2018 Regs and Explainations

[Paul Morcom]

On 12/15/2017 at 16:17, AdamR said:

Seriously though, why is there a cap on points score? Is it from the days when TTs were still being established?

There is also currently a likely occurrence of an unrepresentative score with a small entry and the adverse condition 1.6d or 1.6e rule being used. What we see is that against real targets (class records) when bettered are rarely bettered by more than 1%. So the 101 cap is used to prevent a unrepresentative score from occurring in all cases.

Also even now, after several years of using Class Records wherever possible there are "soft" target/records there. Yes, each year they reduce in number as competitors focus on them. Why?.....Because the British weather is very variable and the level and number of drivers varies across classes.

[XTR2Turbo]

You could argue that the target times converge less quickly with the current rule as if you are chasing points you just want to get the max score and leave a softer target for next time

[tkm_dave]

I agree with the cap for events with no target where points could vary rather wildy depending on who's in class on the day, but other than that I think 101 cap is quite harsh when the vast majority of times are pretty settled.

[Matthew Haynes]

3 hours ago, XTR2Turbo said:

i assume ssot have done some research on this

Indeed Graham Frankland phoned all of us novices to do some research for the SSOT which I assume has informed the changes made. 

[neptune]

As someone who has never participted but would like to try sprinting and enjoy some of the legendary circuits, I hope my comments are useful

First and foremost my car is a road car used in all weathers. I like my full hood. Due to msa rules i understand i cannot participte without and approved roll bar, which means I can't use my hood so my car becomes less attractive for its main purpose. 

 Swapping bars is a p.i.t.a. and a half hood doesn't appeal to me. 

Costs for new rolbar, approved helmets, clothing , new seat belts all become significant just to participate. 

So I like others i have spoken with, will choose other less stringent and  more pay and play oriented events to dip our toes in the water . Perhaps I will get hooked and then be confident to invest. 

My reason for commenting is that by virtue of the MSA association, SS is unable to offer  a low investment taste of the sport . It isn't the TT's or classes that are the barriers to initial entrance even though they may be barriers to folks coming back for more ...

 

 

[Onliest Smeg David]

@neptune thanks for that,  & I'm sure there's others as you.

When I first tried I was a 'full hooder' and sprinting MSA bars were not yet required. When MSA changed regs I was not sure about changing rop but having done so I am quite impressed with how civilised a half hood is, a weeks tour of Scotland with much severe weather on return journey proved it.

Try passengering with one to see if you could cope.

First year I borrowed all ppe as I didn't want to commit to expenditure until I knew it was something I wanted to carry on with.

All Westfielders ought to try track days and sprinting as our cars are made for it, although can understand the difficulty of justifying expense.

But it's not too big a job to refit original bar and MSA bars are resaleable. I still have my full hood just in case its required.

[B.RAD]

Surely there's an opportunity for the SSOT to appeal the rule on the rollbars to the MSA? If that is a genuine blocker to entrance to the sport it should be a priority to have something more sensible put in place. Absolutely fair not to allow the single hoop cosmetic bars, but the RAC bars etc seem to have done a great job in protecting their occupants for years. I believe Morgan have their own rules to avoid the need to comply with the ROPS regs. 

[Terry Everall]

Barny....you are right about appealing to the MSA and several clubs and car manufacturers have tried and failed.These included OMS and Jedi single seaters  who had non compliant ROPS and drivers running in the British Sprint Championship. Some manufacturers were okay as their Cages/  Roll over bars had been homolated and the designed material type and sizes accepted. If you can resell what you already have on your cars to replace with a compliant ROPS then the cost is dramatically reduced

[B.RAD]

Understood Terry. 

What about getting the RAC rollbars homologated? This was cost prohibitive to individuals but could be manageable as a club? I think Mark did this for his single seater project so could maybe provide some guidance?

[stephenh]

I don't think you could get the RAC rollover bar homologated now, it would have had to have been when it still complied with the then regulations. And Westfield do now (at last) offer an all welded braced bar which complies with the MSA rules for specialist production cars anyway, I think?

Mark got his rollover protection approved, because it was on a rebuilt historic car, I think, rather than a new build or a "modern" rebuild. So far as I understand it.

[B.RAD]

As long as the rollbar meets the test parameters it doesn't matter when it was made - still think this is a sensible suggestion for the SSOT to investigate to support the club members.

[Mark (smokey mow)]

1 hour ago, stephenh said:

Mark got his rollover protection approved, because it was on a rebuilt historic car, I think, rather than a new build or a "modern" rebuild. So far as I understand it.

Far from it Stephen. The ROPS on my single seater was hommolgated and meets the current MSA ROPS regulations.  The relaxations for historic vehicles are such that I could have legally run with the original 1" diameter unbraced hoop but in my mind that would have been dangerous.  The problem for me then was that because I wanted to improve the safety and therefore Increase the tube diameters the new ROPS would no longer have been period defined and consequently it has to meet the current regulations.  

2 hours ago, BCF said:

Understood Terry. 

What about getting the RAC rollbars homologated? This was cost prohibitive to individuals but could be manageable as a club? I think Mark did this for his single seater project so could maybe provide some guidance?

Happy to help if I can. 

There's only two issues I see with the RAC bar.  The first being that there are at least two different types available, either with fixed or removable backstays and then there are wide and narrow varrient.  Each would need simulations carried out by MIRA and likewise the MSA fee paying for a homologation application (total cost of MIRA and MSA is about £1500 for each). The second problem is the MSA have an aversion to rose joints used in ROPS, this however could be overcome by replacing with a more compliant adjuster but it all adds additional costs.

 

[neptune]

51 minutes ago, Mark (smokey mow) said:

Far from it Stephen. The ROPS on my single seater was hommolgated and meets the current MSA ROPS regulations.  The relaxations for historic vehicles are such that I could have legally run with the original 1" diameter unbraced hoop but in my mind that would have been dangerous.  The problem for me then was that because I wanted to improve the safety and therefore Increase the tube diameters the new ROPS would no longer have been period defined and consequently it has to meet the current regulations.  

Happy to help if I can. 

There's only two issues I see with the RAC bar.  The first being that there are at least two different types available, either with fixed or removable backstays and then there are wide and narrow varrient.  Each would need simulations carried out by MIRA and likewise the MSA fee paying for a homologation application (total cost of MIRA and MSA is about £1500 for each). The second problem is the MSA have an aversion to rose joints used in ROPS, this however could be overcome by replacing with a more compliant adjuster but it all adds additional costs.

 

Please excuse my ignorance but why did the currently approved type of roll bar have to be made so tall and wide ? If the only issue with the RAC bar was rose joints, would it be possible to manufacture an approved bar but with the dimensions of an RAC bar? I would happily buy such a replacement even just for road use. Only 1 homologation fee and I would suspect a relatively large market ?.?

[Dave Eastwood (Gadgetman) - Club Chairman]

There used to be a welded version of the RAC bar, once upon a time. (Not sure if it was originally made by WSC Ltd or not, but there’s quite a few around on older Westfields.)

The other issue with the RAC bar, is that for genuine competition use, it’s not really tall enough. While material spec and joints could be tweaked to suit the new regs, you’d be buying a product that for a significant amount of drivers wasn’t  high enough, should you be unfortunate enough to roll.

So you make it in the recommended height range for most drivers, and then you’re back to square one, the standard weather gear doesn’t fit.

[Mark (smokey mow)]

Absolutely as Dave said ^^^^ for some the height of the RAC bar is fine, but for others with padded seats on runners it's just too low.  

IMO the biggest hurdle to attracting newcommers to the sport is the MSA's regulation changes of the last few years that has added considerable additional expense for those wanting to compete which would be off-putting for the occasional competitor. I know the SSOT had been looking at other alternative option to the MSA such as the Javilin series but I haven't heard the outcome of this research.  @John Williams - WSCC Competition Secretary is there any feedback from the SSOT working group on this?