: 3 stories above the Batcave...

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby X2 » March 21st, 2012, 3:51 pm

*Puts downpayment on new Forester*

User avatar
wagonrunner
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 12891
Joined: May 18th, 2004, 9:38 am
Location: Distancing myself from those who want to raid the barn but eh want to plant the corn.
Contact:

Re: Clarification for a previously asked question - car type

Postby wagonrunner » March 21st, 2012, 5:31 pm

wagonrunner wrote:But as you mention foresters, I recall them racing at dex already. the Lower STI version.
Not the XT, and whatever other (tuscon height at that time) models.
I use that comparison because a buddy had both. sorry.

Image
X2 wrote:*Puts downpayment on new Forester*

Nice ride. But i've not seen that right height on the newer models. GL with that.

Advertisement

Return to “CARS - Autocross (Solodex)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest