Alan,
I think you described the appropriate mechanism or box that should be
used to measure the width of said formula car. This is the procedure
described by those in charge of enforcing these rules in the National
club racing circles according to the (admittedly) second-hand
information I have received. This is also the process used to verify the
width of at least three known-to-be-completely-legal cars of which I am
aware. In fact it was stated that if the "tits" of the tires touch the
box then it is too wide (for that reason some competitors actually take
the time to pick the "tits" off all the tires).
The method of measurement of the car in question was a measure of the
difference between the width of the car and the width of a trailer upon
which it sat (not perfect, but can infer the car's ability to pass
through the described box). There were measurements taken to ensure that
the trailer was square. IIRC the width of the car as measured from
right-most point to the left-most point (not including the tits of the
tires :-)) was greater than the max stated in the rulebook.
As I have stated many times, I do not believe that any of these
competitors were intentionally trying to gain a competitive advantage,
but rather that their complacency, and the complacency of the majority
of the class, has resulted in new-to-the-class competitors seeing this
as a stamp of approval on not complying with all the rules.
I feel the protest committee made the correct call given the information
available to them at the time, and I also think that the protestor was
not entirely unsatisfied with the result - that the class of formula
cars has received notice that it needs to make sure its cars comply with
the formulas. If I implied that the protest committee was cognizant-ly
remiss, negligent, or unfair, then I profoundly apologize. I think it
handled its responsibilities with the utmost attention to the spirit of
the rules and the situation (and having reread my response I can clearly
see how it could be interpreted as a slam of the committee.very sorry,
that was not my intention).
My point in my previous response was, and still is, that the competitors
of the class who are claiming that they were protested on weenie issues
and were not given any advance notice are overlooking several facts: 1 -
that they were given advance notice that their cars were not compliant
and that if these non-compliances were not fixed they would be
protested, 2 - that it is the competitor's responsibility to ensure that
his/her car complies with the rules and that receiving advance notice
from a competitor before a protest is a gratuity not a requirement, and
3 - that the rules do not provide another means for policing compliance
with the rules other than the protest process so people need to not be
surprised that it is used at the National level.
I personally have no dog in this fight other than having been privy to
the other side of the story and feeling a responsibility to my friends
to ensure that people understand both sides.
J. Brett Howell
www.PebbleMotorSports.com <http://www.pebblemotorsports.com/>
/// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or try
/// http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
/// Partial archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|