I have had the similar problems and have some damage that has resulted in some bending of the mounting area. The bending on my car is not as severe as shown but is visible. I have not dealt with that damage yet. However, the Red 12 was found, by Norm Hamden, to have a loose, bent bolt on one side (or was it a missing bolt?). In any event, his alignment guy found the nut, inside the rail, stripped out. He tried to tap it, broke the tap and ended up cutting the nut out and welding another one in. The new one was larger because he also had to tap the second nut and so made both the same, larger size. I was even able to find new bolts in Sedona, Arizona, go figure.

Charlie, that means my car does not have the same sized hardware on one block. If a nut is damaged, and I think that this is not uncommon, tapping it out to the next larger size is the least expensive option and I, for one, do not see any issue with that.

The pictures here seem to show more damage that needs a heavier hand to properly fix. Again, these are 20/30 year old cars and have/will sustain damage that can be repaired to keep them serviceable. The caster blocks are vulnerable to damage because of their location, as these show. I would never have imagined that fixing the damage would be any issue for anyone as long as the caster block is the same and is in the same location. Am I wrong on this?

Jim Foxx

I am good with a repair as long as it is in the same location.

I could certainly compromise on hardware as long as the location is the same.

Seems like this is all about "LOCATION-LOCATION-LOCATION"

Having safe and servicable cars is definitely what we all want. Since this seems to be a reasonably common issue, it would be a good idea to clarify how best to fix this. Thie critical point is maintaining the geometry to the best extent practical. The next question is defining what that means. On the face of it, Phil's proposal seems like a good place to start. We need to word it so there are no loopholes that more "ambitious" racers can manipulate into better geometry. In other words, take Phil's suggestion, and codify it into a specific allowance that is measurable/enforceable. "Stock location" is a good principle, but needs to be defined in some measureable way to be an enforcable rule, and take into account slight variances - i.e to add a reinforcing plate as Phil suggests.

Eric,

Just curious how rule changes are decided?
Is there a vote after the proposals are in? When will we know the results?

-Shannon

Good question.

Requests are taken in from the racers, and the merits of each proposal are debated in the private series director forum. The series directors collectively come up with a set of recommendations for rules changes based on these suggestions, which are are typically put out for comment on the forums, and then sent onto the NASA main office. The rules are reviewed there, and recommendations are made (usually wording issues, or asking us to consider some unintended consequences, etc.) NASA has the final call - they own the ruleset. In practice they've gone with what we've asked, with only minor modifications to date, but it is ultimitely their call, should they choose to make it.

It is not a democracy, though. No voting takes place.

I assume improve reliability includes safety.

I know all of the history on lexan rear hatches but would continue to include this proposal in the mix for the following reasons:

It would make builds easier by providing bolt on weight reduction and improved safety. In Great Lakes region, it would help us grow our group (currently 3 cars) by making it easier to convert GTS-1 racers to spec. Also, in our region, we race at Mid-Ohio at least 3 times a year including nationals. Hitting the turn one bridge with the rear of the car is a real possibility. In a GTS1 race two years ago, a 944 made contact with the bridge, the hatch was torn from the bow ties and the frame deformed. If the hatch had not been lexan, the hatch most likely would have shattered spreading safety glass marbles across a very fast corner. In terms of costs, this part is about $400. I have never priced a replacement glass hatch for comparison. This information may be helpful for consideration.