2012 Track Width Measurement

Hope everyone had a good holiday. Now that it’s mostly over, it’s time to get serious about the new season. We will be rolling into MSRH a month from today for the first race of the new season.

I read over the rules when they first came out and was generally in favor of the new directions but I did have some concerns. Now that Dan is taking the car to the body shop next week and Al has spoken a bit about the rules on the national site, I have some more significant questions/concerns.

(For reference I’m going off of version 1.2 of the CMC rules for my questions.)

The first question would be concerning section “6.3 Track Width” and it’s interaction with section 7.5.1. This is of course different from section “6.3 Minimum Weight” which I don’t have any questions about. Section 6.3 (the second one) sets maximum track width based on a set of platform dependent fixed dimensions. This is clear and measurable and I’m glad it was added. If you read section 7.5.1, it appears to cloud the track width rule. Section 7.5.1.3 from last year’s rule had strong wording on fender/track width interaction but it has been removed for this year’s rule. Section 7.5.1.2 from this year implies a fender/track width interaction but it’s not clear.

So does the rule effectively look like this:
Maximum track width is determined by a measurement based on the table in section 6.3 (the second one).

Or this:
Maximum track width is determined by the width of the stock fenders up to a dimension not to exceed the table in section 6.3 (the second one).


It seemed obvious to me when I went over this the first time that the intent was just a measurement and the rule was poorly worded. Based on Al’s comments on the national CMC board, he’s interpreting it by the second statement (and the rule is still poorly worded). I really hope that’s not the direction we are (still) going in.

As a bit of reference, I added spacers to Dan’s CMC car within the fender rules at the time. It was clearly legal on the driver’s side and pretty close to the limit on the passenger side front (my opinion and Dan has never been penalized for it). He had light contact in the passenger front bumper cover in one race during last year that made the car not legal (my opinion). With a lot of work/massaging we were able to make the car legal again (Al’s opinion at National’s - carries much more weight than my opinion but not as much as whoever is working tech when it gets checked). When Dan tapped the wall at Mid Ohio it made the driver’s front not legal (my opinion) and no massaging at the track was able to get it legal again. The fender looks fine/not bashed in and the only visible damage was a black mark that we have since rubbed out. We crossed our fingers since Al had declared it legal when we arrived and we had visible signs of damage elsewhere. It was never checked in tech on Dan’s car to my knowledge and he was certainly not penalized for it.

So, now Dan has a track width that is legal per the new section 6.3 (the second one) but isn’t legal per last year’s interpretation of the rules and maybe not this year’s??? Since the car is going to the body shop for rework and paint, we would like some direction on this. I don’t want to argue numbers or performance. I just want to verify that Dan’s car is 100% verifiably legal without it being subject to someone’s judgment call.

Thanks,
Richard P.

I'll take a stab at this...
The number was set based off of what we thought was the max leagal limit based on the 2011 rules.

So w/ the tire all the way out (on a stock OEM car - more than one car was measured) but with the top facing tread block still under the fender, we took that measurment and set a limit. I can tell you that the limit for 4th gens was set NARROWER than what my 4th gen could be set to under the 2011 version. So it is my understanding that the number is the limit and the limit should not require fender mods in order to get to the limit (except the Fox). Since the limit is set by a hard number, I can't see how anyone would be DQ'ed as a result of the tire not being covered by the fender as a result of crash damage. Fix said damage and the track still has the same limit.

Al's post on the National site is a result of some of the SN-95 guys saying the track limit for them sets the tires outside the fenders. Since this should not be possible if the numbers came from a "legal" car, we have to take a "time-out". So some time is being taken to see if this is true, and how these numbers came to be. It is possible we could revert back to the old rule for a short time until we get this worked out.

I hope I helped. Somehow, I don't think I did.

[QUOTE=GlennCMC70;56981]I'll take a stab at this...

Al's post on the National site is a result of some of the SN-95 guys saying the track limit for them sets the tires outside the fenders. Since this should not be possible if the numbers came from a "legal" car, we have to take a "time-out". So some time is being taken to see if this is true, and how these numbers came to be. It is possible we could revert back to the old rule for a short time until we get this worked out.

QUOTE]

I am trying to get a hold of Al reference this. I sent him a text today since I dont know his work schedule for him to call me. I have some rear spacers that will put me .25 (73.25) inches UNDER the max track width and they look like they will be outside of the fenders. I am at 72.5" in the front (73.25 max)and am just inside the fenders there. I would like for Al to come look at my car as it sits and let me know what the verdict is since my car is unmodified in any way in the rear so its as "legal" as it gets. Im not gonna be pleased if I get told to ditch the new spacers for penny on the dollar on eBay or worse yet cut down my rear wheel studs to make it all fit and then be told the same. I like the rule as it is where there is a hard number that is easily enforceable. I even bought spacers with the intent to give myself lots of leeway under the limit, and I held off on those all year since a track width rule was coming. I want to build my car to the limit but I prefer to only buy stuff once. If this changes it just teaches me not to touch anything when the rules come out I guess. I waste enough on this car already without building to a rule that is about to be changed one month after being implemented.

For all to see- The rear axle measurement on my 96 SN-95 car is 70" on the Longacre toe plates with MB Comp 17x9 wheels 275 RA1's. I purchased 45mm (3.5" total combined) to get to my measurements now. I am hoping that by giving exact measurements I can get some clarification on this before I waste any more money. Please let us know what the other cars measurements were. If you nly measured SN99 they have different bodywork than us which should have been taken into account.

Sorry for the rant but after dropping about 400 bucks to get renewed and entered for MSRH the last thing I want to find out is that my spacers are illegal now and I have 2.5 inch more track width in the front than in the rear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GlennCMC70

I hope I helped. Somehow, I don't think I did.

---

Thanks for the help. Your explanation and interpretation is fine and logical. It just doesn’t exactly match with the words in the rules or jibe with the words Al posted on the national site.

And just to reiterate, the driver’s front of Dan’s car does not “look” damaged. The plastic fender has a nice smooth contour that visually matches the contours of the passenger side. There is no “crash damage” to fix. But it isn’t legal per the old rule and it was before he hit the wall. That, combined with your statement of the possible width of your car is why I was pushing for a track width based off of a number.

Hopefully the words in the rules will get tweaked to be clearer.


Richard P.

Got a hold of Al. I am back off of the ledge now. :) Didnt realize you could machine aluminum spacers if need be. Look like I wont have two new trot line sinkers after all.

I don't think the two rules conflict.

One basically says don't modify the fenders (except rolling) excluding the Fox's.

The other states a Track Width.

[s] Theoretically[/s] *edit* scratch out the theoretically, use the Foxes as an true example as if you hadn't yet modified the fenders, */edit* say your fenders were narrower than the max track width. You could raise the car so the tires now stick out past the fenders. The rule about the fenders covering the tires (in a view from above) is gone. Dan's car is legal if it meets the Track Width rule, regardless of if they stick out past the fender.

Correct Gary. There is no need to keep the tires within the fenders now, only under the track width limit. If the numbers are right (which we now know they are not for the 94-98 SN95, but that'll be corrected soon) the tires being at the numeric limit will mean they are still under the OE fender. Unless you're in a Fox that is, and for them we have a bodywork modification allowance.

I will correct one thing I said that is not correct. The 4th gens did not get reduced. Early on that was the case, but at some point the number was changed to reflect the accual width I can get legally on my 4th gen.
Sorry for the error on my part.

Seems like there are two different measurement techniques that muddy the water. The 1st, according to Glenn was that a legal car was measured taking a vertical drop from the fenders to the top of the tread. The second measurement technique calls for measurement 3" off the ground using something similar to the Longacre plates. Are we in violent agreement?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MountainRider2

Seems like there are two different measurement techniques that muddy the water. The 1st, according to Glenn was that a legal car was measured taking a vertical drop from the fenders to the top of the tread. The second measurement technique calls for measurement 3" off the ground using something similar to the Longacre plates. Are we in violent agreement?

---

The rule up to 2011 was "measured taking a vertical drop from the fenders to the top of the tread" and was a visual check only. If the drop touched a thread block the car was not legal. If it did not, it was legal. For 2012 we took a legal car (at the edge of being not legal per the old rule) and measured that track at "3 inches off the ground using something similar to the Longacre plates" and used that number as the limit.
We took a visual check and found out what that distance was 3" up the side of the tire and set that as the limit.

Clear?