Trucks, 3D rules, Self determination

[Ricey88]

This topic should not be a part of NSW SS on the rise

I don't believe anyone has a problem of inviting trucks or other non 3D cars to race WITH sports sedans. states do it and the national series still do it with trans-am cars.

Commodore cup must comply with 3D rules AND then they add further restrictions, making them a sub category .

The question was asked " who provided the logbooks" for the TRUCKS with 6200 cc?

If you don't believe that 3D can survive in its current format/rules, stand up and fight to get the changes you think are necessary! smoke, mirrors or underhanded deals will not be good for the category.

I think Its about time that the current owners of 3D cars took a stand and fixed the rules OR the cars, I don't care which gets changed but if the category is going to rebuild to its former glory
we cannot afford to have such a big gap between the rules and the cars on track. People thinking about getting into 3D see the discrepancies and it gets to hard and go elsewhere.

I am sure there would have been at least one more trans am here if the rules are actually changed to make them 100% legal.( can someone tell me where I can find a list of trans-am make model and year that have been recommended and approved by cams).

slightly off topic: what's the maximum width of a 3D rear wing ? do I go by the rule book or the cars racing?

Cams are never going to offer us self determination , that is something we must demand once we have our house in order.

[Phast Phil]

Yes I was approached by the "truck" promoter about a year ago and yes I said they do not comply with sports sedans and could not run in the Kerrick series and I was not interested in pursueing the matter at all as we want to promote and race real sports sedans that comply with the rules.

That is my position for all items when I manage our series or sit on the NSSC rules board. As for the NSSC and CAMS, the rules have been frozen from end of 2009 and will only change end of 2011 if motions passed at state level are them passed by majority at NSSC and then accepted and approved by CAMS for inclusion in 2012 tech regs. This gave us a 2 year stability window.

Personally I thought it was foolish for someone to purchase these trucks and expect them to be raced or sold here. I think my opinion has proven correct unless they bought them very cheaply in the USA (less than parts value).

If they were issued with 3D log books then they should have all been charged and fined for presenting an engine with capacity over 6000cc.

Yes I get the fact that sometimes you get desperate and need the numbers but this is not the way to go. Trust me if CAMS gave them a series they would not invite you to run with them. Make them buy or build real sports sedans to race in a sports sedan race. If your series falls then you are all welcome to race with a complying SS in the Kerrick series.

Ricey, the trans am cars are 100% CAMS group 3D legal. I do not know where you are coming from with this. All homologated trans am bodies (inc aero as per trans am) are approved in group 3D tech regs. To get a list of approved bodies go to the SCCA site and follow through to the Gt1 rules. You can race legally in the Kerrick series in a SCCA ruled transam or a NZ Tranzam under NZ rules.
Alternatively you can log book it as a group 3D SS (as I have) and run under SS rules with an approved TA body (inc aero). Doing this means you come under the 7800 RPM limit in the Kerrick series and one can use fuel injection, 6 speed Gbox and cambered rear end plus up to 18 inch wheels (now the diameter limit in the Kerrick series).

Let me know who wanted one and I will put them straight.

As for the wing size, always go off the rule book.
This year you will have me looking at cars for legality and bringing any abnormalities to the attention of the chief scrutineer. Yes I am going to have our rules enforced at least in the Kerrick series so expect to be in the trailer if you present an illegal car.

[Ricey88]

Phil
The point I am trying to make is that I do not
Want to be going to you or anyone else with a “Please sir may I ???????????”
I want to be able to
Go to the rule book, look up the question and find an answer!
As an example, Aero is well defined in the 3D specification; Rear wings may be no wider than 1600mm.

In the 3D rules / Specifications on the CAMS website under
3D Specifications: part 3) COACHWORK, 3.4) Mudgaurds, (iv)
Available DTM/TransAm-style bodywork may be used when recommended by the NSSC and CAMS for approval.
Apart from that there is no other mention of Trans am.

I know I am struggling to make my point clear, but it seems you have a lot more information about the rules
Than the people like me trying to build the cars.

Where ever you are getting your information from it would be better if it was made available to ALL.

Hope this doesn’t sound disrespectful of all the hard work and time you put into running the national series!

[msadyno]

Id like to know if the favour would be returned if the trucks end up fielding a 15 or so field ( highy unlikely ). Seems a very bold move trying to add yet another category in the mix to an already struggling Australian motorsport enviroment. If the truck guys went on a "wing and a prayer" style venture, why should the sports sedans take a backward step and let it in ? Does this now open the door for a "run what you brung" catagory ? From an outsider looking in it's not very appealing.

Stick to your guns and keep it whats it's designed and meant to be !

[bbbrock16]

if this topic is open to share your opinion, then i will go against what seems to be the majority by saying i think the trucks we're fantastic. you all seem to be upset by the fact they were running a 6.2L engine, but keep in mind they are a control engine and are not putting out anywhere near the horse power figures of the top cars. The interest created by the cars was fantastic and the whole weekend saw people asking, looking and praising how awesome these trucks were. Sports sedans is famous for its diversity, and i think the 'NAStrucks' are perfect for the catagory. If we allow transams to run, why cant we run these. I remember a few years ago luke youlden ran a mustang at phillip island, and i heard the RPM that thing was reaching was far beyond anything else in that field (this is what i HEARD...), and i didnt hear to much fuss about that, Nor should theyre be. The same rule applies for these trucks. I undertsand what everyone is trying to say as far as they dont match the logbook, but thats how they bought the cars, and this is the only category they can race them unless they go to QLD every meeting, and pay 1000 dollar entry fee's. They are hardly going out and kicking everyones ass so lets try and support them, encourage them, instead of going online and getting upset about it. The start of race 2 saw a V8 supercar and a NAStruck on the front row of the grid, and i thought that was an amazing sight, and reminded me of how great this category is, because no other category in the world would have that diversity. And for all we know, by the time the 2011 season is out, they may be running SB2's. the chassis will take it, the drive train will handle it, and i think it would be a positive progression they could very possible make. My opinion is quite strong and i am very PRO NAStruck, but maybe i can get over little infringments and realise whats good for the categories growth. And i think everyone should do the same.

[FalconEL]

With respect Ian, you want to go to the rule book, look up the question and find an answer. What is your question?? I'm unclear on exactly what your question is, but it seems as though you have perhaps two concerns here.

1) The 3D Rules. These are clearly defined in the CAMS Manual and should not affect the build of your Monaro. Is there a specific area that you require clarification on?

2) Eligibility of Vehicles competing in Sports Sedan events.

In relation to the Kerrick Series competition, the defined "Eligible Vehicles" are as listed below in the 2010 Sporting Regulations (the 2011 ones will be uploaded shortly I understand) available on the National Sports Sedan Website:

S4 AUTOMOBILE ELIGIBILITY
Only automobiles that comply with the provisions of one (1) of the following are eligible to compete in the
Series:
(a) Space frame chassis and floorpan Sports Sedans complying with the Group 3D Sports Sedan Regulations as per the 2010 CAMS Manual of Motorsport (Class SS).
(b) Trans-am automobiles complying with A.S.S.C. regulations for North American Trans-am competition (Class TA)
(c) TraNZam automobiles complying with TRG of New Zealand regulations (ClassTNZ).

So that's the Kerrick Series events covered.

Perhaps (and I'm guessing this is where your concerns may lie), it should be better defined in the CAMS Manual that the vehicles as listed above be included in CAMS 3D Sports Sedan competition generally either at State Championship or Multi-Club level events as this level of event is the stepping stone to National Series competition. Currently, these vehicles can and will continue to be accepted by promoters as eligible vehicles in CAMS Sports Sedan events.

I'm assuming your beef is with TransAm's for whatever reason. I'm guessing only, but you mention TransAm's specifically in each post on these related topics.

Without going into what my opinions are about TransAm cars (they are all positive by the way), submissions for their inclusion into Sports Sedan competition were made many, many years ago now. The NSSC at that time considered the submission, submitted it to CAMS for approval through the correct process and CAMS rubber stamped it.

With regard to eligibly of body styles, if this is another question you may have, the NSSC received one application to use DTM style bodywork in his new car build in the last year. He submitted photos, gave a detailed description of what he wanted to do with his body styling etc. Each NSSC member provided input and deliberation into the approval process. The competitor in question requested that his application remain confidential at this stage, so we respected his wishes. Perhaps, we could look at including some sort of flow chart or similar on the website detailing the process involved in making a submission to the NSSC (and provide the contact details of the NSSC). The NSSC exists to assist in guiding competitors, and I agree with you that we need to make ourselves more visible as a committee.

The Log Booking of Vehicles as Group 3D Sports Sedans by CAMS without consultation of the NSSC is unacceptable, and another seperate issue altogether that will be raised at Motor Racing Executive Level.

[Ricey88]

Hi Chris
I’m disappointed it has come across as a beef because it is not.
1) I think there is a problem that is causing some people not to get into sports sedans.
2) I am very happy to have trans am as sports sedans
3) I think the problem can be fixed without any down side
4) Trans am rear wing is just one of the most obvious discrepancy
Maybe if I put it like this,
Try printing the 3d rules, hand them to one of your non sports sedan friends
And ask them what’s the widest the rear wing can be.
If they come back to you with 1829mm if it’s on a Trans am, I need to shoot myself now.
I think they will say 1600mm

[FalconEL]

If we added the following statement into the 3D Rules with regard to including Transams as Eligible Sports Sedans under the following criteria:

That a Sports Sedan may also consist of:

(b) Trans-am automobiles complying with A.S.S.C. regulations for North American Trans-am competition (Class TA)
(c) TraNZam automobiles complying with TRG of New Zealand regulations (ClassTNZ).

Would that be more satisfactory?

FYI, I called my father who was at home, he threw a tape measure across the rear wing on Shane's Camaro. It is 1820mm in width. (this is the wing the car came with from New Zealand). Shane purchased a spare rear wing from the USA, I got Dad to throw a tape measure on it also, and it also is 1820mm in width. It's certainly not our intention to have a fudge with the wing width, 1820mm is what it came with, it's a TransAm from NZ, that's the maximium permissible size, so that's what we run.

I understand where you are coming from, we need to make it easier for guys to get into Sports Sedans. The problem is that it is seen as "too difficult" due to the amount of work required. We need to utilise this website to step people through a build process, there are some good examples on the forum of various projects on the go.

[Ricey88]

One important part of what I am saying is at the moment the cars racing do not match the rulebook.
If we disagree on that, I don’t know how I can put anything positive or constructive forward

The actual things that are wrong are not the main problem.
People entering motor racing are not likely to take A leap of faith regarding paying out good money for a
Car that they are being “Told “complies with the required regulations. Spending large amounts of money
Requires research and then confidence in the outcome. At the moment I don’t think sports sedan rules / cars provide this.

[profi]

Why not make the class grow, the more wild these things look the more identity we end up with.

Look at the gt2 sports cars, they look great with their wide wings, why can't our rules be changed to
suit. IMO a 1600mm wide wing on a 2000+mm car gives them a vintage look.

Oh and the ute thing, they're not really a sedan are they....