A New Approach to Tech Inspection

[chief57]

why even write the rules if not going to enforce them?

Exactly.  My favorite is the 48 lb. minimum crankshaft weight.  I've never heard of a track actually weighing someone's crankshaft, but the night a track does is the last night that team races there.

  boy have i got a story for you gp!

[Groundpounder]

why even write the rules if not going to enforce them?

Exactly.  My favorite is the 48 lb. minimum crankshaft weight.  I've never heard of a track actually weighing someone's crankshaft, but the night a track does is the last night that team races there.

  boy have i got a story for you gp!

Your stories are usually pretty entertaining, I can't wait to hear it.  lol

[m15mod]

Nate, A few years back a group of guys decided that they wanted to tackle this issue. They were educated in racing and all the promoter needed to do was call and ask, they would come. Not being directly related or connected with any race team, or track, it seamed like a great idea. BUTTTTTTT as it turned out they found out very quickly that the management always had limitations as to who they could check??? WHAT??? REALLY??? This group of race loving guys who wanted to see our sport prosper only lasted a few trips to the track.
Cheating is a serious problem in all forms of life. The best rule is no rule! Rules hurt the little guy the most. I know we need rules, but how about general guide lines, and safety rules. Have at it!

[ctracer38]

M15Mod, You are exactly right! The best rules are no rules!
Rules cost racer's money and most tracks don't really want to tech.
Have some rules that are easily checked and have at it!

[uticamike]

  The best rule is no rule! Rules hurt the little guy the most. I know we need rules, but how about general guide lines, and safety rules. Have at it! 

One wonders how NASCAR and the NHRA grew to the heights they did.    There is clearly a difference between  too many rules and "no" rules.

Please name the game or sport that prospered without rules?  There are more Libertarians on here that I thought. 

[sharpsteenracing2]

 NASCAR and NHRA grew like the WWF. Didn't Petty win his 200th with a big motor? Do you think the best drivers are in the big show? It seems to be more about entertainment than the sport (ie Danica). Thats what makes them grow. Rules are needed but they should be for all not just the guys with shallow wallets. The answer isn't simple but sometimes it appears they don't even try. I like when it just looks like they are trying. At least thats something.

[m15mod]

I would like to be clear... General guide lines. Lets talk Modified engines.
6.8 ibs / c.i.  Simple to check
23 degree cyl head with an intake flange height rule. Easy to check
Single 4 bbl. Easy to check
Cast iron block. easy to check.
Gear rule. Not so easy to check but its a must to protect the dump ***** who thinks he needs to turn 9300
That's my engine rules.  The cost of a modified engine will now be 1/2 what it is now.
So Two rules 12-1 compression and the 390 carb rule costs 20,000.00??? YES That will save the teams money.

 We need to decide what side of the fence we are on....Stupid rules that cost the teams huge dollars or limit the rules so lower dollar teams can compete to win on a budget.

Should we debate the left side weight rule? Oh yeah that saved the racers a ton of money....How much does a shock cost today?

How about the one tire manufacture rule??? Oh yeah that saves a ton of money....not!!!

Have you been to a track that runs hard tires??? How about Perry for an example. 100 laps of cautions for a 30 lap race. The same 3 cars by the way... It sucks learning on a pos tire! Oh yeah crashing every week, that helps the car counts.

We are all race fans here and we need to agree on that!

[Nate Stevens]

I agree with you on most of your points.  Fewer rules would make racing much cheaper.  Unfortunately, like any rule change, if you opened them up too quickly it would cost a lot of teams money.  The other big thing I disagree on is hard tires.  Hard tires can provide just as good of racing with a field of good drivers.  Drivers who can't slow down will crash on hard tires.  Hard tires are the best/easiest way of saving money: they can be used longer & they are the easiest way to limit the amount of usable horsepower.

[raceannouncer]

IMHO, in a place called fantasyland, everyone would FOLLOW the rules; thus tech wouldn't be needed at all.  The reality is that many drivers try to gain an advantage by NOT following the rules!  Those who believe actual proper enforcement is needed are essentially correct but the problem then becomes one of interpretation of the rules...just as anything else in life--very few people people agree on anything, especially in the area of rule(s) enforcement, which seems to be the crux of this thread.  How I interpret a rule and how someone else looks at the same rule, can highly differ. When a group of people are involved, disagreement on the rules grows exponentially.  As is true on the subject of track ownership, there are many who engage in finger-pointing but few wish to do the job themselves! 

[Claychamp123]

I agree with the harder tires idea. If the drivers crash a lot on harder tires it's because they aren't good drivers and after awhile they'll have to get good. In the old days drivers had to overcome a lot of poor equipment issues by learning how to drive. You couldn't just bolt on a new pair of sneakers and be superman. IMO the Cup Series is in the same predicament with aerodynamics. Everytime the cars are redesigned to have less grip the drivers all complain and the crashes are more numerous but then they give them more downforce and nobody can pass and nobody crashes so it's boring. I say take away the downforce and or run hard tires and all the pretenders will crash out and then we can get down to the good racing between the drivers who actually have car control abilities. JMO

[Nate Stevens]

There is very little reason to have an issue with interpretation of rules.  I have read hundreds of rule books and the main reason there is any room for interpretation is poor use of the English language and unnecessary vagueness.  Other reasons for interpretation in the rules are discrepancies within the rules and rules that just make no sense at all.  As long as the person who is writing the rules has a reasonable grasp on technical writing, has a decent idea what they are talking about and puts some degree of due diligence into writing them there is little reason to have issues with interpretation. 

On occasion there is innovation or new technology that creates an advantage that is not directly covered in the rules.  There are several approaches to dealing with this issue.  Nascar seems to say that if they did not approve it then it is illegal, which I assume is covered somewhere in their rules.  I feel this is counterproductive to innovation, which should have a place in racing.  My opinion is that nothing should be made immediately illegal, that is not covered in the rulebook, unless it poses a danger or health risk to competitor, staff or fans.  It should be addressed as soon as possible, though, in that if the practice does not fall into the intent of the class all competitors should be informed that it will be disallowed as of the next season.  This gives everyone the opportunity to invest in the practice while it is still legal with the knowledge that they will have to change back for next season.

[driverdad71]

A new approach is certainly needed, plus a new attitude from both competitors and management.  First: the position should be treated like a job; i.e. you are getting paid to WORK!  Not sit on a golf cart, not watch the races, not yap with buddies, etc.  That being said, I believe the head man should paid a minimum of several hundred a night.  The amount needs to be high enough to a) make people actually WANT the job and B) make sure they want to KEEP that job because that income is important.  If they are getting the proper stipend, they are not going to want to take the chance of losing it by "looking the other way", "taking care of a buddy", or even taking a bribe.  In return for that high stipend is that you are there to WORK!  In my opinion, tech should be possible at any time a car is in the pit area, and for any reason.  You don't have to rip a guys car apart, but there is no reason you can't consistently check visual items and document them and file them.  One example could be a durometer check (if that division has a minimum requirement).  If you are diligent with checking the little things and show you are always looking over their shoulder, you will gain respect.  You won't gain friends, but that's not why you are there.  You are there to do a job.  Furthermore, if teardowns require you to be there all night, it's part of the job.  You may be there 15-18 hours on race day, but you should know that and, if you are doing your job, expect that.  If the compensation is proper to the job, qualified people will WANT the job, and WANT to do a GOOD job.  How many tech guys do you know are there because they were BEGGED to do it?  They don't pay 'em jack, but they let em in, they sit on a golf cart, watch the races, etc.  I won't name names, but one time I wanted to scale my car before a warm up and the tech guy just sat there and said "you know how to use it" and kept right on breathing.  Wouldn't even get up to give me a reading.  But that's what you get with the current attitude towards tech and by tech.  If tech isn't treated as important to the overall integrity of the race product, who can EVER take it seriously?


Anthony Knoll

[sharpsteenracing2]

 How many of the tech officials could know what exactly each head and intake from each manufacturer looks like? Do you think its fair to have a ford putting out 530hp against chevys with 450hp? You can't tell me that don't deter people from coming to race at your track. Hard tires are a mater of life and death for a guy with a budget like me. I can't buy tires every week in order to compete with racers that can. If you don't feel competitive you don't want to race. I tire from hearing how well someones getting through corners with a motor that's 80hp more than mine.

[Groundpounder]

How many of the tech officials could know what exactly each head and intake from each manufacturer looks like? Do you think its fair to have a ford putting out 530hp against chevys with 450hp?

If you're convinced that Fords have that much of an advantage, you should probably be driving one instead of trying to get them penalized down to the level of your current inferior brand.  Just sayin'.

[racerdad]

A new approach is certainly needed, plus a new attitude from both competitors and management.  First: the position should be treated like a job; i.e. you are getting paid to WORK!  Not sit on a golf cart, not watch the races, not yap with buddies, etc.  That being said, I believe the head man should paid a minimum of several hundred a night.  The amount needs to be high enough to a) make people actually WANT the job and B) make sure they want to KEEP that job because that income is important.  If they are getting the proper stipend, they are not going to want to take the chance of losing it by "looking the other way", "taking care of a buddy", or even taking a bribe.  In return for that high stipend is that you are there to WORK!  In my opinion, tech should be possible at any time a car is in the pit area, and for any reason.  You don't have to rip a guys car apart, but there is no reason you can't consistently check visual items and document them and file them.  One example could be a durometer check (if that division has a minimum requirement).  If you are diligent with checking the little things and show you are always looking over their shoulder, you will gain respect.  You won't gain friends, but that's not why you are there.  You are there to do a job.  Furthermore, if teardowns require you to be there all night, it's part of the job.  You may be there 15-18 hours on race day, but you should know that and, if you are doing your job, expect that.  If the compensation is proper to the job, qualified people will WANT the job, and WANT to do a GOOD job.  How many tech guys do you know are there because they were BEGGED to do it?  They don't pay 'em jack, but they let em in, they sit on a golf cart, watch the races, etc.  I won't name names, but one time I wanted to scale my car before a warm up and the tech guy just sat there and said "you know how to use it" and kept right on breathing.  Wouldn't even get up to give me a reading.  But that's what you get with the current attitude towards tech and by tech.  If tech isn't treated as important to the overall integrity of the race product, who can EVER take it seriously?


Anthony Knoll



I am with you. How many guys have you heard say can't get away with what they are doing can't race with them and they can't afford to out spend them I am done. I have heard it many times over the years.

Don Reynolds