Free Race Seats at the $2000 Challenge?

Before we start: This is not a wide-ranging thread all about the $2000 Challenge rules. This is a thread about one specific exemption. I'm not willing to drastically change the rules of the event at this point.

Background: Andrew Nelson had a bad crash at Sick Week, and some of his injuries might have been prevented by a better race seat. This might be a good cautionary tale:

https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/articles/the-lessons-learned-from-andrew-nelsons-crash/

So, should SFI- or FIA-approved race seats be budget exempt at the $2000 Challenge? I see minimal performance advantages and huge safety upsides. And, unlike a cage where steel can be found cheap from all sorts of places, it's fairly rare to get a great deal on an in-date seat that fits you properly. Harnesses are already budget exempt, and a harness + stock seat has the same performance improvement with none of the safety of an aftermarket seat.

Anybody have strong objections to free race seats at the event? 

I will just reiterate my minority opinion that I disfavor pretty much all budget exemptions and this one is no different.

I am all for safety not counting against budget. I am even more supporting of WELL ENGINEERED safety not counting against budget. 

A proper seat with proper harnesses attached to the vehicle in the proper manner? Yes. 

A wishy washy install of a seat and in date harness with the ability to make the driver 100% more dead? Nope, ain't supporting that bullslip.

I don't wanna be a "this is a slippery slope" guy here, but this is kind of a slippery slope.

Quasi hit the nail on the head, IMHO.  The seat is budget exempt the harness is budget exempt, but those alone are not the keys to a well mounted and safe seat.

Will the harness bar be exempt?  Mounting hardware? Other items?

I always like the idea of more safe.  I think it'll be difficult to implement this though.

Parts, even exempt ones, are only as gooder as the installation. When/how do we start policing proper execution in these builds?

Exemptions muddy the budget. I'm not interested in this while the request for trade/recoup clarification remains open.

Minimal performance advantages?

I'm not sure I can quickly get onboard with this idea of a seat is just safety. It allows the driver to drive better. Plain and simple. I think there would also be a real concour advantage as a nice looking seat makes any car feel that much more well assembled.

Some questions to consider: Is it going to be the difference between someone attending the event and not attending (both ways)? Is a seat that costs more than the entire car going to be the difference between 2 finishing positions?

Also:

https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/project-cars/2004-Chevrolet-corvette-z06/outfitting-interior-performance-project-chevrolet/

1. its a performance improvement

2. its a concours improvement

3. i am also against budget exemptions

Echoing the sentiment that free parts will not make Challenge cars safer, it depends on how it's built.

I am a casual challenge competitor and I wouldn't mind swapping a fixed bucket out of my autocross car for the event.  I think it is a pretty significant performance advantage in the autocross.

I don't think it is as much of a performance advantage on the drag strip.  There is more risk there and a properly installed seat makes things safer.  We are running cars with marginal safety on the wrong tires in misty conditions at dusk.  How about a middle ground where you are allowed to swap the seat for the 1/4 mile passes but not autocross?

 I think pushing the envelope of speed for 2 grand needs to take these things into account on all fronts in the budget, and allowing another budget exemption allows the $ spent on a seat to go elsewhere - like going even faster - and there really is a cap on how fast you can go safely and cheaply. Another exemption is another way to take validity away from the event and potentially create a more harmful situation if someone with less experience and knowledge of straight line speed decides to take their now exempt $50 seat budget and throw a 25 year old flea market nitrous kit on top of their turbo LS and launches a cylinder head into the stands because they're chasing some mythical number that really only matters to 10 people.

Also with gumby on the "we asked a question and have had no clarity so why are we just moved on to seats" point. 

What is the point of the event?  Is it to show that it is possible to spend $2,000 or less to have a car with which you can compete in entry-level motorsports?  If that's the thesis statement, then every single item that is "budget exempt" disproves the thesis.  Sure, safety is important.  But then we should require a full containment seat, cage, HANS device, fire suppression system, and...  oh wait.  we're already way over $2,000.  And we haven't bought a car to put all that stuff in yet.

I'm all for requiring things like seats, cages, etc. if you're going to run under a certain ET at the drag strip because that is dangerous.  But part of building a car that can go that fast is building it safely so those things should be required to be present in both the car and the budget.  If you can't make a 10 second car work with the required safety gear in a $2,000 budget, then the answer is that you can't build a 10 second car for $2,000. 

Every single time I tell anyone about the Challenge for the first time, the response is always that it's crazy to think you can build a car for $2,000.  The more ways that you can use accounting tricks to make a $4,000 car into a $2,000 car, the more that response is absolutely correct.

I'm in the no exemptions gang also.  If you want to make the Challenge safer then make tech inspection a real inspection.  Seems ever other year we hear or see something that shouldn't have been done and it got by.  We've been asking for this for way to long and it keeps getting ignored.

Stampie said:

I'm in the no exemptions gang also.  If you want to make the Challenge safer than make tech inspection a real inspection.  Seems ever other year we hear or see something that shouldn't have been done and it got by.  We've been asking for this for way to long and it keeps getting ignored.

Also, yeah this.

Patrick said:

Also with gumby on the "we asked a question and have had no clarity so why are we just moved on to seats" point. 

Wait, what? What's the question?

And points taken on the seat exemptions. 

FWIW, I had a long chat with the track's tech staff after this year's event, and they were somewhat surprised I wanted them to enforce their rules without exception. "We'd end up putting half the cars on trailers."

I told them to do it in 2024. 

Tom Suddard said:

And points taken on the seat exemptions. 

FWIW, I had a long chat with the track's tech staff after this year's event, and they were somewhat surprised I wanted them to enforce their rules without exception. "We'd end up putting half the cars on trailers."

I told them to do it in 2024. 

Make sure we have guidelines on what they are looking for, then it's completely on us.

:shrug:

Yep. Make sure you bring your fireproof jackets, steel valve stems and driveshaft loops.

Tom Suddard said:

Patrick said:

Also with gumby on the "we asked a question and have had no clarity so why are we just moved on to seats" point. 

Wait, what? What's the question?

in this thread:

https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/2000-challenge/town-hall-rule-proposals/253863/page1/

there are several variants of the "please clarify individual versus total recoup limits" question:  I posted on 5/30, Gumby posted on 5/31, Stampie and Patrick posted on 6/2, then there was input from maschinenbau and Mr Joshua and SVreX but no answer yet from GRM.

Answered. Sorry about that! In cases like that where I totally miss a thread, feel free to email me. 

Tom Suddard said:

And points taken on the seat exemptions. 

FWIW, I had a long chat with the track's tech staff after this year's event, and they were somewhat surprised I wanted them to enforce their rules without exception. "We'd end up putting half the cars on trailers."

I told them to do it in 2024. 

Glad to hear. I've been wanting this from my first year, after seeing other cars not even skirt stuff but ignore it completely. You want slicks? Have your ducks in a row. 
 

some people and their lack of safety need a come to Jesus moment, and if it's getting sent back to the trailer so be it

In reply to Mr_Asa :

I concur.  

From what I’ve experienced, passing tech at the $2000 Challenge is actually more thorough than any Test-n-Tune or Friday Night Madness that I've been to at GVRW.  I've seen mud trucks on 37's going down the track with crap floating around in the bed!   They don't look to hard unless you show up in what looks to be a sub 10 second car. If there are any “surprise” rules that anyone is aware of that are not stated on the $2000 Challenge official webpage, it would be nice to expose and elaborate on them in preparation for the event.  Getting surprised at tech is a real stressor because it's a super hectic time at the challenge.

So far I see “… fireproof jackets, steel valve stems and driveshaft loops “

Fireproof Jackets: Required for drivers in cars running 11.49 or quicker meeting SFI spec. 3.2A/1; Drivers in cars running 9.99 and quicker must have jackets and pants, meeting SFI spec. 3.2A/5.

Steel Valve Stems: Required on all cars going 11.99 or faster

Driveshaft Loops: Required on cars going 11.49 or quicker on DOT’s OR cars running quicker than 13.99 on drag slicks (non DOT)

What else am I missing … school me some NHRA rules, I’d rather not have any surprises on game day!

This may be a weird point....

Now that cars over 2k$ can enter and compete, does it make sense to close up some of the budget exemptions?

If you can't or don't want to keep it in budget, don't.  Still come out and run.

In reply to rich911s :

You really need to scour the NHRA rule book if you do major , or even some minor modifications to a car. One example....If you modify the stock floor there is a requirement to have a minimum of 2x2 rails down each side of the chassis. Since my build has none of the stock floor remaining, I had to incorporate those rails into the chassis construction. Without the drag strip requirements I almost certainly would have put 1.75" diameter tubing in there per normal road racing practice. I'd be pissed if I got put on the trailer by picking the wrong size tubing. Go through the rule book looking for requirements for the ET and trap speeds you think you'll  be capable of. Roll bar/cage rules are an obvious one to look at, and they are more stringent for convertibles. Even relocating a battery gets you into requiring a safety switch on the back of the car. If they get rigid with the rules there will be disappointed competitors.