Looking for support to request a SOLO2 rules change
Below is a draft of a letter that I'd like to send to the SEB regarding allowing the removal of fog/driving lights on all cars in SOLO2. Would anyone here who is an SCCA member, especially anyone who has broken a foglight in a car/cone collision, be willing to support this by also writing thier own letter ( SEB @SCCA.com ); form letters are ineffective. If so please post a thought or two. Also, if you think I am nuts, post why. I'd like to garner some support, and then have a barrage of emails sent to the SEB at roughly the same time...say next week or so.
Dear Members of the SEB:
In March I submitted a proposal that was submitted as item 08-101. It was noted in the June Fastrack that the proposal was “Not Recommended”. Based on a recent incident that I was involved with, I would request that this topic be revisited and reviewed on a more broad scope.
My original intent was to submit this request as primarily a C&C issue that was paired with the bodykit rule already in place for ST. Unfortunately, I think that I vastly underplayed the potential safety aspect of this concern. On 8/3 at an event in Milwaukee I managed to run over a 3-cone wall on a high-speed section of the course. The impact dislodged one of my foglights and by one account “it flew 40 feet in the air”. My understanding is that it also made a bit of a mess when it ‘landed’.
It seems that most fog/driving lights are attached by flimsy brackets or plastic housings that are often just snapped in place versus having a fastener, like bolts or screws, to secure them to the car. This can allow for the light to easily be dislodged in a car/cone colision. In the big picture, spending $45.00 and perhaps an hour of my time to repair my car’s flimsy light is nothing compared to having to worry about a projectile shooting out of the front of my car at 55mph…and the possibility of that projectile hitting a corner worker or spectator…not to mention that debris on course could be missed and cause damage to another competitor’s vehicle or tires. Now I completely understand there is ‘an assumption of risk’ involved with our sport—but it is also prudent to attempt to mitigate the risk as best possible.
I think that this is an issue that now goes beyond ST and should be considered for Stock class cars as well. In my opinion this should fall under the Stock C&C rule (13.2.A), and a driver should be allowed the latitude to remove the OE fog/driving lights to save from exposure to (additional) damage on his/her vehicle in a car/cone collision. In doing so, the risk to other competitors (as course workers), spectators and other vehicles is mitigated. Furthermore, I can certainly understand that additional clarification be worded into the rules to require the openings left by vacated lights not be used in a way that another performance advantage may be gained (e.g. ducting). This rule would benefit those cars/drivers that have poorly designed lights (by autocross standards); cars that may actually have well-designed lights would not be forced to remove them, but because lights typically weigh very little, would not be at a material disadvantage from additional weight.
I have attached my original correspondence below and would greatly appreciate the SEB reconsidering this matter by more heavily weighing the safety aspect that it presents.
I would like to take an opportunity to discuss what I see as a contradiction in ST rule 14.2.F where it is stated: "Standard parts may not be removed except for the substitution of spoilers, rear wings, bumper covers and valances". It also states "addition of spoilers, splitters, body kits, rear wings and non-functional scoops/vents is allowed...body kits are limited to bumper covers, valences, side skirts and fender flares."
My car has “standard” fog lights. They are constructed and attached in such a way that they are prone to breaking, and as such I would rather remove them than to have to replace them at $45.00 each. I know this to be the case on other cars as well. On top of being a financial nuisance, when lights break, whether it be a shattered lens, or a dislodged housing it is possible that the result could pose an on-course hazard in the form of broken glass or flying debris.
I would ask the SEB to consider to amend the rules to allow the removal or replacement of non-DOT mandated secondary (e.g. Fog/Driving) “standard” lighting. Because we are allowed to already use aftermarket body kits, I believe this request to be within the spirit of the rule already in place. The contradiction in the rules occurs is that many body kits do not have a provision for OE fog or driving lights, and as such are actually illegal to use in ST (we cannot make an illegal modification which is the removal of a “standard” part to facilitate a legal modification, that being the substitution of a listed body part). Because a typical fog light weighs perhaps a pound or two, I do not see this as offering any material performance gain through weight loss.
I appreciate the consideration in this matter.
Erik Bacon
MKE Region 205933
oops
Linear Mode
