SNZ rules???? (Read 2,645 times)

[crg86]

I believe the SNZ rule book states that there has to be TWO fast and easy exits from a T.Q. With this rule cars running full containment seats do not comply I would like to see drivers prove me wrong but i can not see how it can be possible. Yet SNZ officials seem to think it is ok to just ignore this. I thought they wanted the cars to be safe? Also cars running a lip on the inside rear of the fire wall. Aero dynamics? you cant say no because why will SNZ not let cars run the same lip on the Right Rear upper panel? Seems there are some rules for some competitors and not others?

[outlawracepaint]

I can get out of my car from two exits easily more than happy to show it to anyone that wants to see it. Last year i did it in front all of the scrutineers as they asked when i showed up with one of the first full containment seats.

At the end of the day having broken my back in a TQ in my opinion without a full containment seat i wouldnt run them simple as that, My opinion and preference only I just wouldnt feel safe enough having run Speedway cars for eleven years now and i would never go back to the Open style seat.

And Aerodynamics wise why not put a piece of plastic down the knurf bars like me and get even more advantage when you turn the car in if you want the advantage

I sit lower in the car also so have less wind resistance

Shane O'Connor TQ 1NZ

[crg86]

Thank you Shane for your reply. I'm not getting at the drivers here at all dont get me wrong. What i am saying is that with SNZ the left hand wont talk to the right hand. You get one official sayung everything is fine but yet then another night you get one saying something is completly wrong there is nothing consistant.

The question im asking here is WHY is this?

[outlawracepaint]

Fair enough no stress What actually happened to make this a debate if i may ask completely out of interest? Do you have a TQ yourself?

Shane

[crg86]

It started from a few rumers i had heard over the past 3 meetings at the springs i have then asked around and found out what is going on from the people involved. I dont currently own a t.q no. But SNZ just needs to be consistent in the way they rule and judge cars as to weather they are "legal". I dont generally listen to rumers hence why i asked the people involved.

[outlawracepaint]

Are you talking about the brad curtain car here im guessing now?

[Abb0]

Would out the left side and out the top not constitute two exits?

Or am I missing something really basic (not being involved with TQs)?

[crg86]

The 51 car is one of the many issues. but i understand there is a report pending on that car as to weather its safe or not? Why would they let him continue to run if they think it is not safe? If they deem a car unsafe should they not be forced to put the car on the trailer and not continue to run? I'm goin to take a wild guess and say that maybe the official that has said " it is unsafe" and is doing the report has something against the driver?

[bill75]

Brads car looked fine to me when it was in my sign shop. I have seen cars that are dangerous but this isn't one of them. In saying that i not 100% up to speed with the TQ rules today. I would be disappointed to find out that its because of personalities. In my opinion SNZ are out of control at the moment and I have made my concerns known to directors and senior officials about this.

[japsuper]

Most likely that little hitler from SNZ technical that was at the Springs on Sat night. I think he had something to say about every car he looked at.

Would help if all classes sat down and made some clear rules............

[crg86]

Thanks Bill. I have also had a good look at Brads car and i to believe that it is far from unsafe. It is a similar design to a J&J sprint car scaled down. So how can it be unsafe. Do SNZ also want to pull every J&J from racing. I think "the little hitler" comment is 100% correct.

[blown]

you have hit thr nail on the head crg86 brads car is a mini jand j and looks awesome but because it is new in the tq ranks somebody in their wisdom has decided it must be wrong and maybe even illegal even though the car has been greensheeted and run at the springs and huntly, snz thought on this is a top rail impact may create a squash effect due to the down rails not being parralel what a load of nonsense go and look at the car and look at the engineering that went into it by past nz sprintcar champ carl wilson and notice all the bracing etc almost identical to a jandj sprinter, this car is considerably safer than any other tq in nz at the moment with more room for the driver cockpit meaning easier entry and exit and theres no way a wheel is going to get stuck or enter the drivers area rather than hassle brad every meeting snz should be looking at the positives of this car and there are many and encourouging others to run this style of chassis, but this is snz after all, besides that many others have given the car the thumbs up and give brad and carl their encourgment, including tim clark, carl drever, etc hopefully this will be resolved very shortly and comense sense will prevail

[animal]

Anyone got a pic of Brad's car. Sounds like a cool design.

[Greg 84r]

The little hitler just goes by whats in the rule book, doesnt matter who you are. I race in another class and had to replace my head plates and hip plates with only 3 weeks until first meeting...
Little hitler jnr

[crg86]

Little hitler goes by the rule book my arse. if he thinks brad's care is unsafe why did he let him stay racing? because he doesn't like change thats all. brads car is similar to a jand j in the design of the inverted V. If "little hitler" thinks its unsafe i'd like to see him try ban all jand j sprints cars aswell. go on put his money where his mouth is. brads car is 100% to the rule book and is infact safer than any other t.q out there. go do a crush test and you will see.

[blown]

animal for car specs ,photos,etc try brads web site www.redstoneracing.webs.com

[dogman]

this man is doing a job for free, if you do not like his rulings you can via your rep ask for a stewards ruling or you can go to the tech committite via speedway NZ to ask for a ruling. name calling or sore losers do nothing for this sport
respect the man you do not have to like him, and yes he made a ruling against my draughters carbut did I bag him no!
live for the sport

[bikeboy]

Dec 3, 2009 7:16:07 GMT 12 dogman said:

this man is doing a job for free, if you do not like his rulings you can via your rep ask for a stewards ruling or you can go to the tech committite via speedway NZ to ask for a ruling. name calling or sore losers do nothing for this sport
respect the man you do not have to like him, and yes he made a ruling against my draughters carbut did I bag him no!
live for the sport

well said,

the car is outside the current spec, he has let it run but is asking for further clarifaction from above, i do not see the problem here?, did you want him to ban the car from running if he thinks its outside the rules?, because in my opinion that would be worse,

rules will always be interpreted in different ways by different people, he has not exactly been heavy handed in applying the rules because the car is still running is it not?

[nomad]

Dec 3, 2009 8:43:44 GMT 12 bikeboy said:

the car is outside the current spec, he has let it run but is asking for further clarifaction from above, i do not see the problem here?, did you want him to ban the car from running if he thinks its outside the rules?, because in my opinion that would be worse,

rules will always be interpreted in different ways by different people, he has not exactly been heavy handed in applying the rules because the car is still running is it not?

You have hit the nail square on the head and driven it home with the one shot.

The rulebook via interpretation is an ever evolving beast and long may evolution be championed.

If interpretation is going to be the cornerstone of chassis,engine or running gear development,surely the most prudent path to follow is one which involves the rulemakers from the point of conception?.

Every season sees reruns of previous soap operas,with the vast majority of episodes sharing the same plot....interpretation of the rules,expectation of complience being met with the rulebook,SNZ and various officials getting jumped on for doing their jobs and last but not least plenty of sour grapes getting sucked.

[mod46c]

Dec 3, 2009 9:24:22 GMT 12 nomad said:

The rulebook via interpretation is an ever evolving beast and long may evolution be championed.

The constant interpretation and re-interpretation of the SNZ rule book is a symptom of a poorly written rule book and nothing else.
A well written rule book that does require constant interpretation will not prevent evolution of race car design cf NASCAR, F1, V8 supercars etc.