Can somebody please clarify if my buggy needs to comply with the new rule on side protection bars or not?... After reading the CAMS manual it still leaves me with questions.
In "GR9" it reads (about 25 lines down) Implementation: Cars which are subject of a CAMS log book issued prior 1 January 1998 may continue in competition provided they remain in conformity with the regulations that were in force up to that date, save for the requirement for roof reinforcement as outlined in Article3.2 of the following regulations. All other buggies are to be in compliance with this present regulation in it's entirety.
Article 3.1 , 3.2 , 3.3 are titled Optional Tubes & 3.2 is titled Roof and rear stay bracing options:
My buggy was log booked in 1981 so my understanding is that I can run my buggy in any competiton upto & including the AORC, as long as I put 1 bar in the roof from front to back up the centre of the car.
Any help with this would be very much appreciated as there is only 42 more days until SORRA round 1.
Have only just read this query on side protection rules for 2010. The paragraph you are referring to is regarding the Implementation for Extreme 2WD and Bajas. You need to note 4.2 Side Protection and in particular the diagrams associated with 4.2.
I agree the wording in the manual is not clear and could lead you to believe that Buggies issued with Log Book pror to 1st January 1998 are exempt but that is not the case according to Scrutineers.
Elaine Nikiforoff wrote: I agree the wording in the manual is not clear and could lead you to believe that Buggies issued with Log Book pror to 1st January 1998 are exempt but that is not the case according to Scrutineers.
unfortunately personal opinions of the scrutineers need to be backed up by the wording in the manual. otherwise it is just personal opinion. If it leads people to believe they're exempt, how do you argue otherwise?
-- Edited by BAJAs RULE on Monday 25th of January 2010 11:05:16 AM
__________________
HOGS BREATH CAFE BAJA ,COOPER TYRES, Spot on tyres, JR Manufacturing, Hunter Rivmasta Racing Products
Sadly these side impact rules are all about personal interpretation. Given that AORCom have refused to set a minimum side opening dimension scrutineers will be forced to decide if a car is safe. Think about this, the owner/driver of the car is 170cm & 65kg. His navigator is of similar build. They are both able to get in & out of the car with the new bars in place quite easily. His navigator gets sick so he needs to find another one. The only person that wishes to help out is 185cm & the wrong side of 90kg. He has difficulty getting out of the car, not because the car doesn't comply but because he doesn't fit the car. What rights do the event organisers have to tell him that he can't compete because of his size? I have spoken to our club chief scrutineer & he says that he will make decisions at every event based on his personal view because there is no dimension rule in place. Most people I have spoken to will take the most simple option for two reasons, the first is that it is easier & the second is that the nerf bar option will add too much weight to a small car. It is my view that there will be a lot of cars that will have side openings that are far too small & unsafe.
Well said Stingray. You have hit the nail on the head.
Once again another rule made without any sensible thought put in. A rule for the sake of a rule, that will make the life of competitors and scrutineers even more difficult.
LSC
__________________
For men who do it well Racing is life, everything else is just waiting around...
Steve McQueen
This new rule will just lower the number of club cars getting around as people are struggling with cash to make the changes.Why the change now there was never problem before is it becauce of all these new car with big nudge bars that are so high?.20 plus years ago you little verco's and rivmastars running around everywhere with big jeeps and f100 chasing them in the dust with there home made bars on and not once did i ever see any one get hurt.Obviously croweater knows some that made these crap new rules
This new rule will just lower the number of club cars getting around as people are struggling with cash to make the changes.Why the change now there was never problem before is it becauce of all these new car with big nudge bars that are so high?.20 plus years ago you little verco's and rivmastars running around everywhere with big jeeps and f100 chasing them in the dust with there home made bars on and not once did i ever see any one get hurt.Obviously croweater knows some that made these crap new rules
And 50 years ago Doctors starred in advertisments extolling the virtues of cigarettes.............
I don't see a problem with the new rule. In all honesty, how much would the steel needed to make these changes cost? The added safety is certainly worth it in my opinion.
And don't forget, the older a car is, the more metal fatigue it will suffer from, so therefore adding some new steel into the side to offer a bit more protection can't be a bad thing can it?
fadge100 -- if you search this site you will find the reasons behind the rule. It was AORCOM who made this "crap" rule. Probably you should research the reasons before labelling it "crap". Irons buggy mods in "build ups" gives 2 great examples of what AORCOM are trying to achieve. Look at the photos on that post, then Trekka273s comment above, research the reasons why, then pass judgement.
and 20 years ago we wernt reaching speeds that we are now. To say nothing of the same vircos and rivmaster running with 250 HP vs their designs for 100HP.
For information of all competitors and scruitineers the NSW Scrutineering Panel Chairman asked CAMS Technical Dept for guidance on this issue both the question asked and CAMS reply are below:
From: David Healy [davidhealy43@yahoo.com.au] Sent: 9 February 2010 4:31 AM To: nikiforoff1@optusnet.com.au; Greig Black; Dennis Castellarin; Norm Crompton; Bill Jones; Janet King; Janet King; Keith Neville; Robert Panetta; Lance Smith; David Healy; Sue McIntosh Subject: Fw: Side Intrusion Bars - Off-Road Vehicles
Folks,
Response from CAMS below.
David
----- Forwarded Message ---- From: Campbell Andrea <Campbell.Andrea@cams.com.au> To: David Healy <davidhealy43@yahoo.com.au>; Rupert Rodrigues <Rupert.Rodrigues@cams.com.au> Cc: Paul Taylor <Paul.Taylor@cams.com.au> Sent: Mon, 8 February, 2010 3:07:47 PM Subject: RE: Side Intrusion Bars - Off-Road Vehicles
David,
The Australian Off Road Commission has looked at this over the weekend and certainly it is intended that this apply to all vehicles including pre 1998 and that has been the nature of all communication to competitors on the topic to date. To ensure there is no misinterpretation regarding applicability, some revised wording will be released shortly.
For your information this new regulation comes out of an inquiry into a fatal side collision involving an older style vehicle with a larger side opening than most current style buggies are built with.
Regards,
Campbell
Campbell Andrea
Manager - Motor Sport Technical & Safety
direct: +61 3 9593 7776
This electronic mail contains information that is privileged and confidential, intended only for use of the individual(s) or entity named. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, copying or use of the information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error please delete it immediately from your system and inform us by return email or telephone +61 3 9593 7777 and destroy the original message.
From: David Healy [mailto:davidhealy43@yahoo.com.au] Sent: Saturday, 6 February 2010 5:25 PM To: Campbell Andrea; Rupert Rodrigues Cc: Paul Taylor Subject: Side Intrusion Bars - Off-Road Vehicles
Gentlemen,
Bulletin No. B09/87, covering the implementation of side intrusion bars on off-road vehicles, came into force on 01/01/10, and is included in Clause GR9 of the Off Road General Requirements in the 2010 1st Quarter CAMS Manual.
It is understood that these requirements were promulgated to ensure adequate protection for the occupants of all off-road vehicles, regardless of age.
However, paragraph 7 ("Implementation") of Clause GR9 exempts vehicles logbooked prior to January 1, 1998 from these requirements, and there are some competitors who are claiming this exemption at Scrutineering.
Please confirm, in writing, if off-road vehicles logbooked prior to 01/01/98 are exempt from the 2010 requirements for side intrusion bars, or if they are not.
If they are not exempt, may we please have a direction (Bulletin or alteration in the 2nd Quarter CAMS Manual) confirming the requirement?
