October Minutes

Post Reply
Site Admin
Posts: 631
Joined: June 24th, 2006, 11:56 am

October Minutes

Post by Dietmar »

The FV Ad Hoc Committee met on Oct 1
Members attending: Steve Oseth, Barret Hendricks, John Petillo, Bruce Livermore, Dietmar Bauerle
Guest: Fred Clark

A while back the wording in the GCR was changed with regards to the term BODYWORK. This became necessary because the GCR definition of BODYWORK was totally inappropriate for any open wheeled car. Some confusion still exists as to the actual intent of the term BODYWORK.
The current rules state: Bodywork shall be defined as all panels external to the chassis/ frame and licked directly by the air stream. All bodywork shall be rigidly attached to the chassis and shall not move relative to the chassis while the car is in operation.
This does not allow for the use of any device which would divert air around the rear axle or locating arm (trailing or leading) for the purpose of streamlining . It seems that some officials have taken the new BODYWORK definition to its fullest extent and have told competitors that their cars in their current configurations are now illegal even though these cars have been running this configuration for the last 10-20 years.
This brings up the question as to whether these cars should require modifications or the BODYWORK rule should be adjusted to allow cars that have always run this configuration to continue without the need for modification(s) .
The SCCA has asked the Ad Hoc Committee to further discuss the BODYWORK rule and come up with a recommendation. The Committee will be discussing this issue at subsequent meetings. Preliminary discussion has been toward allowing some streamlining device provided that it is a structural part of the suspension but we are not yet sure of the exact wording or to what extent.

A letter has been received and discussion began on the question ( read possible need and/or advantage) of allowing forged pistons. The letter suggested the problems with current piston supplies and quality and asked that a forged piston built to current specifications be considered. The Committee has decided to open discussion by first approaching certain manufacturers to determine interests and costs. The thought is that if the forged piston is allowed, it would not be exclusive to one supplier but opened up to anyone wishing to manufacture and sell to the general public. Our primary concern would be to make certain that adequate specifications would be in place to control the piston parameters.

No other items were presented or discussed.
Next meeting scheduled for Nov 5
Post Reply