eb64p
New Member
Posts: 28
|
Post by eb64p on Jul 30, 2015 17:15:05 GMT 12
Well with these extra costs our team of three w streetstocks may not be racing this season
On top of $50 increase in licence fees we have to have flame proof under wear at $200 or 2layer overalls at $450
Engine seals been quoted $300 - $400
And race boots $100
Would have been better to faze it in over a few seasons so increase of $650 - $1000 extra just to get out there then we got $175 club fees
I agree with making the sport safer but we are getting priced out
I welcome your thoughts other low budget racers
Cheers Hayden Bonner streetstock 24 w
|
|
|
|
Post by percy on Jul 30, 2015 17:17:09 GMT 12
Did you provide these thoughts to your competitor rep at your club remit meeting prior to the AGM?
|
|
|
|
Post by TimSOZ on Jul 30, 2015 18:34:47 GMT 12
Don't forget the compulsory fire extinguisher too!
One of the reasons Speedway NZ announced its fee increases early was so that delegates could factor that into their decision making processes at the rulemaking AGM, when they voted in all the other items mentioned by Hayden. Many of the changes were put forward by members, and voted in by members, without any say on the part of the Board, management, officials etc who then become tasked with enforcing the rules. SNZ as an entity consists of many parts, and in this case the costs now being incurred by competitors were decided on by different segments within the organisation.
Some rules (eg the Streetstock engine sealing) were voted on two years ago and are only coming into force this season. Others, such as compulsory master switches, will be in force from 2016/17. So yes, there are elements of phasing items in over time, but this is certainly a year where many changes are happening at once.
|
|
Yard
Full Member
Posts: 126
|
Post by Yard on Jul 30, 2015 19:57:44 GMT 12
Hayden
I am intrigued by the quote of $300. To $400. For the sealing of your Engine.
Why so ??
|
|
|
|
Post by HadleyMotorsport on Jul 30, 2015 20:30:37 GMT 12
In regards to safety, I don't think it's a realistic option to phase items in. For instance, if our sport puts a two year phase in period on race suits, we are effectively admitting what people are wearing isn't safe enough, yet we aren't doing something about it straight away. If anything happened during that phase in period it would be a horrible look for the sport. If I remember correct, I think this was the general feeling at AGM with most of the safety remits?
I'd be interested to see that if each class was a 'club', I wonder how they would go with getting grants to pay towards upgrades in safety gear for their drivers?
|
|
|
|
Post by Pirate Racing NZ on Jul 30, 2015 20:57:49 GMT 12
I only started end of last season. I got a two layer suit, hood, necksgen and upgraded gloves from the beginning. I decided safety was more important than a couple of flash car bits. Even put in steel front and rear firewalls instead of the alloy everyone else uses. As a sparky, pilot and rescue volunteer, I figured I am more important to me than a better car, not running with the big boys anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by Murray Guy (Grandad) on Jul 30, 2015 23:44:19 GMT 12
Well with these extra costs our team of three w streetstocks may not be racing this season On top of $50 increase in licence fees we have to have flame proof under wear at $200 or 2layer overalls at $450 Engine seals been quoted $300 - $400 And race boots $100 Would have been better to faze it in over a few seasons so increase of $650 - $1000 extra just to get out there then we got $175 club fees I agree with making the sport safer but we are getting priced out I welcome your thoughts other low budget racers Cheers Hayden Bonner streetstock 24 w
It's an epidemic Hayden, incrementally forcing the traditional kiwi speedway racer out of or into alternative motorsports or affiliations.
Low or high budget isn't the point, neither is 'faze it in' in most instances.
The focus should be on prioritisation and evidence based rule changes rather than the present sheep like mentality that seems to invade unabated every bureaucracy.
'Flameproof underwear' .... ye gods!
|
|
|
|
Post by chris13w on Jul 31, 2015 1:03:50 GMT 12
Well with these extra costs our team of three w streetstocks may not be racing this season On top of $50 increase in licence fees we have to have flame proof under wear at $200 or 2layer overalls at $450 Have you seen one of Bernie Gillans Flamecrusher safety demonstrations? No one should be allowed on a track in a single layer suit, your time to get out of the car before being seriously burnt is in the single seconds, you might as well not bother and just sit there and burn to death. Personally I wouldn't let anyone on a track without full flame proof underwear AND at least a two layer suit, and don't tell me your life isn't worth the cost of that... If you can't afford the proper safety gear first, then you're right, you can't afford to race. |
|
|
|
Post by penman on Jul 31, 2015 3:49:34 GMT 12
Well with these extra costs our team of three w streetstocks may not be racing this season On top of $50 increase in licence fees we have to have flame proof under wear at $200 or 2layer overalls at $450 Engine seals been quoted $300 - $400 And race boots $100 Would have been better to faze it in over a few seasons so increase of $650 - $1000 extra just to get out there then we got $175 club fees I agree with making the sport safer but we are getting priced out I welcome your thoughts other low budget racers Cheers Hayden Bonner streetstock 24 w
It's an epidemic Hayden, incrementally forcing the traditional kiwi speedway racer out of or into alternative motorsports or affiliations.
Low or high budget isn't the point, neither is 'faze it in' in most instances.
The focus should be on prioritisation and evidence based rule changes rather than the present sheep like mentality that seems to invade unabated every bureaucracy.
'Flameproof underwear' .... ye gods!
Is this argument just for the sake of argument Murray? Do you seriously consider that requiring a high level of safety equipment is an 'epidemic' or indicates a 'sheep-like mentality'? |
|
|
|
Post by stealth on Jul 31, 2015 8:13:10 GMT 12
Who's been pushing the rules re safety gear?
Wouldn't have been one of those people who sells safety gear by chance would it?
Do the injury statistics support what happens in the rule book?
Was there an increase in drivers burning to death in the last 2 seasons?
Why is it OK for stockcar and Superstock competitors to wear work boots but not streetstocks?
What's next a referendum to change the speedway new zealand logo?
|
|
|
|
Post by tank11 on Jul 31, 2015 8:30:21 GMT 12
My boys while in ministocks had proper race boots, balaclavas and were not allowed to wear nylon underwear.
We used Leatt neck braces and side nets.
Only takes one mistake and they would live with my decision.
Buy the best that you can afford, otherwise watch from the stands.
|
|
|
|
Post by 4vboss on Jul 31, 2015 10:39:00 GMT 12
here we go again......bottom line is if you cant afford the best and latest in safety gear don't race!!!!
Like Tank11 I put my lads out in the best I could buy as I don't need to live with a bad decision.
SNZ has done the right thing here as it has lifted the minimum requirements to a standard that is current and compliant for todays racing and was long over due in my opinion
|
|
|
|
Post by BarryB on Jul 31, 2015 11:03:48 GMT 12
Who's been pushing the rules re safety gear? Wouldn't have been one of those people who sells safety gear by chance would it? Do the injury statistics support what happens in the rule book? Was there an increase in drivers burning to death in the last 2 seasons? Why is it OK for stockcar and Superstock competitors to wear work boots but not streetstocks? What's next a referendum to change the speedway new zealand logo? It's a changing world in which we live. Self responsibility used to be enough, and everybody accepted that accidents did indeed happen. That is not the case anymore, and whenever somebody suffers in injury today, whether it be at work or at play, it's always somebody elses fault. Where people, such as employers, stand to be held responsible and accountable for anything that might happen, they have no choice but to be proactive as opposed to reactive. And really, when I think about making such calls before there is any "increase in drivers burning to death" I say "good call". What value on a life? Why act retrospectively when you can save one today? Speedway is just a weekend hobby to every racer out there, and we want as many of them as possible able to race at the weekend and entertain us, then return to work each Monday morning and earn more dollars and be able to race again the next weekend too. We want their families to be able to rest easy that their loved ones are going to survive their passion, which after all still has a dangerous element attached to it no matter how much safety equipment they wear. Barry B |
|
|
|
Post by mrsbrown on Jul 31, 2015 17:29:59 GMT 12
Well with these extra costs our team of three w streetstocks may not be racing this season On top of $50 increase in licence fees we have to have flame proof under wear at $200 or 2layer overalls at $450 Engine seals been quoted $300 - $400 And race boots $100 Would have been better to faze it in over a few seasons so increase of $650 - $1000 extra just to get out there then we got $175 club fees I agree with making the sport safer but we are getting priced out I welcome your thoughts other low budget racers Cheers Hayden Bonner streetstock 24 w
It's an epidemic Hayden, incrementally forcing the traditional kiwi speedway racer out of or into alternative motorsports or affiliations.
Low or high budget isn't the point, neither is 'faze it in' in most instances.
The focus should be on prioritisation and evidence based rule changes rather than the present sheep like mentality that seems to invade unabated every bureaucracy.
'Flameproof underwear' .... ye gods!
Got to agree with Penman on this one Murray I think you still have a beef with SNZ over the 6 pin and now you are just using this to have another go at SNZ. Saftey should always come first and foremost. |
|
|
|
Post by mcfly on Jul 31, 2015 17:30:23 GMT 12
Who's been pushing the rules re safety gear? Wouldn't have been one of those people who sells safety gear by chance would it? Do the injury statistics support what happens in the rule book? Was there an increase in drivers burning to death in the last 2 seasons? Why is it OK for stockcar and Superstock competitors to wear work boots but not streetstocks? What's next a referendum to change the speedway new zealand logo? It's a changing world in which we live. Self responsibility used to be enough, and everybody accepted that accidents did indeed happen. That is not the case anymore, and whenever somebody suffers in injury today, whether it be at work or at play, it's always somebody elses fault. Where people, such as employers, stand to be held responsible and accountable for anything that might happen, they have no choice but to be proactive as opposed to reactive. And really, when I think about making such calls before there is any "increase in drivers burning to death" I say "good call". What value on a life? Why act retrospectively when you can save one today? Speedway is just a weekend hobby to every racer out there, and we want as many of them as possible able to race at the weekend and entertain us, then return to work each Monday morning and earn more dollars and be able to race again the next weekend too. We want their families to be able to rest easy that their loved ones are going to survive their passion, which after all still has a dangerous element attached to it no matter how much safety equipment they wear. Barry B All reasonable comments. But so is the other side of the argument. If we are going to react on what might happen as apposed to what is likely to happen, then we might as well shut the sport down now. How many people commenting on the side of "what's your life worth" and "if you cant afford the safety equipment then don't race", are slipping into their 2 layer suits, fire retardant overalls and race boots when they get in their tinfoil cars to get a loaf of bread from the dairy. While speaking about the tinfoil cars, I can only assume that all of those who appose my personal view that we are going too far and incurring unnecessary costs, have all got rid of their older models and are driving the latest ancap 5 rated vehicles with the best possible safety features? If not then don't shoot me down because the reality is that you are more likely to be burnt to death on the road than at speedway. The other reality is that the rules at the moment certainly do appear to be changing with absolutely no merit as to why. There needs to be solid reasoning behind rule changes, not just that old chestnut of "it could happen". I like some others have alluded to on here would like to know if certain sales people have been pushing this bandwagon. |
|
|
|
Post by Pirate Racing NZ on Jul 31, 2015 18:23:05 GMT 12
Barry B[/quote]All reasonable comments. But so is the other side of the argument. If we are going to react on what might happen as apposed to what is likely to happen, then we might as well shut the sport down now. How many people commenting on the side of "what's your life worth" and "if you cant afford the safety equipment then don't race", are slipping into their 2 layer suits, fire retardant overalls and race boots when they get in their tinfoil cars to get a loaf of bread from the dairy. While speaking about the tinfoil cars, I can only assume that all of those who appose my personal view that we are going too far and incurring unnecessary costs, have all got rid of their older models and are driving the latest ancap 5 rated vehicles with the best possible safety features? If not then don't shoot me down because the reality is that you are more likely to be burnt to death on the road than at speedway.
The other reality is that the rules at the moment certainly do appear to be changing with absolutely no merit as to why. There needs to be solid reasoning behind rule changes, not just that old chestnut of "it could happen". I like some others have alluded to on here would like to know if certain sales people have been pushing this bandwagon.[/quote]
Actually, the Chrysler is my smallest car, along with my falcon and jaguar are all steel cars and safe as safe. Some of us walk the walk and don't do jap tin cans. I fly with flame proof overalls and helmate and turn the power off when I sparky. It's your call.
|
|
|
|
Post by TimSOZ on Jul 31, 2015 18:45:32 GMT 12
I like some others have alluded to on here would like to know if certain sales people have been pushing this bandwagon.
The rationale for all the proposed rule changes was made available in April, and then voted on in June by the 45 delegates after discussion at the AGM. From personal experience, I dont think that the likes of Bruce Robertson, Sonja Hickey, Nigel Wilton, Red Wootton, Steve Lennon and the other 40 who voted on the proposals are likely to have been swayed by anything other than their own judgement....after considering the information presented to them. Bernie Gillon who was also a delegate only spoke to remits when directly asked for his opinion by other delegates.
This kind of discussion proves again how important it is for people to both understand the rules and get involved in ensuring their track sends quality representatives to the AGM to vote on their behalf.
|
|
|
|
Post by Murray Guy (Grandad) on Aug 1, 2015 10:49:32 GMT 12
Yes Mrs Brown, I have a beef about SNZ and 6 pins, highlights the underlying concerns and deficiencies that impact on all competitors and our sport.
Aside from the $4000 (in my case) in total waste, SNZ processes, outcomes and inability to apply rational thinking to secure win/win outcomes is non existent at times.
SNZ choose NOT to use 'class specific and generic' on-line consultation opportunities. Would make for far greater competitor awareness and participation.
As I said earlier, it's an epidemic. Traffic Hazard truck mentality.
Permeates almost all areas of our lives from playgrounds to the workplace, removing personal responsibility, accountability and common sense.
My biggest concern as a saloon competitor (and spectator) in regards safety is actually for the infield personal.
For example, SNZ constantly remind me to stay in my car on the infield, don't take off my helmet etc. Safety first, blah, blah.
So while I'm sitting there I watch all manner of infield personal with their backs to the race direction, sitting on stationary tractors and 4-wheelers, no belts, no helmets, no protection other than for some a hazard vest, others chatting amongst themselves while someone watches a noise meter.
At a recent meeting a mate puts on his helmet and sits astride his 4-wheeler, ready to push a sprint car out on to the track.
It's a rule he tells me, got to wear a helmet.
Out on the track a few minutes later a notice the clerk of the course racing around on a 4-wheeler with no helmet, no lights - go figure!?
It's a wet and greasy track and competitors are asked to pack it. We have infield volunteers standing on the track directing cars approaching them.
These folk should never put themselves between the approaching cars and the wall, should all use glow sticks.
It's assumed I guess that they can be seen, that a car will not slide, that the driver is in total control - wrong!
This provoked a chuckle ... I can see SNZ officials asking drivers to drop their overalls to see if they are wearing underwear, and if so, does it comply! 
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2015 16:21:22 GMT 12
Actually there DOES seem to be a double standard here - whats the point of promoting driver safety to such a degree when the infield staff are effectively able to ignore to rules all drivers and thier crew have to adhere to?
Do the fire crews, infield staff or flag wavers have to wear flame proof undies? answer: no.
Do safetey crew or infield staff have to wear protective clothing including helmets? answer: no.
Do the drivers of the pace vehicle, tow trucks/tractors, water truck or push trucks have to wear flame retardent clothing? answer: no.
Are the above drivers of pace vehicles wearing a helmet and neckbrace of comparable safety standards to the drivers behind him/her? answer: no.
If this is required of a driver or crew member of a driver, including those who are not part of the race itself, why is it not required for safety crew, towies, tractor drivers, push truck driver or pace truck driver?
What about the water truck driver? He or she makes laps of the track not just during but before the meeting too... so following that line of thought what about the track packers? is there a safety standard being applied to them so that snz can say "we have the safety of all people involved in this sport at heart"? answer: no.
Why do the CREW of a race team have safety standards higher then that of the infield staff? I have been on the infield before and have sometimes had cars spinning out of control towards me - what was the stafety standard I had to adhere to? answer:a high visibility vest. Thats a great help for the driver who was out of control as he headed towards me = he could at least see he who he was going to hit. Wouldnt help either of us but at least he could see me.
someones gonna come on here and say "a helmet would restrict the peripheral vision of safety crew and make things less safe for them" Im sure of it - so lets think about this, is a helmet going to stop the crew member who got hit from behind from seeing the car that hit him?
Where do we start? and where do we stop? good questions - the need to be asked too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Go Slideways on Aug 1, 2015 16:25:15 GMT 12
"The focus should be on prioritisation and evidence based rule changes rather than the present sheep like mentality that seems to invade unabated every bureaucracy.
'Flameproof underwear' .... ye gods!"
I agree with what you're saying about the infield staff setting an example Murray, but as a spectator I've seen quite a bit of evidence based logic (fires) that supports rule change to help minimize harm from an identified hazard.
I don't want to take my young Nephew to speedway and watch an upside-down driver get seriously burnt right in front of us, especially by Methanol, if it can in any way be avoided.
So yeah, as a spectator I support any rule change in this area that mean's the driver will have a better chance of walking away waving to the crowd rather than leaving the track in the Ambulance.
But I'm only a spectator.
photo storage
|
|
