Ok i think that bi annual inspections is a good thing it is all about having safer cars. So is it safe to have cars running around with 250 to 300 litre tanks. It use to be in the cams maual  untill the panel made it free  but this was a long time ago.  Yes people will whinge like buggery but it's about safey and offroads know it's a problem. 

Amassing how effective new rules are at galvanising opinion.
Whilst competing at Milbrodale this year, my car suffered a crack. Not in the frame but in the top right link pin. I would have far preferred to have suffered a crack in the frame, because that wouldn't have stopped my car from turning into the left hand bend after the main jump, below Animal Leap.
As it was, my son and I managed to dodge the fence and a few race officials and finally convince the car to pull up where we wanted it to, out of the way.
Who knows . . . . . if I hadn't had to buy two new harnesses to replace the perfectly good pair that were already in the car, then I might have bought a new set of link pins before the race.
The last time I witnessed a link pin failure, over that jump, it was a lower link pin and the driver of that car had his last view of Milbrodale Mountain for that weekend out of the Westpac chopper window.
I'm fortunate and glad mine was an upper pin but I haven't seen any mandatory crack testing and inspection regime enforced for link pins yet.
Sorry to be a spoil sport and all but I'm completely convinced that this is indeed a witch hunt. A witch Hunt with an obvious and very simple ulterior motive.
The motive is obvious because the first proposal of this 'inspection' was targeted at pre 2000 cars only. The inspection of newer cars was only added to the proposal when the transparency of it became impossible to miss.
Old looking cars make for poor TV.
Big, bright, noisy new cars make for good TV. Especially when they're inverted, in a cloud of smoke and dust, in front of an appreciative crowd. Wonderful stuff. Doesn't do much for the competitors or the competition but the cameras love it.
Well the results of this debarcle will be very effective and long term. Lots of cars will get inspected. Some of them will be passed, some will be failed.
And lots of cars will stay in the back of the shed or be put out to paddock-bash for the rest of their days. Every two years.
Then one day, years from now, after the sport that used to be called Off Road Racing has vanished up it's own backside, old people will say. "I remember the days when we used to have fun racing cars"

BTW
The NSW Off Road Panel did Not support this when it was first proposed, under the misappropriated title "Targeted Scrutiny".

Following is an extract of what was sent to AORCom from the NSW Panel a year and a half ago, in response to the original proposal.

"It is not necessary to establish an additional schedule of inspections in order to widen the scope of, or to instigate another specific form of inspection for Off Road Competition vehicles within NSW."

"........I believe it is of the utmost importance to make it completely clear to those conducting the 'targeted' inspection and those whose vehicles are being inspected, that a visual inspection of the exterior surface of a welded steel structure will provide the opportunity to detect visible signs of external deterioration ONLY.

The notion that such an inspection can determine the degree of 'Structural Integrity" of a welded steel structure is fanciful at best.

If the proposal is to fix a vehicle's frame to an immovable platform and apply several points of pressure in several different directions about the frame, until distortion or failure of that frame occurs, then the structural integrity of each individual frame could be accurately assessed but I feel this approach will generate a generally negative response. However the notion that structural integrity can be accurately determined by any other means is simply a nonsense. "

Jeff Cripps

You guys are so far from the truth it is a joke. Inspecting cars every 2 years means you can ease the work load on officials and do half one year and half the next. It could have been some classes this year and other classes next year, instead it was decided to divide it by means of age. It only makes sense to do the older cars first.
Post 2000 car inspections was not an after thought.
At no time, ever, did AORCOM or CAMS, discuss the prospect of getting rid of old cars, instead it worked bloody hard to ensure there was a means for their long term future.
This inspection is not just about frame cracks, it includes seat and seat belt mounts, fuel tanks and fuel systems, safety cage compliance, etc. A lot of this stuff you can not see at a track with panels and floor on.

What sort of drugs are you on Stingray? Probably one of CAMS's biggest jobs is to secure insurance for us and for land owners so we can go racing and you want them to openly allow the use of "out of date" seatbelts. Get over it and go and buy FIA belts!
It was cause by some greedy shmuck in Tassie that wanted to sell more seatbelts and brought it to everyones attention and now you are trying to do it with tyres, so we will all end up running specialized tyres at $1000 a corner - good on ya!

-- Edited by croweater on Friday 12th of November 2010 06:43:44 PM

another good point is why arnt fuel tanks require to be certified and have a balder as there is high chance that they could have something go through them. also why is there not a brake test carried out on buggy and trucks to ensure that the brakes fitted are capable of stoping the power that the buggy or truck has.

i have always thought that club racing cars should have different rules to national cars as they are totally different sports. club track re normally short and speeds are limited due to the fact there are trees and corners so you just dont do 200klm per hour.

anyway i dont think i will invest any more into this sport.

just a side note when was the last time you stripped the family car down inspected it for cracks. the family car does a lot more klms then a buggy ever will. you might say but buggy are on rough surfaces and yea that is true but a car cops smaller constant strest which is just as bad. so i guess you guys replace your seat belt in you car every 2 years to keep the you safe. you might say that they get inspected every year for rego but that just really checks brakes. also did you know your speedo doesnt have to work for rego. if you dont belive me i'm sure one of the other guys with a checking station can ring and check with rta as i did the other weekend when i was at mechanics and a car came in for rego and speedo didn't work so called up to find out fail code and told cant fail pink slip for speedo not working. (this world is all messed up)

hope you all enjoy racing and i wish you all the best but i'm done before i began.

i have a new webmaster lined up for next year to take over the forum. once i get down to show them how it all works i'm outta here.

Lets not get this dicussion personal, to date it has been quite informative and respectful of everyones opinion.

Croweater, I really must thank you for your honesty, and for being part of this discussion to tell us how some of these decisions happen. Other people in your position have not been so forthcoming!

I also must thank all those people on panels, aorcom, etc, without these people our sport will not function at all. I pity them for some of the crap we throw at them.

As said before, again and again, the current system of communication (or lack of) between club & national racers, officials, and organisers, seems to be the problem?
Maybe instead of designing VERY poorly thought out rules, next year more attention could be directed at communication.

It appears from this one rule, we have now LOST 3 newcomers (just in this forum) to our sport, and a keen webmaster.....we cannot keep going at this rate.

I used to think how lucky I was to be part of off-road, now I cannot see why I bother, its really not worth the hassle :(

Yours in cracked link pins, and rear hubs, Jones

I understand where people like our web master are coming from, he (and I live) a few hundred kilometres from Sydney which is likely to be our closest scrutineer. As I work on a budget, this check will in-packed in my racing.
Although it is hard to argue against safety checks, I have wondered on this occasion if the cost will out weigh the effort.
I regularly go over my buggy looking for faults or problems including looking for cracks (and I have welded up one to date) it is the only way I can keep the car reliable. I am sure every competitor does this, so why is it that "big brother rule maker" thinks we are incompetent.
I will continue to race, as I enjoy the thrill, but I do find it frustrating that rules are being introduced for what seems to me, for the sake of it.














-- Edited by Friz on Saturday 13th of November 2010 09:16:36 AM

Question if a regular scrutiner is good enough to check our cars at race meetings. Then why do they need to make it more compicated. And some of us are lucky I have a new car that hopefully wont crack for a number of years and i have a silver cams scrutineer living next door. But i worry about the guys we are going to lose from our sport with some of the dumb rules. The point i am trying to make is it may not be a big deal to some but it is to others.

Hi Guys, sorry for my delayed response but I dont have the net at home, so I have to steal a few moments from the boss to post a reply at work.

To answer your question Stingray, nothing has happened over the past 18 months to change the panels position on this but of course, this is just my opinion, not an official response from the panel.

The NSW Panel is made up of a group of individuals, some of whom could see some merit in the idea, some could not. But as a group we could not support what appeared to be an ill-conceived, poorly planned proposal, which had been inadequately discussed and if hastily implemented, could have a catastrophic effect on the morale of many Off Road competitors, without producing any real, measurable benefit.

Nothing was received from AORCom, apart from an official response, acknowledging the panels letter had been received and tabled at their meeting, until the announcement,  heres the rule, like it our lump it.

Now personally, I couldnt care less if you want to see my car with its underpants off. Fine. Whatever floats your boat but if its simply to look for cracks, measure some spans between bars and compare my car with the rule book then for crying out loud. My 12 year old son could do that.

Why Must it be done by someone with a silver star, Must be done in daylight, Must be done on a hoist, Must be done before I can race next year.

My automatic response is , You Must be kidding. What are wein Kindergarten ?

 

Im happy to accept that the rule was not constructed with the intension or purpose of removing old cars from competition.

But the reality is that is exactly what it is doing and will continue to do.

 

It needs to be reviewed. It needs to be revised. It needs to be changed.

If for no other reason than to stem the tide of confused, disgruntled competitors turning their backs and walking away from the sport they so dearly love.

As per the Inspection Sheets we shall be using,
the inspection is concentrating on the chassis, and mountings including the safety cage, roof reinforcement, fuel tank protection (if applicable) etc. You do not need to have your motor or gearbox as these will not be checked at this inspection.

Scrutineer

The idea is that when you pull it down ,you check it out ,fix, then bring it along to the scrutinineering?

 the scrutineers shouldn't find anything wrong, hopefully.
If there is a problem. I'm sure they will sort out time and place for checking the problem once you have fixed it. they won't have to check the whole lot again, only the problem.

see you there , mine is almost ready for it!

Just had an inspection and it was amazing the number of faults that were found (my car included) in the cars. fortunatly most were only very minor but it goes to show that perhaps the powers that be were correct and this inspection should have been started years ago

Absolutly right the suprising thing is that most of the problems would not have been found with the floor in place. The only thing wrong with the whole process was the lack of communication from AORCOM. I can only hope that the communication between AORCOM and the competitors improves.

my floor is in 2 peices the main front piece is easily removed the small rear peice requires me to remove the seats and fuel tank to remove it do i leave it in or do i remove seats and tank remove it the bolt the tank and seats back in??