delete
Printable View
delete
The afterburner and several others meet a spec from 2012 (iir) when they were made.Quote:
Originally Posted by GAC
The new regs require the latest 2019 spec. light.
Actually the 2019 spec is not the latest FIA certification. For some unknown reason the crb and scca do not allow anything other than the 2019 spec and those on list number 76.. There is a new cert list for 2023 (2024?) with quite a few more options on it... but not good enough for scca.
The Afterburner shown in the post above has a 2008 FIA certification... NOT acceptable by scca.
Does anyone have an exact list including part numbers of what SCCA will accept that will NOT expire in 2025?Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Davis
https://www.fia.com/sites/default/fi...74-2019_10.pdfQuote:
Originally Posted by david oleary
Who knows if these will expire or if the CRB was even aware of an updated spec.
I do not see any FIA documentation that backs up your statement above.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Davis
I would say you are confused by actual certification applications/approvals. There are approvals with very resent dates, but they are for 8874-2019.
All certification approvals have expiration dates. There is no reason that SCCA has to acknowledge a certification expiration date.
Brian
As promised...
Letter # 34898
Request approval of 40-LED 4\" rain light for F/SR cars
Please approve the 40 LED 4" red taillight part # ST-RHB40 from Superbrightleds.com for use as a rain light for formula cars and sports racers, in addition to FIA 2019 rain lights:
https://www.superbrightleds.com/roun...nt-40-leds-red
Testing has shown that this light provides very nearly the same brightness as the FIA 2019 spec lights, for a tenth of the cost.
It is incumbent on the board to take every measure to minimize the cost of entry to racing; this provides a very cost-effect way to dramatically improve the safety of every open-wheel and prototype car on track, but at almost negligible cost and weight impact.
Therefore it is appropriate and necessary for the board to fully consider and evaluate this as a suitable alternative to a very effective yet expensive mandated lamp.
Letter # 34899
Request SRF LED rain light approval for all open-wheel cars
Please approve the SRF-approved rain light (Superbrightleds P/N PT-STRB-R2) for use as a rain light for formula cars and sports racers.
If it's good enough for them, surely it's good enough for us!?!
Letter # 34900
Officially document and disclose rain light decision
Please publish a detailed explanation of the deliberation behind and the decision made to require the expensive upgrade to 2019 FIA spec rain lights for all formula cars and sports racers, through official SCCA channels. A SportsCar article would be appropriate, if not expedient; a post on scca.com would be effective, but a forum post is not adequate.
The board may have noticed a higher-than-typical level of pushback on this new requirement; perhaps if greater effort were spent to involve the affected members, with a reasonable time window for response, and with better and more open communication of the motivations and factors considered, there might be a substantially smaller volume of letters fighting back against a possibly helpful decision.
Then again, that may not be the case. It's hard to say, when the reply amounts to little more than a standard "Thank you for your input."
The ST-RHB40 is spec'd at 210 mA while the 8874-2019 lights are 700 mA. I am pretty certain the the CRB is going to doubt your claim of 'nearly' the same brightness.Quote:
Originally Posted by 924RACR
You are going to have to do better than that.
Brian
Two different current readings are irrelevant. There's also not necessarily a linear relationship between current and brightness,
There are also different efficiencies of LEDs, also different reflector designs.
Brian, you are sufficiently technically challenged such as to be a perfect candidate for the CRB.
Hence the other letter requesting they publish their testing/results.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardingfv32
Shall we talk about efficiency???
Recently received an email from Enterprises that they will sell the mandated light through the CSR's for $185. Enterprises sure is acting like that one light is mandatory.
Enterprises picking one and backing it makes sense since FE2 is being mandated to follow this rule and isn't getting the SRF3 exemption. I expect they'll restrict FE2 to one particular FIA-certified light in a coming update.Quote:
Originally Posted by CheckeredFlag
Also, per a recent email, the SRF3s got stuck with a mandatory spec "pigtail" adapter that costs $25 on top of the light itself (which is $38 through Enterprises - quite the markup from the $22 on the SuperBrightLEDs site, but perhaps that's not as much of a ripoff due to shipping?) and the combined package is $60. So our cost savings, while it hasn't quite vanished entirely, isn't as massive as it at first seemed.
Yeah, but it is basically an $8 extension that has the tail and brake wires reversed, or cut and spliced. Which most of us could do. No reason this needs to be a spec part.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshuaJustice
Does anyone know that the FIA spec will be sufficient to meet our needs. Has it been tested an verified?
Where is the data verifying this before simply mandating this, especially when there are much less costly means that could be as or more effective.
This is a rhetorical statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Demeter
That fact is that there is no way to establish factually what is 'needed'. Too may variables to develop a measure.... what level of moisture, speed, size of tires, body aero features, etc.
This is a judgement call and the CRB has chosen to go with the FIA judgement. Good luck proving someone else'e judgement is better than the FIA.
Brian
Brian,
Just because they are the FIA does not mean that they are all knowing and omnipotent. They have no knowledge of our conditions. And did anyone think that the FIA light just might be inadequate for our needs?
You made my point with : " That fact is that there is no way to establish factually what is 'needed "
Overpriced....YesQuote:
Originally Posted by Steve Demeter
Inadequate? Not even close
In the rest of the world there is no doubt that they are the best at what they do. No one else is close.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Demeter
You are still left with the problem of finding an alternative if you want to challenge the CRB's decision.
Brian
I believe the FIA used the qualitative assessment of some drivers driving cars on an artificially wet track, and then used their opinions to select the item they tested to develop the standard.
Light testing
Anyone who has ever been to a North American F4 event will find this statement hysterical. Their rules and application are a jokeQuote:
Originally Posted by Hardingfv32
RTI and even SCCA/FRP events are better
.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardingfv32
FIA Race Control and FIA equipment standards are in no way the same thingQuote:
Originally Posted by rockbeau25
Good point, poor example on my part.
Question Please
So i got my new F1 light today and it has the same 3 wires my OLD light uses, My OLD light works as a BRAKE light when i am in P2
form and a RAIN light when P2 or FA, will this new light work both ways also?
which light did you get?Quote:
Originally Posted by david oleary
I have the Cartek one, and you can make it a brake light or a flashing rain light with a 3-position toggle switch.
Perhaps even both flashing & a brake light at the same time, depending on how you wire it.
Don't forget, brake lights aren't required in P2... prefer to have both circuits light up the same time, for visibility...
i got the LIFELINE, LL421-100-011 the cert sticker is so small and the location of the sticker is where you can hardly see it but i guess you just show it at tech with the paperwork and hopefully that will work.Quote:
Originally Posted by 924RACR
Hi Vaugh
i think when we built this into a P2 a brake light was required? not sure now because we only ran it one season as a P2 and a FB for the INDY runoffs, after that we made it a FA but we have a full kit to make it a P2 again, it takes about 4 hours to do that switch it over..
Tech is not going to be checking certs. There are only to qualified brands/units sold in the us. They are going to be looking for one of these recognizable units.Quote:
Originally Posted by david oleary
You would have to import something from Europe to throw off tech.
Brian
Sitting hear reading the posts about the in car flagging and this one about the NEW CERTIFIED EXPENSIVE rain light, brought me back to my days as a building inspector, when obtaining an engineers cert overrode actually doing the inspection. There were plenty of inspectors that would just accept the engineers cert and never look at the work. This goes back to the comment a while back about lazy tech inspectors. So if someone hands you their log book with all the certs for everything then you figure everything is ok?
I found out that there are engineers, that for money will certify pretty much anything since they can always say that is not what I certified!
Remember that old saying, KISS, keep it simple STUPID! It is easier to have the driver or car rep turn on the rain light to see if it works and is bright enough in their opinion, than searching for a poorly located sticker that pretty much can be a fake. Back to my above mention about people willing to provide dubious certs.
In home construction where I was a building inspector in MD outside DC, the frame and rough wire was quite important since the next inspection was insulation which could or would cover a lot of the exterior construction, so they could then drywall. Then at final inspection something I occasionally ran into, was the grading cert from an engineering company that said the exterior grading was according to plan. Well a foreman/superintendent, quickly realized that I having been an equipment operator and plumber, when I took a look outside I could easily see the grading was not right. When I rejected the final and they could not go to closing, until they corrected the issue, everyone involved was pissed.
So taking someone else's word and not doing the inspection, was the lazy way out. I would much rather have to explain why I missed or overlooked something in doing my job, than attempting to say I never looked at it.
Think about that before quickly accepting a cert for something in place of doing the inspection.
Ed
...
Similar to one of my sayings: Don't assume anything. If you do, it'll too often come back to bite you in the butt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Womer
This and the flagtronic display are similar in that your budget will determine your perspective.
If you are wealthy, you say "Its only the price of one tire."
If you are hustling to find resources just to make it to the track. you say "OMG, it's the price of a tire."
It seems each side struggles to see it from the other perspective. Together, they are the price of half a set of tires. :(
What has pissed me off the most isn't the cost, it's the methodology they used.
One person writes a letter (I know who you are) to the CRB and within the Secret Crony Cadre of America, a decision is made behind closed doors that affects EVERY SINGLE open-wheel car owner. Like the FC tire standardization, they had time to poll the owners for ideas to bring to the table: "Hey, a letter has been submitted we feel is a good idea for the club to standardize on. We want to settle on one or two rainlight options for 2024. Please provide your ideas." Owners get buy-in (granted a lot would still be against, but their input gets provided before the decision is made but they still know a change is coming) and acceptance is more likely.
"Club" is in the name, guys!
Sports
Car
CLUB of
America
Instead, we're faced with continued agreement with the dictatorship principle or be disbarred from club racing.
Elections have consequences, I guess.
Now imagine you’re some poor bastard that bought a $12,000 Vee that cost $18,000 delivered.
Now said bastard finds the car needs belts, a fuel cell, a master cylinder, new valve springs from a fresh rebuild sitting for years, video cams, a rain light, a Flagtronics, and driving gear to race with a Club that can’t even answer a phone.
And right now, poor bastard has awaited a return phone call for nine days, from a track to see if his wife and he can camp at the Runoffs in nine days, and has already driven 800 miles towards there.
At some point, common sense intervenes, and poor bastard sells the race car at a loss just to be poorer, and spends the rest of his life pissed off and ignoring the sport he absolutely loved and supported for 60 years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by E1pix
Let's NOT do that Eric! Dreams are hard to come by and you are very very close to achieving yours - don't give up due to the inevitable shortcomings of a few others. Deep breaths, mon ami, deep breaths....... It is worth it despite your struggles!
And, at over 33,000 views (!!), I'm tapping out. I won't add to this tally any longer. It seems to me like the arguments have been made, decisions rendered, and directions given. I left SCCA years ago for more friendly venues, and there are more of them now than there used to be. Voting with your feet seems to be the only viable option at this point.
best,
bt
SCCA is NOT the only game in town.Quote:
Originally Posted by E1pix
Sound like the same complaint that has been made many times before.Quote:
Originally Posted by CheckeredFlag
It just seems odd that before the internet, say 3 or 4 decades, SCCA function this way and grew very well. I do not think that the vast majority mind this so-called dictatorship or things would have changed by now. Very few are interested in how the sausage is made.
Brian
Apply your statement to any passion-based exploit, or even day-to-day necessities — or life in general — and a disconnect occurs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardingfv32
People will put up with a lot to achieve goals, but that doesn’t mean it’s okay — and certainly isn’t okay with the “vast majority.”
While the internet makes grievance-airing more noticeable, it hasn’t changed the Club — though according to many members here, the Club certainly *has clearly changed* in servicing its members.
These threads show a widespread, massive unease with mandates, if not the general direction of Club racing. Nobody I’ve read seems unhappy just to be unhappy, but for every ten negative comments there’s *maybe* one positive one.
So I don’t consider these as internet issues, nor have they been common over the Club’s history. If they had been, I wouldn’t have bothered with any of it (spending retirement to ourselves race).
I’ve adored SCCA Racing; its members, its drivers, its crews, its tracks, and everything else about it for 60 years, so I take this all to heart — whether good or bad.
But in those decades the CRB and BOD minutes as well as the COA minutes were published monthly in the magazine that was mailed to every member known as Sports Car. Now to find the same info one has to go n a treasure hunt through the SCCA website to even begin to find them. I had to ask someone in Topeka where to find them. They could be a lot more clearly visible :mad::mad:
That's a bit of a stretch. Fastrack is readily available on the SCCA website. All a first-time visitor has to do is type "fastrack" in the search box -- first hit. Plus, it's available much faster than via printing and snail mail, and all back issues are right there, instead of buried in a pile of back issues in your garage.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Demeter
Sometimes, 'progress' is a good thing.
You’re right, Tim... unless wanting to do the Runoffs.Quote:
Originally Posted by TimH
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Nesbitt
The internets make most information gathering much, much easier. OTOH, that "first-time visitor" has to know what to put in the search box, and the term "fastrack" is not going to be known to most.
Well, this is 2023 not 1983. Fastrack and the GCR are now online and Sports Car may actually be ending print editions this December. Members can communicate outside their regions so easily now with Zoom, Facebook, and ApexSpeed. We start to see the cronies behind the curtain and their methods. Hell, "write a letter" is now online and can be shared to the membership as a whole on social sites instead of no-one knowing what has actually been mailed in then buried.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardingfv32
I bought two sets of used tires for $720 recently. At that rate $250 is a decent amount of rubber. This is also to replace something I already have a very effective version of.Quote:
Originally Posted by problemchild
Okay - I am a computer guy.
Email shows up from Kerrie Speed - lost in the 100's of spam and other emails I get.
Scroll down to Road Race, Click on Road Race and the Road Racing page says the October preliminaries are online.
Click on that and it takes me to another page to click on the cars and rules page
Click on that and takes me to a page where the links are not active (they are today).
I have been trying to get a direct link to the GCR on the SCCA front page. If this is our "Bible" it should be front and center.
I think I am going to put a computer and flat screen in my trailer so I can call up the GCR, Fastrack and the race sups so I don't have to print them out each weekend.....(I do anyway as they sit on a corkboard in my trailer )
ChrisZ
BTW - This is the next rain light:
2. #34785 (KEVIN KLOEPFER) Fire System ServiceThank you for your letter. This is being referred to SCCA technical staff to determine and outline the recertification requirementsfor the various approved types of fire systems.
Knew that was coming.....
BTW II
Then there is this:
The existence of a Homologation Certificate or letter of exception from the Road Racing Department is not conclusive evidence of
rules compliance.".............:confused::confused::conf used::confused::confused: I guess that proves the old saying "Not worth the paper it is printed on..."
Amen Chris You made my point
I finally accepted the inevitable and ordered my CarTek light from MSW today. And they say it is 2019 FIA Approved