I was just looking through the Wittitrin day one pics this morning & saw a few cars with what I believe is non complient bar work. In particular the bar that I thought was supposed to brace the front corner of the roll hoop. I was led to believe (I had to change mine) that the bar had to go from a position close to the bend & extend down to the raised hip rail. I am not having a go at the car owners at all, if they have been told their cars comply then good for them. I thought the biennial inspection was to insure that cars complied with the side intrusion regs as well as other things. From what I can see some of the cars have passed & clearly don't comply with the rules.
and here we go again i wonder how many pages this time around with the rule what a joke from the start why cams think that our cars need to have different bar work to the state is very strange they race about every other weekend and race a few hundred miles a week over here we race maybe once a month if luck most cars would maybe do 1000klms a year at a push most would do 4 or 5 races a years so most may do 500klms i guess i can see how our raceing is so much more dangerous then theres what a joke.
Can't mate because it wont pass the biennial inspection as the floor pan is rivited to the frame. This is illegal & has always been according to our club scrutineer. You would have thought someone would have picked up on it over the last twenty plus years but they didn't.
Scrutineers are only human. Probably a big pain in the arse but at least its probably not too difficult a fix. Get it fixed and try to make it to Wittitrin next year. Well worth the trip.
This isn't about me or my trusty old car, this is about a system that has clearly failed. A rule was bought in on the grounds of safety, a system was then bought in to make sure cars complied with the rules (the inspection). For some reason cars are competing that don't comply with the rules. Logic would say that the reason is that the silver scrutineers that carried out the inspection were not fully briefed on what the rules were. What other conclusion could be drawn. If we bring in a rule that makes cars safer, any car that doesn't comply is by nature "unsafe". How can a car that is unsafe be allowed to race. If that car is in an accident & people are injured due to the support bar not been correct, who is accountable. The fact that these cars were allowed to compete shows a total failure of the system. It should have been picked up at the biennial inspection, it should have been picked up at race scrutineering. Given that it is a safety issue the cars shouldn't have been allowed to compete. I'm not having a go at any of the people involved, It's the system that is the problem.
In my opinion the first and main person responsible for a car complying is the competitor. The competitor has the most to lose in the advent of a failure causing any sort of accident. Ignorance of rules or selective adherence to them starts there. You sign your entry form saying your car complies. The scrutineers job is to check but In my opinion responsibility sits with the competitor. That said I agree Bi ennial inspection should pick up non compliance with barwork as a minimum.
Jeremy I believe you are right and given the time spent on each car at bienniel scrutineering I can only agree. On the subject of compliance or noncompliance of cars at Wittitrin I cannot comment as I am not a scrutineer.
