1441 replies to this topic

[Noose]

Mark,

We can't respond until we actually see a chassis. As of now, the use of JK guide tounge sections, or other similar Flexi pieces, meeting the stated dimensional requirements is allowed until January 1, 2009.

[Hworth08]

We used shaker tubes to mount Formula bodies as early as 1965. Drill a 1/16" hole in a peice of shim stock, punch the "hole" out with a pair of hole punchers, a length of 1/16" tubing inside 1/8" inch tubing, and solder on the shim stock caps. About as vintage as it gets.

[Noose]

I remembered them, too. As for the use of them in today's retro builds I know Tony P as well as Lou Pirro have incorporated them in some chassis they have built.

[Noose]

No problem. Actually, there are still brass components out there that were used back in the day where the tongue in an integral part of the whole nose piece.

[Noose]

Here is proof, too. This was from the Independent Scratchbuilder site. It was 1968.

[Noose]

And here's another built by none other than Brian Warmack - same race.

[team burrito]

I didn't realize that. might be cause I was only born in 69!

That's because you are not a geezer like us!

[Noose]

I might also add that since it is brass that there should be no reason for it not be legal even as an integral piece.

[Tim Neja]

Ahh--stop typing--start racing!!

[tonyp]

Tim... Agreed!

[Phil Smith]

Ahh--stop typing--start racing!!

Tim... Agreed!

Well, Slotblog would cease to exist if everyone did that! Plus, if you guys were practicing what you're preaching, you wouldn't have posted what you just posted!

And why are you guys that are above all of this, reading this crap in the first place? Take your own advice and shut up and go racing!

[tonyp]

It keeps me amused. I race and understand the rules. LOL...

[Phil Smith]

I race and understand the rules. LOL...

I don't race OR understand the rules. Maybe there's a lesson to be learned!

[team burrito]

And the lesson is don't believe everything you read here, you will just get more confused.

[Cheater]

Contradictive rules:

1/2" spoiler permitted as maximum cord length... one bend only, sheesh

But body rules state 1-3/8" high body max and 1-3/4" maximum height inclusive of spoiler?? Making said spoiler 3/8" MAX, rule should be listed as 1-7/8" as maximum height inlcusive of spoiler, making the rules conform with one another.

Rick,

Here's how we explain it in SERRA tech.

If you want to use the full 1/2" height spoiler, you can't run the rear of the body at the maximum permitted 1-3/4" rear height.

If you want to run the rear of the body at the legal maximum height, you can't run a full-height spoiler, i.e. the spoiler can only be 3/8" in height.

What's contradictive about that?

[Phil Smith]

So Dr. Phil (and others) would this help you to understand the intention of the hinge rule and its movement?

A hinge is something that controls rotation. Hinged movements are those produced by the rotation of a part around the hinge, not by the linear movement of that part within any clearance that might or might not be present in a sloppy hinge.

Noose, I hate Dr. Phil. That was cold!

Tight hinges produce "hinge rotation" only movement. By default, sloppy hinges are going to produce movement other than rotational. I just don't see how the inherent multi directional movement of sloppy hinges doesn't create a huge contradiction in the current rules.

It seems to me: The IRRA says sloppy hinges are legal. But because of the single direction movement rule, no car that has sloppy hinges should pass tech - if the car is teched properly. No cars! EVER!

It floors me that the IRRA ignores this discrepancy in the rules. Noose is the only member that's bothered to even address it, and I can't say that even Joe seems too interested.

Why is this? And why does this obvious discrepancy in the rules need to exist in the first place? Why not just rewrite one of the rules so it's in step with the other? I just don't get it.

[Noose]

Well, Phil, because the board does not feel that it needs to be rewritten. It's that simple. So what's your next point of controversy?

[Phil Smith]

And the lesson is don't believe everything you read here, you will just get more confused.

Russ, no doubt I'm completely confused. I guess I should take your advice.

[Phil Smith]

Well Phil because the board does not feel that it needs to be rewritten. It's that simple. So what's your next point of controversy?

Noose, at least that's an answer that makes more sense than any of the others.

Why doesn't the IRRA fix the hinge rules? Because they don't feel like it!

Works for me!

PS: Thanks for not calling me Dr. Phil again!

[MSwiss]

From Dallas Phil:
"Tight hinges produce "hinge rotation" only movement. By default, sloppy hinges are going to produce movement other than rotational. I just don't see how the inherent multi directional movement of sloppy hinges doesn't create a huge contradiction in the current rules."

Phil,
Where in the IRRA rules is there a reference a hinge must only produce rotational movement?
They're isn't.
The IRRA can't continually rewrite rules that everyone already understands.
Feel free to copy a set of our rules, perform the "Dallas Phil Obsessive/Compulsive Edit"
to them,and refer to "The Dallas Phil Remix" whenever you need to understand how to build a legal car.

[Phil Smith]

Where in the IRRA rules is there a reference a hinge must only produce rotational movement?

Well, you have point, but for all practical purposes, an irrelevant one:

"Hinged Movements: Other than a drop arm, all hinged movements must be oriented in only one direction on any individual chassis. A chassis may have transverse hinges (examples: Iso-fulcrum hinges and plumber hinges) OR
it may have longitudinal hinges (example: side pan hinges) but the chassis may not have both types. The number of individual hinges is not restricted. Centerline hinges are NOT allowed."

So you can only have movement in one direction. It can be something other than rotational movement, but it can only be one movement. If you have movement that's not rotational, it has to be in one direction only, and you no longer can have rotational movement, because that would be movement in two directions.

You're so much smarter than everyone else, Mike. You explain to me how you make sloppy hinges move in one direction and one direction only.

[team burrito]

IMO, if the wire is smaller than the ID of the tubing, it becomes a retainer, not a hinge. If you want to define the amount of movement, then do it.

Otherwise, stop strangling us with your rules and let us build chassis!