New rule proposal to add weight!
#2
I'm in....
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Let me guess, the 50lbs comes in the form of a passenger seat? On the other hand, I've spent the past two weeks in Maine pigging out. Maybe I better vote yes.
#5
I'll vote yes since I put it forward. My guess is that a large majority of the field races heavy.
Most seem to have some combo if not all of the following: coolshirt box, plumbed fire system, accusump, transmission cooler, stock wiring harness, typical seat, stock glass windshield etc...light cars and drivers can ballast or fuel more. Some won't run a coolshirt to save weight, we drive better, more comfortably, if not more safely in the hotter races with a coolshirt. It's just about a requirement in TX.
Those who want to protect their motors, trans, and themselves run all the gear with the added weight, the class has added most of this stuff since it's formation. I think it'll close up the weight disparity in the class...closer racing? who knows. Interested to see the weight logs from a big field.
But my guess is then some won't resort to running Cayman engine covers (plastic), pulling seals, lexan, CrMo cages, door hold opens, $$/time harness weight removal, 10# tops and use OEM etc. Or put in a rally ready cage with lots of tubing with less penalty. Of course, Clydesdale class drivers will benefit.
Of course we all want a light car, but in the end we're racing each other, not E cars.
I also put in the roof net option over arm restraints. Just fewer pieces of strap to deal with in a cockpit.
Most seem to have some combo if not all of the following: coolshirt box, plumbed fire system, accusump, transmission cooler, stock wiring harness, typical seat, stock glass windshield etc...light cars and drivers can ballast or fuel more. Some won't run a coolshirt to save weight, we drive better, more comfortably, if not more safely in the hotter races with a coolshirt. It's just about a requirement in TX.
Those who want to protect their motors, trans, and themselves run all the gear with the added weight, the class has added most of this stuff since it's formation. I think it'll close up the weight disparity in the class...closer racing? who knows. Interested to see the weight logs from a big field.
But my guess is then some won't resort to running Cayman engine covers (plastic), pulling seals, lexan, CrMo cages, door hold opens, $$/time harness weight removal, 10# tops and use OEM etc. Or put in a rally ready cage with lots of tubing with less penalty. Of course, Clydesdale class drivers will benefit.
Of course we all want a light car, but in the end we're racing each other, not E cars.
I also put in the roof net option over arm restraints. Just fewer pieces of strap to deal with in a cockpit.
Last edited by consolidated; 08-22-2014 at 11:06 PM.
#7
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: SF Bay Area, California
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
7 Posts
I'm opposed to this change. I think it is reasonable for the class weight target to be set for a 200 lb driver. At that weight, 2650 lb can reasonably be achieved, with room to spare, without resorting to installing a lexan windshield or an expensive light weight seat. I weigh 190 lbs, have a fire system, cool suit and Accusump, and if I don't finish the race with at least 3 gallons of fuel in the tank and my Cool suit completely full, I will be under weight. Many SPBs without an Accusump have to run with 25+ lbs of ballast at the current limit.
I have seen a lot of cars that have not had allowed weight reduction measures implemented that can be done with a reasonable investment of the owner's time (e.g., secondary air injection removal, door lightening, wire harness lightening, dash trimming, sound deadening removal, bumper removal, etc.).
Rather than raise the weight limit to make it easier for the bigger drivers to get down to weight, I'd favor allowing more weight reduction measures (windshield wiper mechanism removal, full dash removal or at least more aggressive trimming, perhaps allow after market body panels).
I have seen a lot of cars that have not had allowed weight reduction measures implemented that can be done with a reasonable investment of the owner's time (e.g., secondary air injection removal, door lightening, wire harness lightening, dash trimming, sound deadening removal, bumper removal, etc.).
Rather than raise the weight limit to make it easier for the bigger drivers to get down to weight, I'd favor allowing more weight reduction measures (windshield wiper mechanism removal, full dash removal or at least more aggressive trimming, perhaps allow after market body panels).
Trending Topics
#9
Instructor
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I voted no.
I weigh 215 and have an oversize cage, cool shirt system, camera, etc. A coolshirt is almost mandatory here in SoCal during the summer also, so I understand where you're coming from.
However, with all of that being said, I did not have to resort to any sort of high tech expensive parts to get down to min class weight.
Just follow the rules and do what everyone else has done and your car should be at the same weight, right?
I weigh 215 and have an oversize cage, cool shirt system, camera, etc. A coolshirt is almost mandatory here in SoCal during the summer also, so I understand where you're coming from.
However, with all of that being said, I did not have to resort to any sort of high tech expensive parts to get down to min class weight.
Just follow the rules and do what everyone else has done and your car should be at the same weight, right?
#10
Perfect Angel
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Not sure why those who have optimized their cars for the class weight today should get screwed because new builds are finding it difficult to lose the weight.