|
|
Post by chris13w on Jan 9, 2015 20:11:50 GMT 12
Seen it happen many times myself , but I remain optimistic. lol Seriously though given who the driver is and what it is he has built I would expect SNZ has gone out of it's way to make sure the car is all good by now. Call it good PR to avoid the bad PR that could result from the public not getting to see the car run at the Champs. Proactive versus Reactive. There's that bloody optimism again. a green sheet is more of a saftey check, rather than a check for legality, i know they don't measure the cars, which they will do at the NZ champs, i have seen cars having to be modifed at the track to meet the measurements that were in thier log book, its up to the driver to make sure his car is legal, and the local green sheeter is not always the best judge of that, A few years ago there was a Honda CRX running out of Dunedin that had its engine turned 90 degrees and running a RWD quick change diff... I mentioned it a lot at the time as I thought it was a brilliant idea to get some variety into saloons... However - its also 100% ILLEGAL to convert an FWD Saloon into a RWD Saloon - yet someone green sheeted it, and multiple tracks scrutineered it and let it run?! So how did that happen?? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2015 23:03:09 GMT 12
a green sheet is more of a saftey check, rather than a check for legality, i know they don't measure the cars, which they will do at the NZ champs, i have seen cars having to be modifed at the track to meet the measurements that were in thier log book, its up to the driver to make sure his car is legal, and the local green sheeter is not always the best judge of that, A few years ago there was a Honda CRX running out of Dunedin that had its engine turned 90 degrees and running a RWD quick change diff... I mentioned it a lot at the time as I thought it was a brilliant idea to get some variety into saloons... However - its also 100% ILLEGAL to convert an FWD Saloon into a RWD Saloon - yet someone green sheeted it, and multiple tracks scrutineered it and let it run?! So how did that happen?? When did you last read the rule book? There is no rule prohibiting turning the engine within the chassis, not in the latest rule book {I just re-read the thing to make sure} and not in the tech manual that is supposed to clarify things - but in actuallity doesnt clarify a darn thing for saloons apart from body sizes and wheelbase's. Being a space frame chassis there was no modification of the engine in order to make it fit north south instead of east west, there may have been a new bellhousing - but thats nothing new, Ford v8 engine to holden gearbox sound familiar? but thats covered in rule T11-2-17 (a). the only way you could argue against the car is using rule T11-2-2 (e)= Engines must be derived from original manufacture and be of the same number of cylinders, and configuration, that was originally fitted in that make and model.
The key word is configuration I think - from the dictionary i get this = an arrangement of parts or elements in a particular form, figure, or combination. in terms of an engine that particular car required a 4 cylinder engine, with all cylinders arranged in an uninterrupted line - that is all as the position within the car is not part of the noun "configuration"... in fact you would immediately make every saloon illegal if you think it is, no road car i have seen has its number 1 spark plug in line with the front axle. for reasons of space they are usually before the front axle {ford and holden} eg; this is a holden.  or after {almost all corvettes} eg; this earlier corvette chassis shows my meaning better than others i found.  in conclusion - if you used that rule to make that honda illegal {i know the car, i argued about it at the time as well}. Then in order to be fair according to that rule - you have to make ALL corvettes that do not have their engines set back illegal as they are not in thier correct place within the chassis. ALL fords with the engine too far back would also be illegal and all Holdens as well on the same basis. given that you are not allowed to set a corvette motor back that far according to our rule book - to enforce that would instantly make all corvettes illegal anyway. there goes almost 80%{ish of our saloons straight away... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2015 12:06:34 GMT 12
Sorry chris, that last post came out really wrong - not intending to insult etc. Main point is - when looking in depth to the rule books, that car you have mentioned  ^^ that one ^^ is actually within the rules - Blondies car is the same. Does go right to the edge of them, thats certainly true.... But its still legal. The big hoops off the modified chassis bring the roll cage out to the full width of the car which is one requirement that cant be avoided, the extra bars and things that support the roof are also made to follow the roof line - another rule thats got to be obeyed. The engine sits forward - no1 spark plug is in line with the axle stubs, the beam axle curves around it in order to pass the rules around engine position. Super charger is run off the back of the engine and sits behind it inorder to bring weight back for rear weight balance, gearbox is behind that - much like any other super saloon. Seating position is further back than normal in super saloons - he is only just in front of the diff instead of having it well behind him and there is a whopping great hole in the roof, however - the required head plate over the drivers seat is there, 600x600mm as required. the hole in the roof is so he can get in and out - might be because the seat is in the middle - theres no rule prohibiting that by the way, after yet another read of the rule book the saloons and super saloons - you are actually able to put the driver anywhere within the chassis so long as the roll cage fully encloses the driver position. As far as I can tell - and Ive seen the car close up as well so Im confidient in saying this... There is no rule that can prohibit him entering the champs. |
|
|
|
Post by japsuper on Jan 10, 2015 12:55:27 GMT 12
Sorry the Honda does not comply with the rules. The intent of the rule under "configuration" is to cover the East/west or North south locations.
Subsequently in past remit years the remit to allow changing FWD to RWD "configuration" has not been passed. Funny that a remit is put forward when the rules allow it already !! NOT.
If you don't believe me, contact SNZ or one of the Technical committee.
By the way I have allways supported the remit to allow FWD to RWD conversions ( and Chris13W ) will also.
I'd be one of the first to build a S2000 powered civic or similar !!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2015 14:58:44 GMT 12
Sorry the Honda does not comply with the rules. The intent of the rule under "configuration" is to cover the East/west or North south locations. Subsequently in past remit years the remit to allow changing FWD to RWD "configuration" has not been passed. Funny that a remit is put forward when the rules allow it already !! NOT. If you don't believe me, contact SNZ or one of the Technical committee. By the way I have allways supported the remit to allow FWD to RWD conversions ( and Chris13W ) will also. I'd be one of the first to build a S2000 powered civic or similar !! Dude seriously - stop and think, re read the book and look at it for what it is, not what we assume its been for such a long time. There is no "intent" rule in there apart from = T11-2 a) INTENT: The following Saloon specifications are written in accordance with the constitution to provide a low cost saloon racing class with rules to allow all cars to be equally competitive without unfair advantage. thats the long and short of it. The only other rules in there do not prohibit turning an engine as it does not come under configuration - it comes under position and all they say about position is either north south or east west, it does not say they have to remain so. but if you wish to include position - all saloons are illegal as that would mean all engines are in the wrong position within the chassis... I do know what you mean - but the car is legal. I think its brilliant myself. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2015 15:05:35 GMT 12
No Honda come factory like that, so why should that be legal? Hmmmm
|
|
|
|
Post by tank11 on Jan 10, 2015 16:11:46 GMT 12
No Honda come factory like that, so why should that be legal? Hmmmm Not many brands come out, as raced here full stop. |
|
|
|
Post by tank11 on Jan 10, 2015 16:13:49 GMT 12
Is Kane Lawson driving Dennis Bolt's car ?See Kevin Moore popped out of the closet again,like Blondie in his port a loo . Old JimmyJ, talking turds again....... |
|
|
|
Post by tank11 on Jan 10, 2015 16:16:12 GMT 12
TrevG, it probably doesn't matter what actually happened, but what's in the log book. Historically I think that's often the case.... Barry B This. Many a driver has "logged" on to another car to get the number of meetings required. |
|
|
|
Post by japsuper on Jan 10, 2015 16:58:49 GMT 12
I give up, Rhodesta think what you want. Whatever your interpretation of the rules may be, you are not correct.
I'll leave it at that before you claim I am insulting you, like last time.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris13w on Jan 10, 2015 21:00:32 GMT 12
Sorry the Honda does not comply with the rules. The intent of the rule under "configuration" is to cover the East/west or North south locations. Subsequently in past remit years the remit to allow changing FWD to RWD "configuration" has not been passed. Funny that a remit is put forward when the rules allow it already !! NOT. If you don't believe me, contact SNZ or one of the Technical committee. By the way I have allways supported the remit to allow FWD to RWD conversions ( and Chris13W ) will also. I'd be one of the first to build a S2000 powered civic or similar !! Dude seriously - stop and think, re read the book and look at it for what it is, not what we assume its been for such a long time. There is no "intent" rule in there apart from = T11-2 a) INTENT: The following Saloon specifications are written in accordance with the constitution to provide a low cost saloon racing class with rules to allow all cars to be equally competitive without unfair advantage. thats the long and short of it. The only other rules in there do not prohibit turning an engine as it does not come under configuration - it comes under position and all they say about position is either north south or east west, it does not say they have to remain so. but if you wish to include position - all saloons are illegal as that would mean all engines are in the wrong position within the chassis... I do know what you mean - but the car is legal. I think its brilliant myself. Read the rule book - T11-2-21(e)(v) specifically says the Honda is illegal, and T11-2-21(e)(i) also rules out your other pointless argument. How does it go, sometimes its better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and confirm it...  I think its brilliant too, and I put in a remit to make it legal - but that's obviously not how anyone else wants the world to be though - c'est la vie. So back to 77S - if it gets through scrutineering this time, how long before a clarification (the Supersloon rules are set by a tech committee) makes it comply in the same way all the other Supers comply? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2015 12:02:30 GMT 12
Read the rule book - T11-2-21(e)(v) specifically says the Honda is illegal, and T11-2-21(e)(i) also rules out your other pointless argument. How does it go, sometimes its better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and confirm it... I think its brilliant too, and I put in a remit to make it legal - but that's obviously not how anyone else wants the world to be though - c'est la vie. So back to 77S - if it gets through scrutineering this time, how long before a clarification (the Supersloon rules are set by a tech committee) makes it comply in the same way all the other Supers comply? Sooooo... You want me to think you're a fool? LOL - not serious bro, definately not serious!  Rule - T11-2-21(e)(v) is only in effect if the engine is placed in that position - when the chassis of 999D was built, the engine was not placed in that specific position as it is not a full bodied honda. That makes the effective rule T11-2-21(e)(i). If you think other wise - then the engine must remain as placed where it is in a standard road car as part of rule T11-2-2 (e), which takes precedence over rule T11-2-21(e)(i) as it is part of what constitutes a legal car to become a saloon in the first place. That means rule T11-2-21(e)(i) which you claim "rules out your other pointless argument." makes any corvette illegal on the basis that they cannot obey both rules - in the standard car the engine is set too far back. If that is not the case - could you please explain how to obey both rules while maintaining the intent of the rule book? Im also interested - which rules are you thinking blondies machine doesnt comply with? since ive seen the car and had a darn good look at the whole thing maybe we can straighten a few things out? |
|
|
|
Post by chris13w on Jan 11, 2015 20:28:31 GMT 12
Read the rule book - T11-2-21(e)(v) specifically says the Honda is illegal, and T11-2-21(e)(i) also rules out your other pointless argument. How does it go, sometimes its better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and confirm it... I think its brilliant too, and I put in a remit to make it legal - but that's obviously not how anyone else wants the world to be though - c'est la vie. So back to 77S - if it gets through scrutineering this time, how long before a clarification (the Supersloon rules are set by a tech committee) makes it comply in the same way all the other Supers comply? Sooooo... You want me to think you're a fool? LOL - not serious bro, definately not serious! Rule - T11-2-21(e)(v) is only in effect if the engine is placed in that position - when the chassis of 999D was built, the engine was not placed in that specific position as it is not a full bodied honda. That makes the effective rule T11-2-21(e)(i). If you think other wise - then the engine must remain as placed where it is in a standard road car as part of rule T11-2-2 (e), which takes precedence over rule T11-2-21(e)(i) as it is part of what constitutes a legal car to become a saloon in the first place. That means rule T11-2-21(e)(i) which you claim "rules out your other pointless argument." makes any corvette illegal on the basis that they cannot obey both rules - in the standard car the engine is set too far back. If that is not the case - could you please explain how to obey both rules while maintaining the intent of the rule book? Im also interested - which rules are you thinking blondies machine doesnt comply with? since ive seen the car and had a darn good look at the whole thing maybe we can straighten a few things out? Your tag line says it all... you really are a special kind of stupid.... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2015 20:49:40 GMT 12
Sooooo... You want me to think you're a fool? LOL - not serious bro, definately not serious! Rule - T11-2-21(e)(v) is only in effect if the engine is placed in that position - when the chassis of 999D was built, the engine was not placed in that specific position as it is not a full bodied honda. That makes the effective rule T11-2-21(e)(i). If you think other wise - then the engine must remain as placed where it is in a standard road car as part of rule T11-2-2 (e), which takes precedence over rule T11-2-21(e)(i) as it is part of what constitutes a legal car to become a saloon in the first place. That means rule T11-2-21(e)(i) which you claim "rules out your other pointless argument." makes any corvette illegal on the basis that they cannot obey both rules - in the standard car the engine is set too far back. If that is not the case - could you please explain how to obey both rules while maintaining the intent of the rule book? Im also interested - which rules are you thinking blondies machine doesnt comply with? since ive seen the car and had a darn good look at the whole thing maybe we can straighten a few things out? Your tag line says it all... you really are a special kind of stupid.... In this case - I think thats the pot calling the kettle black.... My answers are all based on reading the rule book and using logic. you have just dipped into insults - instead of actually responding in kind. So much fo trying to push the class forward eh? incidentally - this is my last post on this thread, you are quite clearly only here to find ways to limit the class instead of using the rules to make things work. why I dont know - but then, I suppose some peoples "independant thinking" means others arent entitled to do the same. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 11, 2015 20:55:47 GMT 12
You can agree to disagree guys , abuse won't achieve anything much worth having.
|
|
|
|
Post by sonic33 on Jan 11, 2015 21:19:14 GMT 12
You can agree to disagree guys , abuse won't achieve anything much worth having. You and your team of moderators seem to be in for late nights. Many a thread these days seems to resort to personal attacks. It is all good to have a discussion ( as it is a discussion board ) but a lot of people resort to the personal attack, which is wrong. Thanks for your efforts Sir. I know we are all passionate and have our opinions, but personal stuff should go. |
|
|
|
Post by japsuper on Jan 11, 2015 21:32:27 GMT 12
Its actually past discussion. We are now into the realms of fantasy from Mr Rhodesta. It does not matter what his interpretation is, the facts of the matter are what SNZ and the Saloon tech committee tell us ( as he is talking Saloon rules not super rules ).
Some of us actually own/race Saloons and have been down some of these lines and have asked the questions of SNZ and had the answers.
The dribble that goes on sometimes is just infuriating, I would suggest Mr Rhodesta get on the phone to Mel Hills SNZ director responsible for Saloon classes, you will find him at ProParts Rotorua, (PM me if you cant find the number) and run these "newly interpreted" rules past him.
|
|
|
|
Post by sonic33 on Jan 11, 2015 21:45:58 GMT 12
Sounds like Wellington speedway should pre sell tickets on trade me for the scrutineering of Blondie's car.  Other than the last 5 or so years of rubbishing the looks of Hypermacs, this is the most interesting car that has made the track. If it was me I would have got a local SNZ scrutineer to cast an eye over it before rolling into Welly next Friday, but I only race keyboards. Good luck and all the best Blondie, I hope you take the grid on Friday. |
|
|
|
Post by Rusty on Jan 12, 2015 16:12:24 GMT 12
At the end of the day the snz rule book is very vague in many places. A driver only has to get the meeting in his licence to count as a meeting raced. Well it was the case when i went from b to a licence in ministocks to compete at an away track. Signed the scrutineering form and checked in my helmet and licence
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmyj on Jan 12, 2015 16:31:13 GMT 12
Only 1 way to find out is when he turns up for scrutinearing and if any one protests   |
|
