Proposed Grassroots Motorsports $2014 Challenge Rules

SVreX wrote: What I heard overwhelmingly at the town meeting was a perspective that said, "If it's on the car, it's in the budget".

We heard that, too. So, we're discussing it and will present final rules soon.

Scca also requires dot legal tires in every class don't they?

yamaha wrote: Scca also requires dot legal tires in every class don't they?

Don't believe so.

I don't think some of you are understanding the complexity of the game.

The tires really don't mean very much, unless you are a top 3 finisher.

If you accept the likelihood that you are not a top 3 finisher (like I have- it is mathematically impossible, even though I finished 7th overall this year), there is no reason to build an unsafe car, or spend a grand on tires.

If you ARE a top 3 finisher, then there is also no excuse for you to build an unsafe car.

Therefore, no excuses. Don't build unsafe cars.

I don't really have a problem with free tires.

What i do have a problem with is how silly this looks when put up against Spirit of the Competition.

"If it's on the car, it's in the budget! That includes safety items!"

But.... let's have some exempt $1000+ tires.

I realize that there's been some sentiments previously that the event isn't truly about $20xx cars anymore. Well, yeah... look at the recoupment rules. Look at the changes that went on with the rollover protection rules. Then the Kumho rule came about and people gnashed their teeth. There was a thread longer than this one full of intense arguments and the reigning sentiment was that the "Kumho rule" was awful and went against the Spirit of the Competition. BUT, it was ok in the end, because Kumho was/is a sponsor and they SHOULD get some sort of potential kickback for sponsoring such an awesome event.

But what has this helped exactly, in terms of getting back to what the competition should be about? I realize that my main beef with the rules is something that really matters the least (rollbar), brakes aren't really a huge deal in terms of budget hit, though possibly the biggest deal when it comes to safety. If you can't get decent brakes on a car for well under $100, then you probably picked the wrong car.

But the tires. Now that it's not just Kumho anymore, now there's REALLY nothing about the rule that goes with the original intent of the competition. I guess i'm just really not understanding letting performance modifications be exempt before safety modifications. (Yes, i know there's some some safety exemptions)

I know that used tires are a nightmare to police, but are we to understand that the same overwhelming majority referenced at the meetings this year that wanted the "On the car, in the budget" brought back ALSO said "Let's have free tires!" That sounds rather unlikely.

I'm just saying it's some really weird rule changes to be brought about after the previous gnashing and sentiments of "The Challenge has changed from the original $1500, for the worse."

Either way, i'm in for $2014 since it sounds like i've already paid my entry. I'll be on street tires, and i won't have any brake monies in my budget, since i bought the car with working OEM brakes in 2009, and it has working OEM brakes now.

Then i'm probably out from then on, since the roll bar will take the car over budget. Too bad. I was excited about trying to break the "most appearances by one car" record.

SCCA allows NON-DOT approved Slicks in Mod and Prepared classes. These classes have varying rules depending on vehicle modifications however

ALL MOD cars have to have a Rollbar; All Open MOD cars have to have a Cage ALL OPEN Prepared cars have to have a Rollbar

This does not depend on tires fitted to the vehicle. If you have removed your CAT, gutted the interior, or modified the car in a way that does not go to Stock/Street, Street Touring, Street Prepared, or Street Mod you will be either in Prepared or Mod. A majority of challenge cars I've seen coverage of would be SCCA Mod class autox cars.

Obviously this Gnashing of my Teeth only applies if the Challenge Autox is going to be ran under Strict SCCA Insurance requiring SCCA classing for Insurance Liability purposes. To my knowledge SCCA does not allow cars prepared in excess of there allowed modifications to run (Although that is difficult to achieve because Amod exists which has little to no rules).

This is basically why I have been a proponent of suggesting that All challenge cars must be prepared to some sanctioning bodies rules as the safety/liability has already been figured out by someone else and that gives the cars a legitimate place to play in the future.

In reply to SVreX:

The drag portion would kill me.....and probably the concors(because racecar) But, the car is built as an autox car. I will still put tires in the budget(because I believe its wrong), but I sure as hell won't put the "tire warmer" design I just drew up to get worn r6's to stick for autox in the budget.

For those who weren't at the challenge, there was a lot of discussion with a lot of challengers on these topics during the town hall meeting this year. This proposed rule set was certainly not created in a vacuum! The people in the discussion were well versed in the pros and cons. There is no such thing as the perfect conditions for all interests here, so of course there are some compromises. So far, there hasn't been a single proposal in this thread of pros/cons that wasn't already discussed in that meeting.

Obviously, additional feedback is helpful in case something WAS missed. With that said, I want to make sure those of you that may be getting panties in a bunch or getting the safety police on the phone understand that these types of discussions about the merits of tires, brakes, roll bars, etc. were hashed over and general concensus was measured. The GRM crew were literally taking notes. Like I said, I was really pleased with the open discussion and folks were pretty open minded to simple solutions. The main goal of the new rules is to keep it simple!

Bryce's final thoughts: You've got to be in it to win it. Nobody likes to get hurt. Rulebooks are boring. Cheaters never prosper. This is an editorial event.

Bryce

my only input is a pitch for locosts to be legal. They literally wrote the book on cheap race cars around these.

Swank Force One wrote: But the tires. Now that it's not just Kumho anymore, now there's REALLY nothing about the rule that goes with the original intent of the competition. I guess i'm just really not understanding letting performance modifications be exempt before safety modifications.

i was not picking up what you were laying down until you laid it down that way. now i get it, and i pretty much agree. i am definitely in the "if it's on the car, it's in the budget" camp.

Bryce is correct, there was a ton of discussion before coming up with these rules--probably more than all other years combined. First off, thanks again for the feedback.

Okay, why the open tire rule? We often hear a bit of grumbling about tires--mainly that someone's running fresher tires than they're letting on. So we entered the town hall meeting with an idea for a new tire rule and discussed it with those there--for quite a while, in fact.

In the end, making tires open was voted upon as the simplest/easiest answer. It also theoretically prevents people from running on crap tires, which is also a major safety concern. Also, no one could come up with a better answer.

oldtin wrote: my only input is a pitch for locosts to be legal. They literally wrote the book on cheap race cars around these.

I don't see where we specifically said that locosts were not legal.

The point here is to build race cars for $2014. Not build a $6000 dollar car that can fit in an imaginary budget because all the required safety equipment is considered free. This isn't LeMons. Want to run 11.49 on the strip? Better budget that cage. Want to run a SM level of prep for the auto-x? Better budget that roll cage. If I was building a race car to go race anywhere else that cost would be inclusive. To me the challenge is an engineering wait for it..... challenge. It ain't s'posed to be easy.

I disagreed with the tire rule, and said that there should be a limit on what tires were exempt (no race tires for free). The consensus was that since good lightly used tires may be easier for some to get rather than others, it would be more trouble than it was worth to police it. Same as the sales tax and registration rule, some parts of the country are cheaper than others, and it puts some at a disadvantage to consider those fees.

Swank Force One wrote: ........ I realize that my main beef with the rules is something that really matters the least (rollbar), brakes aren't really a huge deal in terms of budget hit, though possibly the biggest deal when it comes to safety. If you can't get decent brakes on a car for well under $100, then you probably picked the wrong car............

I like the old derelict cars being brought back to life. OEM parts being replaced so that an old MG or Volvo 122 or Spitfire or other allows them to be saved and under budget, and potentially competitive. The older cars have more expensive brake parts. If included in the budget, do we loose some of these from being loved back life. The sensible cars are the BWMs and Chrysler Turbo cars with modern brakes and suspension geometry, and brake lines that don't need replaced and calipers that cost $13. But many of us enjoy the saving of the otherwise senseless choices for a base car.

I need more popcorn...

I enjoy seeing the old cars being brought back to life, too, but where do we draw the line? Just brake parts? What about other expensive items? Windshields? Clutches? Gear sets?

Yes, an interesting subject. We're about to eat dinner. Maybe popcorn later.

David S. Wallens wrote: I enjoy seeing the old cars being brought back to life, too, but where do we draw the line? Just brake parts? What about other expensive items? Windshields? Clutches? Gear sets? Yes, an interesting subject. We're about to eat dinner. Maybe popcorn later.

Just the brake parts. You can go thru my past budgets and find ball joints and steering parts being replaced. A failure of these parts has a relatively small area of impact. I replaced them to be safer. A brake failure means the potential area of risk is larger.

In reply to wheels777:

Agreed. I'm not saying that bolting up corvette brake stuff to your beater should be included......just OEM for the particular vehicle.

yamaha wrote: In reply to wheels777: Agreed. I'm not saying that bolting up corvette brake stuff to your beater should be included......just OEM for the particular vehicle.

"On the car, in the $2014 budget + 4 tires" or "Limited safety items + On the car, in the $2014 budget + 4 tires" will be a tough decision for the GRM staff. I like both options.....but prefer the addition of the limited safety items. What brings in the most competitors? What does the readership want to read about?

EDIT: adding bold face to clarify what I already said.

David S. Wallens wrote:

oldtin wrote: my only input is a pitch for locosts to be legal. They literally wrote the book on cheap race cars around these.

I don't see where we specifically said that locosts were not legal.

It doesn't affect me either way since I'm over budget [..and thus forced into exhibition class] but I suspect that some people are not aware that the "Specials" class was ALREADY exhibition only.

proposed $2014 rules

Eligible Vehicles: Any four-wheeled, production-based vehicle that was originally sold as a passenger vehicle is allowed. (You know what this means.) Vehicles that don’t fit this category or exceed budget may be run for exhibition only.

$2013

Only production-based passenger cars are allowed in the regular competition. All locosts, race cars, kit cars, Zambonis and the like are allowed only in the Special class (See Rule No. 28)..................................A Special class for locosts/race cars/kit cars/etc. will be run for exhibition only. It will be scored independently from the rest of the competitors. The Special-class competitors will not be eligible for trophies, unless one of them explodes spectacularly. Then we may reconsider. Special-class cars must also meet the classification requirements for a recognized autocross class (for example: SCCA’s A Modified). These cars must meet all Challenge budget rules and safety regulations with the following exceptions: a) The cars do not have to be roadworthy. Headlights, windshields and horns are not required. b) Non-DOT approved racing slicks are allowed.

See, not much difference

Here's my position on tires...

Never really cared for the Kumho rule. But, I could see why it became part of the game...

The new rule INCREASES the creativity. And to that extent, I say bravo.

So...

• If your car wears tires in a size that Kumho does not make, you are not penalized.

• If you want to build a car that emphasizes drag racing, you can choose to buy drag tires.

• If you are driving a FWD car, you can choose a pair of sticky AutoX tires, and a pair of drag tires, without being limited to Kumhos, and roll used tires on the rear.

• If you think there is going to be a downpour, you can bring 4 great rain tires and whoop everyone.

HOWEVER, you CAN'T have 4 new autoX tires AND 4 new drag tires.

I also recognize there is a safety issue with exceptionally sticky tires. Let's be honest, we are cheapazzes. The MUCH larger safety risk is the opposite extreme- the MAJORITY of the field wearing crappy worn out tires.

So, since the Kumho rule is not going away, I like this as a creative compromise, and thinks it fixes many more safety problems than it creates.

And yeah, that means they are not $20XX. Oh well.

In reply to wheels777:

I would like to think the readership wouldn't want to hear about several single purpose cars rolling on race rubber for this one.....you know, since the UTCC is pretty much that.

Put all tires in the budget, that's a bit more "In the spirit of the event".

yamaha wrote: In reply to wheels777: I would like to think the readership wouldn't want to hear about several single purpose cars rolling on race rubber for this one.....you know, since the UTCC is pretty much that. Put all tires in the budget, that's a bit more "In the spirit of the event".

The tire conversation is a dead topic. They don't count.

wheels777 wrote:

yamaha wrote: In reply to wheels777: I would like to think the readership wouldn't want to hear about several single purpose cars rolling on race rubber for this one.....you know, since the UTCC is pretty much that. Put all tires in the budget, that's a bit more "In the spirit of the event".

The tire conversation is a dead topic. They don't count.

Roughly 100 competitors and their teams were in the mix for the conversation at $2013, including most of the recent winners.

Nobody could come up with a better solution at the meeting, and to date I have not heard of any better suggestions.

I was also in the camp for "On the car, In the budget" however the tire ruling is the simpler option for the GRM staff and competitors. A more complex ruling is not a better ruling, it is just more difficult to police.

The tires ruling is a done deal IMHO

I do see a potential area for confusion: which rules are we really held to? GRM's rules are all on one page but they defer to the sanctioning bodies that hold the events for more details. In the past that meant no restrictions for autocross because the club hosting the autocross didn't have an inspection. You were supposedly going to have to meet NHRA rules because the NHRA staff held the inspection but the inspection was a cursory "Safety inspection" that had no tie in to the NHRA rule book. I figured this out by entering multiple times so I worked within the real restrictions. Now $2014 brings a new location and new inspections so I am back to being confused and worried.

Is it as simple as having to pass their inspection because the insurance is through their sanctioning body? Therefore their inspection goes no matter what method they follow loose or strict?

I applaud the new simpler rules. I am in the camp that feels new OEM brake parts should still be exempt. Nothing else. I agree with the open tire rule but can see the point about it really raising the actual cost of the car. My suggestion would be to just adopt the LeMons tire rules. We are allowing them in anyway. That means street tires with a 180 tread life. Buy what you want, use what you want. The gap between the haves and have nots will be smaller. Speeds will be closer between the 14,000 hp Lambos and 65 hp Yugos. The race rubber v. roll bar stuff becomes a mute point. (I say this and I just purchased a new set of V710s for this year's Challenge...and then couldn't go!)