Possible Zone 8 DE rule changes?

[Kim Crosser]

This was a subject at the last Board meeting - whether some safety rules for DE events were too restrictive in our QDE events.

I would like to suggest the following for consideration, and would like feedback - good ideas, bad ideas, etc. If these seem like good ideas, then I will post them for consideration by the Zone 8 Rules committee for next year's rules. All new/changed text is in BOLD Italics.

Kim Crosser



I. General
...
AA. At the discretion of the Event Master, DE events in "Parking Lot" Venues may be run with modified Safety provisions, as detailed in XIV.D and XIV.I below. "Parking Lot" venues are defined as areas that are normally used for temporary parking of motor vehicles, where the entire area is enclosed by curbing, walls, and/or fencing, and the entire enclosed area is paved.

XIV. Safety
...
D. For Time Trial and DE roll bars are mandatory in "open" cars and all cars entered in any Improved class or higher, and are strongly recommended in all cars. Roll bars are not mandatory for Autocross, but are recommended. Minimum dimensions are: Wall thickness .120", diameter 1¾". A 3/16" diameter hole shall be drilled in a non-critical area too allow verification of the wall thickness. Forward braces (roll cage) and the main hoop subject to contact with an occupant’s helmet, should be padded with a nonresilient material such as Ensolite, Ethafoam, or similar material to a thickness of ½ inch. All occupants helmets must clear a straightedge placed between the top of the windshield frame, directly in front of the occupant’s head and the top of the roll bar directly behind the occupant’s head when seated in a normal driving position and restrained by belts and harnesses. A car equipped with a roll bar or roll cage that meets the technical requirements for that car to participate in PCA Club Racing is adequate for PCA ZONE 8 Driving Event use. Boxsters may use a roll bar extension such as the Brey-Krause unit. The 996 & 997 Cabriolet will be measured using an 8.5” block to represent the hidden roll protection. Roll bars must be braced. Full roll cage dimension is 1½" diameter. The roll bar hoop and all braces must be seamless, ERW or DOM mild steel tubing or chrome molybdenum alloy steel such as SAE 4125 or SAE 4130. It is recommended that mild steel tubing be used as chromium alloys present difficulties in welding and must be normalized to relieve stress. Proof of the use of alloy steel will be the responsibility of the entrant. No aluminum roll bars or cages allowed. Full roll cages are required for cars without a supportive front windshield. In "Parking Lot" venues (see I.AA), at the discretion of the Event Master, Boxsters in "Street Stock" and "Stock" classes may be permitted to participate in DE events when equipped with roll bar extensions such as the Brey-Krause unit, even if the "straightedge" provision above is not met.

--rationale - Parking lot events are much less likely to involve roll-overs, as the lot is fully paved. Also, speeds in parking lots are generally lower than speeds at DE events on road tracks. Even with the B-K extender, stock seats in Boxsters limit DE participation to drivers under about 5'10" in height in order to meet the straightedge rule. This would allow taller Boxster drivers to participate in QDE events without requiring replacement of the stock seats with racing shells.

...
I. A securely fastened 2.5 Halotron; 2-lb. Halon or 10-BC rated dry chemical fire extinguisher is required for Time Trials and DE. They are strongly recommended but are not required for Autocross. They must be fully charged and accessible to the driver. Any built-in or on-board system that meets these minimums is also acceptable. This may include Aqueous Film-Forming Foam (AFFF) systems. In "Parking Lot" venues (see I.AA), at the discretion of the Event Master, Novices in "Street Stock" and "Stock" classes may be permitted to participate in DE events without an on-board fire extinguisher.

--rationale - The constrained area of a parking lot event means there is a corner worker (with a fire extinguisher) relatively close. Cars cannot go off track and wind up on fire out in the "boonies". Further, the likelihood of igniting a brush fire from an off-track excursion is non-existent. This rule modification would allow drivers who are considering progressing from AX to DE/TT to try a few QDE events without installing an extinguisher. However, cars above Stock, or drivers who have passed their "Novice" status, should be required to install extinguishers to continue participating.

[rshon]

Kim -
As a Boxster driver who's done DE's, I think it looks fine.
-Russell

[MikeD]

I'm not sure I agree with the proposed changes. I'm 6'3" and was able to get the required clearance. It's been a while but I believe that I used a BK Extension with my stock seats and met the requirement just fine.

I don't see the point of relaxing the fire extinguisher rules. They are cheap and easy to mount.

And furthermore, relaxing safety rules for "novices" is a bad idea. If anyone at a DE/TT/QDE needs the safety equipment, it is the "novice". Novices need instructors, and I know a lot of instructors that will not get into cars with students ("novices") if they have anything less than desired safety equipment.

All that to say that if this goes to the rules committee, I for one will appose it.

[ajackson]

MikeD: I disagree in with your assertion that the novices need safety equipment more. More experienced drivers are pushing their cars harder and closer to the limit more often and so that negates the experience with regards to the chances of going off.

It is also a bad argument because Kim just made the point that the safety equipment mentioned (in a parking lot course) doesn't really improve safety because it isn't needed. When was the last time any car flipped over in a parking lot? Has it ever happened? When was the last time a stock car was on fire and the corner workers extinguisher wasn't enough? Has it ever happened? Abstract safety concerns don't help out if the specific items aren't needed.

[MikeD]

If you don't agree with me that's fine. But don't tell me my argument is bad when you apparently do not know any better.

Novices are far less likely to recognize when they are getting themselves into trouble. A PSS GT3 with a 3 point factory belt, no rollover protection, and no fire protection has a far greater chance to get into trouble than a Club Race prepared MI or KI Boxster S or C2.

And I'm sorry, but I really do not understand the logic that thinks just because it hasn't happened, it wont. I'm sure the guys at the event Herb posted about in this thread never thought a car would go off track into the paddock. It had never happened, until it did. We had never had a car nose into a cement stanchion, until it did. We had never had a car take out a porta-poti, until it did. We had never had a car back into a tree, until it did. You're right, we haven't needed roll-over protection in a parking lot... until we do. And we haven't needed in-car fire suppression in a parking lot... until we do. Using the argument that we don't need safety equipment because we haven't needed it yet, is well.... naive.

And still you have not proposed any argument that will convince our instructor pool to get into cars with these relaxed safety requirements. There are instructors right now that will not get into cars with just 3 point seat belts. Now you are going to ask them to get into a car with no roll-over or fire protection.

Your argument did not convince me to change my mind, so as I said in my first post, I will appose these changes if they proposed.

[ajackson]

I guess we'd just have to ask the instructors. Most instructors I've had in parking lot events used the 3 point belts in my car even though I have 5 point harnesses and a roll bar installed. Do we have a problem with instructors being willing to instruct at AX's, where no fire suppression and rollbar protection is required?

From your personal insults (which I disagree with but won't get into), I wouldn't think I would change your mind, but I stand by my points for others to read.

I just thought of a way to phrase my novice vs expert safety requirements idea. What percentage of drivers that have driven a big track once or twice have gone off track? Now what percentage of drivers that have been out many many times have ever gone off (probably most)? Experienced drivers have rolled the dice many times and chances are one time they overcooked something and went off or spun. If you track your car regularly you better invest in some safety because eventually something will happen.

PS. I am guessing you mean oppose rather than appose.

[gulf911]

I will have to support Mike on this one. It doesn't make any sense why you would relax the rules because it 'appears' safe. I have been witness to many incidents at the Q , it can and does happen. One of the main issues we strive for is safety, especially for novices. Should we relax the helmet rule as well? Its in a parking lot after all...

[RETII]

For my $.02 I feel that safety is paramount and while much can be bantered around who is more at risk the fact remains that all drivers in these type of events share the risk of fire for whatever reason. I am for keeping the rule as is. My .02 may actually be about $140.00 because this will be my first DE I had to install said safety equipment and I chose an expensive mounting system. Cost really shouldn't be considered for several reasons first and foremost safety,secondly it costs more to participate than an extinguisher costs. No real good reason IMHO to deviate from an established protocol.

[4est]

I agree with Mike, as well, but do think he came off kind of harsh. You need thick skin to participate in discussions on this forum sometimes. As for the safety topic, since only a small percentage of sky-divers have accidents, should their governing bodies only require a small percentage of participants to wear safety gear? Of course not. As for the novice/experienced issue, I can see both sides of the issue. When I was a brand new driver (year before last), I was very conservative with my bright shiny sports car. Now that I have progressed to MI, I wouldn't dream of driving without all required safety gear because of the amount of time at spend near the limit of my experience driven abilities and those of the car. Sometimes, a newby will push well past the his limits. This will almost always be stopped immediately by his instructor. I think the Instructor is our most important piece of safety protocol. For my vote: I'd rather be way too safe than a tiny bit unsafe.

[kurquhart]

For my vote: I'd rather be way too safe than a tiny bit unsafe.

I agree: it does not make too much sense to relax safety rules simply to admit more drivers into the events. Yes, it is an education event, but safety should be a large part of that education.

Also, I am not convinced that a QDE is that much safer than a DE at a track. IMO, the passing aspect increases the chance of accident in both venues to the point where the required safety equipment is well warranted.

[hmeeder]

As one of the people who has to enforce and explain our rules to those that feel that they are being singled out or discriminated against, I can tell you that one of the most paramount things is to ensure that all rules are applied to all drivers equally.

Kim- you are proposing a rules change that is platform specific, yet your rationale makes no argument as to why a Boxter should be safer in a parking lot vs any other cabrio in the stable. Assuming that your argument that a parking lot DE is a safer venue is valid one, then it is safe for all open cars, not just the Boxter.

I believe that for an exclusion to be ruled in favor of the boxter you need to show somehow that parking lot DEs are safer for the Boxter alone or argue in favor of lifting the broomstick rule for all open cars entirely for that venue. Then you have to show at what exact point is a taller driver safer. Would a 6'10" driver be protected the same as a 5'10" driver? The benefit of the bromstick rule is that it is very specific and measurable. There's no interpretation, no grey area.

As for the contention that a parking lot DE is safer than a track venue, I feel that it is not necessarily the case. Sure the hazards are a bit different, but to contend that there is no danger of a rollover is hard to support. Our parking lot DEs are dangerous in a completely different way. We have light stanchions, grates, random k-rails, porta-potties and no expanses of rocks and bush to separate the lanes of on-coming traffic. Our parking lot DEs are uniquely hazardous and the DE rules tighter safety restrictions are a result of the co-existence of cars on the same track. It is the added factor of cars that are sharing the track that is the true variable in the equation. Suspending or modifying safety rules for novices and street stock cars to make it more accessible for those individuals seems contrary to the spirit of our safety regulations that protect those who need it the most, novices and street stock vehicles. For my part, I feel much safer on a purpose built track, with experienced drivers in well prepared vehicles.

Your second proposal is also easily argued against, much as some of the others have. Additionally, There's nothing saying that you have to spend $140 for a mount. Granted, most Boxter and other newer car drivers are not likely to screw a $5 mount to the floor, but neither are they required to, just provide a solid mount for the approved extinguisher.

Having said all that, I strongly encourage everyone to make any rules changes propasals, regardless of the motivation. Eventually, the Rules Committee will weigh each on its merits and make a decision. More involvement by our members in the process improves the club for all involved.

And Mike could have been bit more diplomatic in his response, but that's just my opinion.

[Kim Crosser]

Many good points were made above. I will try to respond to some/all.

General - I wonder if a lot of this discussion is because our DE events are really just un-timed TT events? From the PCA National DE page - "The mission and purpose of the Porsche Club of America's Driver's Education Program is to provide a safe, structured and controlled teaching and learning environment."
Are our DE events really "teaching" events? The two I attended at the Q had few real students and was IMHO mostly TT'ers "tuning up" for the following day's TT event, while the OCR DE up at SOW yesterday had lots of students included. Some of the Regions include formal steps of progression through the DE run groups, based on demonstrated skill (and attitude) levels and are clearly focused on using DEs primarily as teaching events.

If our DE's are intended to give AX'ers a progression into higher performance driving, it would seem like we should be making an effort to make it easier for qualified students to try a DE event. The continuous lapping really helps students progress quickly as you can apply technique changes immediately and see/feel the results.

Harnesses/seat belts - I suggest that belongs in a different topic altogether. The National and Zone 8 rules already specifically allow factory 3-point belts in S and SS classes, and I am not suggesting any changes to those rules. (One side note - the National Standards do stipulate that both seats must have the same protection - i.e., if driver has a harness, then passenger must also have a harness.)

Fire extinguisher - if you reference the PCA National DE standards (http://www.pca.org/drivers_ed/standards.html), you will find no mention of any requirement for a vehicle-mounted fire extinguisher for DE events. However in their Sample Rules (for NHIS and Lime Rock Park), they do state "Fire extinguishers are mandatory for all run groups and must be securely fastened, metal to metal (minimum 2.5 pound, with two strap metal bracket recommended) within reach of the driver. This requirement is waived for first time participants for one event only."
I am suggesting that people who are interested in moving up from AX to DE be given the opportunity to try it (with an instructor all day!) before being asked to modify their car. Perhaps the better wording for that modification might be:
"First-time DE students with an instructor on-board at all times may run without a fire extinguisher installed."
(I think using the term Novice was a mistake - I meant students who HAD to have an instructor on-board, not inexperienced drivers who were allowed to drive by themselves.)

Roll-bar/broomstick rule - again, reference the PCA National DE standards, "Open Cars: Any make of car delivered with factory-installed roll over protection meets the minimum standards for PCA DE events.". (This same document approves passing zones in major turns on Super Speedway tracks!) Boxsters are equipped with factory roll over protection (although I would agree it is not tall enough) and thus qualify as is. The PCA National standards only specify the "broomstick" rule when the car has no factory protection and a roll bar is added later. Further, in their DE 2002 Sample Rules (http://www.pca.org/drivers_ed/rules.html), they explicitly state: "At NHIS events all Cabriolets must have a roll bar installed, with the following exceptions: Targas, 914s, Boxsters and 996 cabriolets are acceptable as delivered from the factory." (They do require the broomstick rule at Lime Rock, however.)


Granted - these are MINIMUM standards. However, they are the requirements of the National board, and are what is in use in some of the other zones (and even used by some other regions in our Zone).


Mike D - relative to fitting under the broomstick. I tried fitting a couple of years ago, and even with the seat well forward and the back reclined, my helmet projected above the "line". There is another Boxster driver with a BK who is just a bit shorter than me and he just barely clears the bar with the seat all the way forward and fully reclined. At that point, I might question the safety of the driving position - how well does the harness work at extreme angles, and how good is your car control when laying down with arms fully extended? I will try it again in his car at the next event - maybe I lost height as I got older.

Personally, I think the BK extender is a good idea for Boxsters with taller drivers - I am just disappointed that under Zone 8 rules and the "no exceptions" policies, that even if I installed a BK and an extinguisher, I would not qualify to participate in a DE under Zone 8 rules.

Herb - relative to the Boxster "platform", I mentioned that specifically because it is already singled out in the Zone 8 DE/TT rules. If there are other Porsche cabs which need and can use roll bar extenders, then the rule should include those as well.

Ok - fire when ready! (But aim first, please.)

[Jackie C]

If you are asking for instructor's opinions, I'll chime in that all cars should be equal (regarding safety equip) especially since all drivers are not. Nothing can be more frightening sometimes than being in a student's right seat knowing that they are oblivious of the limits of their car, even though they are convinced they know. It does seem to be the trend that more novices are aquiring higher performance cars (GT3s, 996s etc)and that increases the learning curve too. As for this DE, we've included 944 spec drivers from other venues and BMW club. Kim, now we are driving with people that we are unfamiliar with and that adds a new dimension to the mix...
The veterans have the equipment and if the students want to play with the big dogs as far as passing, (particularily in tight areas like the Q) they should ante up. Let's be proactive regarding safety.

[kurquhart]

Mike D - relative to fitting under the broomstick. I tried fitting a couple of years ago, and even with the seat well forward and the back reclined, my helmet projected above the "line". There is another Boxster driver with a BK who is just a bit shorter than me and he just barely clears the bar with the seat all the way forward and fully reclined. At that point, I might question the safety of the driving position - how well does the harness work at extreme angles, and how good is your car control when laying down with arms fully extended? I will try it again in his car at the next event - maybe I lost height as I got older.

Personally, I think the BK extender is a good idea for Boxsters with taller drivers - I am just disappointed that under Zone 8 rules and the "no exceptions" policies, that even if I installed a BK and an extinguisher, I would not qualify to participate in a DE under Zone 8 rules.

I'm surprised that the BK extender is not tall enough. From the picture, it appears a good 5" above the seat back. http://www.bkauto.com/porsche/r3010.php

At any rate, BK parts are expensive. Perhaps it is feasible to have something comparable made locally that is tall enough for your seating position?

[Kim Crosser]

Hi Kris,
The convertible top must raise and lower over the extender, which limits any increase in height - as BK notes, it only increases height above the existing roll bars by 1-3/4 inches.
All DE rules require convertibles/cabs to run with the top up/closed. Otherwise, BK could just make a taller extender.
Kim