IMO this is being blown way out of proportion. Just for your information we on the FB Ad Hoc committee knew that data collection was coming for a number of classes. We did not know or vote that this was happening to FB. However that said I do not think it is an issue and if they want to put one on our car they can do so.
Relax guys.
Thanks ... Jay Novak
313-445-4047
On my 54th year as an SCCA member
with a special thanks to every SCCA worker (NONE OF US WOULD RACE WITHOUT THE WORKERS)
I agree
I agree Jay and I also do not have a problem with the SCCA requiring me to put one of these on my car.
However I still contend it is a legitimate question for all of us to know what they intend to use the data for. I highly doubt I'm the only FB driver that would like to know.
I'm going to call the SCCA and see if I can get an answer to this.
Gary Hickman
Edge Engineering Inc
FB #76
I apologize for not coming back sooner and attempting to answer some questions.
The Runoffs supplemental regs contain a statement about data collection so competitors already signed up to allow SCCA to collect data. The addition of the magnetic plate just makes it easy to do. This data is controlled access and the FB ad hoc does not have direct access to the data.
In the December Fastrack this is a recommended item for 2014 and is part of letter 12661.
Why:
To compare performance between cars/engines. As new engine platforms are added and if/when some restriction is added to balance performance between engine platforms this data and dyno data will be useful.
Dyno data alone does not tell the full story, on track performance is also useful. The box collects long-g, lat-g, speed.
David
edit - after going back and reading all the posts I'm fairly amazed at the reaction to this. Also please take a look at post #8 David Ferguson, #32 by John LaRue and also #35 Phil Creighton.
Last edited by sccadsr31; 12.06.13 at 12:34 PM. Reason: More information
No big deal. I'll put it on but it's not gonna be in my airstream!
Stick it on the inside of one of the rear wing struts- as forward as practical.
Plates
I have a lot of aluminum stock of different size and shapes lying around, but found out today after looking around I realized this 3"X4" steel plate is going to be a small pain in the ass to make.
Anyone out there with a proper sheet of steel willing to fab 20 or 30 of these things? I'll pay $20 for one, and I'm sure you won't have any problem distributing the rest to the FB community for approximately the same.
Brett,
I think your car has one of these. David can correct me if I'm wrong but this should be vertical enough and is pretty darn close to 3" x 4".
On the other hand, if you want to pay me $20 for a piece of metal, I'll dig out my tin snips. You pay shipping, though.
Selling 3"x4" lightweight high performance metal strips for required data box mounting.
Easy mounting, no drilling required. Simply peel and stick. Lightest on the market.
Description
Foil Tape, Material Stainless Steel, Stainless Steel, Width 3 In., Length Thickness 4 mil, Tensile Strength 150 lb./in., Adhesion Strength 45 oz./in., Acrylic Adhesive, Performance Temp. -30 Degrees to 350 Degrees F, Standards MIL-S-5059
$40 each
Note: this product meets the proposed rules requirement but not guaranteed to hold the data box. Not responsible for data boxes falling of cars or injuries resulting from said detached data box while racing. Recommended mounting behind driver opening to prevent box from hitting you in the head if data box falls off.
Too funny!
I found a 3x3" plate at home depot with a hole in the center for concrete foundation work. I'm certain it will work, but it's not the right size.
Seriously, I'm having trouble finding steel stock down here, but I'll keep looking.
Check with local machine shops, metal fabricators, Vo-Tech Welding class. They will probably have what you need in the scrap bin. Happy hunting !
"An analog man living in a digital world"
Emphasis added,Originally Posted by Ian Lenhart
as a non-class-involved bystander,
exactly as I was thinking !!!! not thick enough to create enough 'magnetivity' (sp?) to make it around the track.
Good plan Ian.........
FFCoalition.com
Marc Blanc
First Stainless Steel in not a material it is a brand name, and common usage for corrosion resistant steel.
Second only some specific alloys exhibit magnetic properties, so be careful of the foil tape solution.
Well, I managed to score a beautiful brand new 6x20 inch sheet, and now have 10 regulation size 3x4 pieces. Any one want one, I can slip it in an envelope and send it to you...
Can also bring some to PBIR next month if anyone there needs one..
Data plate
Saturday I was at Dauntless Works in Vacaville picking up my car and another one was there getting some aero bits and the owner pointed out his data plate. He said he just figured it was easier to simply make the plate than spend any time talking about it. It took him about 30 minutes and $3.67.
As far as what we would use the data for-
As racing has progressed, the idea of building something to the ruebook and may the best man win has gradually been replaced ( largely) by the "the sanctioning body has a responsibilty to protect me from my competitors outspending me" theory. As a result we get constant input about 'equalizing' all options. So one of the ways we will go about that, and one of the tools we can use, is onboard data systems. Yes this is a far from perfect method, and its only one tool, in addition to radar speeds, splits, etc. but it is a method we have decided to use.
Now, i abhor the idea of big brother looking at the performance of my car electronically, but in the case of Trans Am, thats exactly what they do, especially in the 'balanced' TA2 class. Thats just the way it is.
If you dont want anybody to monitor your car, in the interest of compiling data to make and manage rules to meet the requests of the competitors, pick an 'open' class like GT1. If somebody shows up and beats my cars on a consistant basis, its my job to build better cars. There is no 'handicapping'.
Now, if FB was a '1000 cc stock engine, may the best man win' class, and the majority wanted it that way, and were comfortable having to replace their engine whenever a better one came along, we wouldnt have to mess with it. But that is not what we are hearing from the ad hoc. To further complicate that, there seems to be a point at which most think we should 'cap', for lack of a better word, the ultimate speed of these cars from a safety standpoint. So we need to sort of baseline where you are now to have some sort of point in mind.
Nobody is interested in stealing any secrets. And frankly boys, there arent any secrets to steal.....however we are progressing down this path simply because the majority of the feedback we get is that the class should be managed from a competitive and ultimate performance standpoint.
T
I have only one concern with this data collecting. Who is responsible for the module?
Example 1: I mount my plate over the engine on the engine cover and the motor blows up and burns the motor cover and the module. Do I have to replace it?
And how much force is required to remove the module? Should I come to a sudden stop, will the module come flying off? If it were to hit some one, am I responsible?
This may sound absurd but I have seen most everything happen.
Mike
thats when the term "flying solo, flying solo" will be used by corner workers....
I've got an AIM solo and the magnets on the back are quite strong. That said, I'll probably come up with a way to zip tie it as well or something....
Here's my take-
Tube frame DSR's started beating CSR's and there wasn't a movement afoot to "cap" speeds from a safety standpoint. But, now there is P1.
Part of me says that the FB ad hoc committee has nothing to do with this decision. That part of me also thinks there MAY be influential people in this club that do NOT want to see these cars beating Formula Atlantics. Now how's that for a conspiracy theory?
Update
It looks like a redesign is required! Data boxes at Fontana fell off the steel plates, I hear in both cases. Fortunately without injury to anyone or a car, so far as I know!
To whomever is responsible: Please don't ask us to do anything as dangerous as this again. (Think Rubens Barrichello's spring) Positioning and vibration being as individual as it is between cars, securing these boxes has got to be a properly engineered system.
Last edited by Randy Cook; 02.02.14 at 2:59 AM.
What system where they using to collect the data?
the sprung steel mounts with clips from AIM that are designed for the solo work flawlessly.. I know several cars that had these and they did not loose any.
https://www.pegasusautoracing.com/pr...asp?RecID=9638
If you only scca offered these to competitors for Free ! or at some insane discount retreivable at the event for say $5 dollars.
I can only imagine truly competitors do want fair competition adjustments.. so SCCA needs competitors help.
We lost 2 data boxes at ACS on Saturday, the one that did not come off used the official AIM mount. Lee Alexander was gracious enough to put an AIM mount on his car for Sunday and he and Chris both had data boxes on Sunday. I had one on my car most of the weekend. I used the AIM mount.
David
I have nothing against the idea of collecting the data for the purposes mentioned (if its as benign as they say).
The method of attachment seems very ill conceived with too many variables. They need to establish a prescribed method, validate its safety, then make everyone use that method. This means areas where it can fall off and hit a competitor are not allowed.
On any Monday a lot of Friday's good ideas look "very ill conceived", no one was injured no said their car was hit so yes we dodged a bullet.
As I said the AIM mount looks good as a solution, however we will never be able to tell you where to put it on the car.
Clearly until you see a tech bulletin or racing memo come out what we believe is a safe solution you are unlikely to find someone walking up on pre-grid and asking you where your plate is.
David
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote