2010 Transam Rules (View original topic)
BaileyOFD
Posted 15 January 2010 - 01:53 PM
http://www.scca.com/...aspx?content=69
It will be interesting to see how many current GT1/TA racecars will meet the left side doorbar requirement. It calls for minimum dimensions of 1.50 inch X 0.083 inch in wall thickness....which does not meet the GT1 doorbar requirement for tube diameter.
One good thing...any Goodyear Tire can be used....not just one Goodyear tire.
The floorpan behind the rear wheels is to be angled upwards...includes the bottom of the fuel cell.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
prt1983
Posted 15 January 2010 - 07:35 PM
Didn't I read that when Trans-Am was brought back, it would follow GT-1 rules,
now with the drivers right side net and the rollbars, am I wrong in thinking that it seems SCCA doesn't want Gt-1 guys coming into Trans-Am with their cars now?
mitch
a timmons
Posted 17 January 2010 - 04:59 PM
5.3.8.14.3: The fuel cell bottom and/or floor behind the rear wheel opening shall be flat, angled upwards, and shall follow, but not exceed, the line of the rear fender bottom.
The door bars rule are the same that were enacted in 2009.
RH side nets were required in 2009.
BaileyOFD
Posted 17 January 2010 - 08:01 PM
It's not a GT1 friendly rule...anyway,TransAm is slowly getting away from GT1 compliant cars.
I wonder how many GT1/TransAm cars have the fuel cell mounted below the rear fender bottom.... (not exceed).
FlyingWrench 3GT1
Posted 18 January 2010 - 05:15 PM
BaileyOFD
Posted 18 January 2010 - 05:59 PM
I've said enough about the doorbar requirement...I'm sure many cars are constructed the way the rule is written and I'm sure many cars are not. As we speak, a prominent chassis builder is working with SCCA Pro concerning the door bar requirement.
FlyingWrench 3GT1
Posted 18 January 2010 - 07:25 PM
prt1983
Posted 18 January 2010 - 09:50 PM
I was at the trans-am and gt-1 runoff races at R.A., talking with a guy from a trans-am team, we were both somewhat surprise that a couple of GT-1 guys that generally run both, didn't show for the trans-am race but ran the gt-1 runoff race.
So it just got me thinking if SCCA is kinda changing the rules enough to separate the difference, a pro division and a "minor league" one. I agree with what you guys have said, if the rules for GT-1 were the standard, there would be alot of races with a min. of 20 cars or maybe even 25 cars, more entry money to help pay for the track and the race.
I just started to see more differences than I thought was talked about when trans-am came back, been a scca member since '83' and have seen scca pull some b.s. stuff on racers. But nothing that money can't take care of, right guys.
mitch
BaileyOFD
Posted 18 January 2010 - 09:58 PM
dougmoul
Posted 26 January 2010 - 10:19 AM
Now let's examine this; We race on tracks with large runouts, sand traps, tire walls in 2880# cars with very low CG's and soft front ends at something under 200 mph. We have some engineers. We have a few traveling teams. We are concerned with driver safety. I have not heard of any intrusions into the drivers compartment that precipitated this change. The modern chassis I have seen have very nicely made Nascar style door bars and my HRP chassis came with a plate bolted to the outside to further resist intrusion. We race on 2.5 mile tracks (or so) with 25 cars (or so) spread out on that course. Big wrecks are relatively rare.
NASCAR puts 40 cars that weigh 3200# with hard fronts, on a 1 mile oval with concrete walls all around, go just as fast, wreck all the time, are just as concerned with driver safety, have tons of traveling teams, have gobs of engineers, and yet, somehow, miraculously, also don't have intrusions into the drivers compartment, in spite of the fact the cars don't have any extra side bars. WOW! They must be really good!
The upper horizontal side bar is too close to the drivers' shoulder and WILL cause driver injury. The diagonal side bar can be too close to the drivers elbow and MAY cause driver injury.
To BaileyOFD--do the modifieds have extra side bars?
Kind of makes you go WTF?
BaileyOFD
Posted 26 January 2010 - 06:41 PM
It is painfully obvious there is "someone" making the TransAm rules that has no idea about GT1 construction methods. The first set of TransAm rules in 2009 were tossed in the garbage because they were so far away from GT1 construction methods.....I believe the same "someone" has had his hand in the 2010 rules.
I expect the doorbar rule will be changed...if not now, it will be after numberous TransAm entries are found to be non-compliant at tech.
parkeracing
Posted 27 January 2010 - 06:30 AM
BaileyOFD
Posted 27 January 2010 - 09:11 AM
parkeracing
Posted 27 January 2010 - 10:43 PM
BaileyOFD, on Jan 27 2010, 02:11 PM, said:
Will you be running during Speedweeks while all the snowbirds are in town?
BaileyOFD
Posted 27 January 2010 - 11:28 PM
parkeracing, on Jan 28 2010, 04:43 AM, said:
BaileyOFD, on Jan 27 2010, 02:11 PM, said:
Will you be running during Speedweeks while all the snowbirds are in town?
No speedweeks this year, I am having an engine built and it will not be ready...plus I will need some seat time before going to the "big shows".
ToddBenne
Posted 29 January 2010 - 11:11 AM
Now, the fretful door bars....it has been the rule for chassis and side intrusion requirements for several years in T-A. However, I do not recall anyone being sent home at any time for not having them. I just referenced the 2003, 2004, 2005 T-A rule book. Bear in mind, the type of door bars required varied depending on chassis build date of either 'before' or 'after' 2003. For reference see page 52, 9.13.4 Side Protection of the 2005 Trans-Am series rule book.
BaileyOFD
Posted 29 January 2010 - 11:13 PM
So TransAm has a rule it will not enforce.......and has not enforced...."interesting" to say the least.
They should make the three Nascar style door bars a requirement, and the additional bars " recommended".
prt1983
Posted 30 January 2010 - 08:43 PM
I didn't know that the roll bars rules have been in the rule book for a couple of years, yet not looked at seriously, you guys made excellant points, no one has had a intrusion into the drivers side, not even nascar. I don't have a plate on the inside of mine, I also thought that the a top horiz. bar might be in the way, here's what SCCA needs to consider, they are stating in having 3 vertical bars and 3 horizontal bars, mine has 2 vertical bars and 4 horizontal bars, who is to say that is not just as strong or maybe stronger.
I think they should have the GT-1 cars weigh the same as Trans-am cars, nascar style door bars required, no right side drivers net for Trans-Am cars and quit the stupid rule of racing on the tire one qualifies on, having to mark them up. Trans-Am and Gt-1 cars are not going to be going thru tires like nascar.
Then watch the fields grow and have a lot more racing.
Like to see some input here from some Trans-Am guys.
mitch
ToddBenne
Posted 31 January 2010 - 11:15 AM
As to the rule of qualify and race on the same tires, it was done as a cost measure as well as to try and put some tire management in the hands of the drivers. Realistically though, be it the BFG or GY, unless you have a bad set up or drive erratically, the tires seem to go the distance. So, I have no issue with the tire rule as it is now.
Qualifying tires, right side nets....don't equate to lower entries. Travel cost, part time volunteer crews with limited vacation days and such, schedule conflicts with SCCA Nationals, and the sense I get from a lot of SCCA Club racers that the Run-offs far out weigh running on potentially the same tracks in a Pro event and maybe earn some money and better media coverage, is more important. It has always been this way. The fields for a T-A race have not been in the last ten years or so heavily populated with Club guys entering. It has always been a sprinkling of of GT1 cars.
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)