Special Stage Forums banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Faster Mabricator
Joined
·
3,611 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Its been awhile since I've been in Production class. Two questions.

1. Is it 12 or 20 year rule?

2. If a Canadian team wants to contest the production class North America Rally Cup and their car is too old for SCCA, can they still enter the US events in Production class to be eligble for NARC?
 

·
straight at T
Joined
·
2,472 Posts
>Its been awhile since I've been in Production class. Two
>questions.

You are a codriver. You are supposed to have both rulebooks memorized. :p

>1. Is it 12 or 20 year rule?

12 years for Production/PGT

>2. If a Canadian team wants to contest the production class
>North America Rally Cup and their car is too old for SCCA,
>can they still enter the US events in Production class to be
>eligble for NARC?

That is a really good question. It could be interpreted either way -
1. 10.2.C.28 has priority over 10.1.E
2. 10.1.E has priority over 10.2.C.28

10.1.E basically says that age limits for P cars are 12 years.
10.2.C.28 says that cars that are CARS P-legal can compete in ProRallies as long as they meet articles 3,4,5,6.

You could ask your favourite PRD, or you could tell your driver that he needs a newer car than a 1986 Scirocco ;-).

Adrian
 

·
I am not here anymore
Joined
·
2,798 Posts
Actually, I don't think it is all that complicated.

10.1.E explicitly applies to "SCCA ProRally Championship competition". What that says to me is that you can enter a car that exceeds the age limit in a ProRally event, but you will not be eligible for the ProRally Championship.

alan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
409 Posts
>2. If a Canadian team wants to contest the production class
>North America Rally Cup and their car is too old for SCCA,
>can they still enter the US events in Production class to be
>eligble for NARC?

A better question might be: Is the NARC still going to be scored now that CNAR is on the rise?

My understanding was that NARC would NOT be continued in 2003.

While, I admit that I haven't seen anything formal on this, I thought I heard this mentioned somewhere in passing last year.

Bill "Gossip Monger" Westhead
 

·
Faster Mabricator
Joined
·
3,611 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
CNAR on the rise how? I think only one person (if any) qualified last year.
While I wish CNAR all the luck in the world, its been shooting itself in the foot, most recently another schedule conflict. See posts on the CNAR conferences on this forum.

NARC is here now. Annually there are a dozen drivers and codrivers battling it out usually to the last event. 2002 saw several clases and the overall championship come down to Tall Pines.
 

·
straight at T
Joined
·
2,472 Posts
>
>Actually, I don't think it is all that complicated.
>
>10.1.E explicitly applies to "SCCA ProRally Championship
>competition". What that says to me is that you can enter a
>car that exceeds the age limit in a ProRally event, but you
>will not be eligible for the ProRally Championship.

The problem is that the statement above has been interpreted as you can't enter a ProRally if the car is too old (and that was, I believe, the intent of the rule). To qualify for the NARC you do have to enter ProRally events.

Adrian
 

·
I am not here anymore
Joined
·
2,798 Posts
>>Actually, I don't think it is all that complicated.
>>
>>10.1.E explicitly applies to "SCCA ProRally Championship
>>competition". What that says to me is that you can enter a
>>car that exceeds the age limit in a ProRally event, but you
>>will not be eligible for the ProRally Championship.
>
>The problem is that the statement above has been interpreted
>as you can't enter a ProRally if the car is too old (and
>that was, I believe, the intent of the rule).

Has anyone ever forced the issue?

The wording in the rule book is pretty clear.

10.1.E - "Age limits of vehicles for SCCA ProRally Championship competition as of January 1 of the competition year ..." followed by the actual age limits.

Since in other places in the rule book they use terms like "SCCA ProRally Championship events" and "Vehicles entered in SCCA Open class competition" to refer to events, I am not sure how someone could argue that 10.1.E applies to anything other than the ProRally Championship. There are other instances where a car may enter an event, but be ineligible for the championship (see 10.1.C).

alan
 

·
straight at T
Joined
·
2,472 Posts
>>>Actually, I don't think it is all that complicated.
>>>
>>>10.1.E explicitly applies to "SCCA ProRally Championship
>>>competition". What that says to me is that you can enter a
>>>car that exceeds the age limit in a ProRally event, but you
>>>will not be eligible for the ProRally Championship.
>>
>>The problem is that the statement above has been interpreted
>>as you can't enter a ProRally if the car is too old (and
>>that was, I believe, the intent of the rule).
>
>Has anyone ever forced the issue?

Well, since pretty much every P or PGT competitor with an older car was concerned, since some of them have been actively pursuing how to update their cars to get a few more years of ProRally life out of them, and since all the 323GTXs became Open-class cars, I'd say that the rule is being interpreted the way it was intended (i.e. to exclude older P cars from running as P cars in ProRallies).

Adrian
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
946 Posts
>CNAR on the rise how? I think only one person (if any)
>qualified last year.
>While I wish CNAR all the luck in the world, its been
>shooting itself in the foot, most recently another schedule
>conflict. See posts on the CNAR conferences on this forum.
>
> NARC is here now. Annually there are a dozen drivers and
>codrivers battling it out usually to the last event. 2002
>saw several clases and the overall championship come down to
>Tall Pines.

It was a single person who qualified.

NARC has been a championship for how many years? 20 or so? CNAR is a mere infant compared to NARC. I can't see anyone killing NARC anytime soon.

I do believe CNAR will grow, but until they get Subaru or Mitsubishi to fund a factory team it will only ever have a few competitors that actively compete. Too much money for too little exposure.

I'd rather spend that money on more ProRally events and perhaps get on more Television than I am able to on CNAR. Until CNAR events are all televised on American Television, then my statement is true.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
The 12 year refers to the age limit of the cars. The 20 year rule is just a rule of thumb indicating how many years you have to compete in the Production Class before you actually get any respect.

;-)
 

·
I am not here anymore
Joined
·
2,798 Posts
>>>>Actually, I don't think it is all that complicated.
>>>>
>>>>10.1.E explicitly applies to "SCCA ProRally Championship
>>>>competition". What that says to me is that you can enter a
>>>>car that exceeds the age limit in a ProRally event, but you
>>>>will not be eligible for the ProRally Championship.
>>>
>>>The problem is that the statement above has been interpreted
>>>as you can't enter a ProRally if the car is too old (and
>>>that was, I believe, the intent of the rule).
>>
>>Has anyone ever forced the issue?
>
>Well, since pretty much every P or PGT competitor with an
>older car was concerned, since some of them have been
>actively pursuing how to update their cars to get a few more
>years of ProRally life out of them, and since all the
>323GTXs became Open-class cars, I'd say that the rule is
>being interpreted the way it was intended (i.e. to exclude
>older P cars from running as P cars in ProRallies).

No, I mean FORCE the issue. Like entering the ProRally event without any concern about scoring points in the championship. It seems to me that most ProRally entrants want the championship points (or, even worse, they just heard everyone say "12 year rule", but never bothered to actually read the actual rule).

Just because competitors interpret the rule a particular way and choose not to enter older production cars in ProRally events doesn't mean that the wording of the rule doesn't allow it.

The rule book needs to say what the rule is and not have a bunch of unspoken baggage associated with it. Before ProRally becomes a "real" sport, the sanctioning body has to have a rule book where the wording of the rule book does mean something.

Besides, presuming that the NARC continues to exist, the 12-year rule unfairly makes sure that Canadian competitors cannot win that championship in the production classes.

alan
 

·
straight at T
Joined
·
2,472 Posts
>No, I mean FORCE the issue. Like entering the ProRally
>event without any concern about scoring points in the
>championship. It seems to me that most ProRally entrants
>want the championship points (or, even worse, they just
>heard everyone say "12 year rule", but never bothered to
>actually read the actual rule).

Since the SCCA officials that we talked to had the same interpretation, I don't think you'd win that one.

>Just because competitors interpret the rule a particular way
>and choose not to enter older production cars in ProRally
>events doesn't mean that the wording of the rule doesn't
>allow it.

How about when everyone involved interprets the rule the same way?

>The rule book needs to say what the rule is and not have a
>bunch of unspoken baggage associated with it. Before
>ProRally becomes a "real" sport, the sanctioning body has to
>have a rule book where the wording of the rule book does
>mean something.

True. That is a defect of a number of different parts of the rulebook. Pointing this out doesn't seem to help...

>Besides, presuming that the NARC continues to exist, the
>12-year rule unfairly makes sure that Canadian competitors
>cannot win that championship in the production classes.

No, it only prevents some Canadian competitors from doing so. If you notice, Canadians came first in PGT driver and first and second (me :p) in PGT codriver. I don't believe any Canadians actually bothered to contest the NARC in P, but a number of them have cars that are younger than 12 years.

Adrian
 

·
I am not here anymore
Joined
·
2,798 Posts
>>No, I mean FORCE the issue. Like entering the ProRally
>>event without any concern about scoring points in the
>>championship. It seems to me that most ProRally entrants
>>want the championship points (or, even worse, they just
>>heard everyone say "12 year rule", but never bothered to
>>actually read the actual rule).
>
>Since the SCCA officials that we talked to had the same
>interpretation, I don't think you'd win that one.

Actually, I asked the PRB about this and got confirmation that it is being looked at.

>>Just because competitors interpret the rule a particular way
>>and choose not to enter older production cars in ProRally
>>events doesn't mean that the wording of the rule doesn't
>>allow it.
>
>How about when everyone involved interprets the rule the
>same way?

That is not a good thing when a rule clearly says something other than what is intended. I think when the age limits were introduced, there was enough discussion that the rally community got a sense of what the intent was. As time goes on and new folks enter the sport, you get folks who weren't around for the discussion and might have some problem building a car and then not being allowed to run it.

As I often point out, part of my background is working on international standards, so I have seen "interesting" interpretations of rules from folk not involved in creating the rules.

>>The rule book needs to say what the rule is and not have a
>>bunch of unspoken baggage associated with it. Before
>>ProRally becomes a "real" sport, the sanctioning body has to
>>have a rule book where the wording of the rule book does
>>mean something.
>
>True. That is a defect of a number of different parts of the
>rulebook. Pointing this out doesn't seem to help...

I don't know who you are pointing this stuff out to, but I am getting some results from my efforts. There is one rule change that was a direct result of a comment from me and this issue is apparently being reviewed.

>>Besides, presuming that the NARC continues to exist, the
>>12-year rule unfairly makes sure that Canadian competitors
>>cannot win that championship in the production classes.
>
>No, it only prevents some Canadian competitors from doing
>so. If you notice, Canadians came first in PGT driver and
>first and second (me :p) in PGT codriver. I don't believe
>any Canadians actually bothered to contest the NARC in P,
>but a number of them have cars that are younger than 12
>years.

I meant to say "some Canadians". Oops!

Actually, I just thought Canada was 15 years behind the US on everything, so they wouldn't have any cars that meet the 12 year limit ;) ;) ;)

alan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
The problem really is that we have NO one in charge. We also do not have anyone who knows how to write a rule. They write what they think they want to say but not what they mean. Then Of course there isn't anyone proof reading the final draft.}>
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top