O'Donnell is legal according to our current rule. And as someone else said,
if I was Chris, I'd take full advantage of the rule too.
I do not quarrel with Chris's use of the rule. I DO quarrel with the rule.
A few years ago my car, which both autocrosses and road races, failed its
road racing annual tech on an item that had passed tech for many years. The
reason? Safety specs had been advanced and my car had not yet advanced to
keep pace. Specifically, my 6-point rollcage now needed to be an 8-point.
When the car was built, it had a 4-point rollbar. Does that mean I should
never have to improve it because it was built in 1971? Does it make sense to
race to 1971 safety standards when better ones are readily available in
2001? Only in one context -- vintage. My car is old, but it is not set up as
a vintage racer and that, IMHO, is key.
We added to the cage to get the two new "feet", which now provide forward
leg protection that did not previously exist. (And added weight I'd rather
not have!)
IMHO, if "allowance" is to be given, I would feel far more comfortable
giving such to Bruce Cambern's Cobra than to Chris O'Donnell's Elan. Nothing
prevents Chris from removing his aluminum rollbar and putting in a proper
steel one. Do that to the Cobra and you impact its collector-car value. His
really IS set up as a vintage car.
(DELIGHTED to hear it is on the way to recovery!)
And you could get around that by telling Bruce that since his bar does not
meet height spec, he would not be allowed to use a shoulder harness that
would keep him upright in a rollo.
--Rocky
----- Original Message -----
From: <Smokerbros@aol.com>
To: <stevehh@hiwaay.net>
Cc: <autox@autox.team.net>
Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 6:50 PM
Subject: Re: Tech at Nationals
> In a message dated 9/1/01 4:09:04 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
> stevehh@hiwaay.net writes:
>
>
> > Yes he does. But then he doesn't meet *all* of the requirements of
appendix
> >
>
> Technically, he does. The only part of Chris' bar that wouldn't be legal
if
> he built it today is that it's aluminum. And Appendix C states if it was
> built before 9/22/85, aluminum is allowed. He meets that criteria, so
he's
> legal as Appendix C is currently written.
>
> CHD
>
> /// autox@autox.team.net mailing list
> ///
> /// To unsubscribe send a plain text message to majordomo@autox.team.net
> /// with nothing in it but
> ///
> /// unsubscribe autox
> ///
/// autox@autox.team.net mailing list
///
/// To unsubscribe send a plain text message to majordomo@autox.team.net
/// with nothing in it but
///
/// unsubscribe autox
///
|