XEV/XS Rules

Moderators: Mike Simanyi, Rick Brown

Post Reply
Jacob Abrams
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 3:50 pm
Car#: 728

XEV/XS Rules

Post by Jacob Abrams »

So when did XEV allow for stripped out interiors? The rules for XA say that isn't legal, and the rules for XEV are even more strict, more in line with ST classes. The rules in XA explicitly state, "Interior and exterior must have a “finished” look (e.g., carpeted, upholstered, painted,
coated)." In following the spirit of the rules for XEV a similar approach should follow.

However, I'm told that XEV is currently being held to CST rules locally to allow for things like stripped interiors and missing body work. Can someone explain how this makes any sense? We already have a CST class still, why would they not be forced to re-class for that instead of XS? Even to run a CST index if staying in XS class wise would make more sense. I thought the whole purpose of running an indexed XS class was to create a balance between the loose but specific rules of XEV, XA & XB. If we are going to make up the rules as we go then that index and class doesn't mean anything. If we want that class to mean something than anyone going beyond the rules should be disqualified from said index to keep it fair and equitable.

If XEV can run minus body panels then what is stopping my XA car from running hoosiers? It's opening a massive can of worms. Lets keep the rules free cars to CST and play by the rules in XS classes please. Tom & Kyle, no hard feelings, but is it really necessary to run these very illegal cars in XS as opposed to CST or time only? They are certainly cool to see and attract positive attention, but running them in a class they aren't legal for is not positive attention for the club.
User avatar
Reed Gibson
Current CSCC Overall Champion
Posts: 502
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2015 12:33 pm
Club: SCNAX

Re: XEV/XS Rules

Post by Reed Gibson »

The 2022 supps read as follows:

"XEV or Xtreme Electric Vehicle will mirror the XA ruleset and PAX Index but shall be eligible for electric production vehicles only."

So no, you can't run a stripped out car in XEV. Normally we take a pretty relaxed stance for minor infractions if the class unanimously agrees to it. That said the board will make sure that car classing is enforced correctly if any competitor requests us to :thumbup:
User avatar
Kyle O'Rourke
Posts: 189
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 6:56 pm
Club: SCNAX
Car#: 860
Location: Torrance, CA

Re: XEV/XS Rules

Post by Kyle O'Rourke »

Sorry, it wasn't my intention to cause any issues. I was originally going off the forum post that mentioned that the board had approved the new XS class and that XEV would follow the CST rules for 2022. I wanted to make sure I read it correctly which was why I asked for confirmation. I didn't realize that it didn't make it into the supplementary rules. I'm happy to make what ever changes are needed.
User avatar
Marshall Grice
Former CSCC Overall Champion
Posts: 1615
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:27 am
Club: CASOC
Car#: 11

Re: XEV/XS Rules

Post by Marshall Grice »

man this is hard to follow. the novemeber meeting minutes have the following statement:
Classing changes for 2022
EV’s are excluded from XA and XB.
Competitors are ambivalent about the class change
Reed will send out a formal proposal for the board to vote on the class changes.


For 2022/2023 season, create XS which will combine XA and XB and each will run their respective indexes.
Proposed by Rick, Second by Ed
Motion passes unanimously
there has been no follow up meeting minute entries that modify this wording.
Then in December Rick posted this to the forum:
In response to requests for changes to local classing for CST, XA, and XB, plus electric vehicles, the following was approved by the Board for 2022:
- CST will remain in place. There was not a clear majority for eliminating CST in favor of XS classes.
- A new class of XEV (Extreme Street Electric) has been created, with an index the same as XA, but rule set of CST
- Extreme Street classes will be combined into an indexed class, XS

When registering, you can only select XS (Extreme Street Combined), then select XA, XB, or XEV from Modifiers.
but there are no meeting minutes from a december meeting (likely because no meeting happened), so I can only assume these changes were voted on by private email.

Then the sup regs were updated recently to say:
XEV or Xtreme Electric Vehicle will mirror the XA ruleset and PAX Index but shall be eligible for electric production vehicles only.
Which as far as I can tell is wording that was never published in committee meeting minutes, proposed or voted on. Why even have bylaws if we don't follow them?
User avatar
Marshall Grice
Former CSCC Overall Champion
Posts: 1615
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:27 am
Club: CASOC
Car#: 11

Re: XEV/XS Rules

Post by Marshall Grice »

So to Jacob's point, the reason it seems crazy that Kyle and Tom would decide run the cars with the stripped out interiors in XS combined is that the rules have been changed after the fact to make it illegal.
User avatar
Reed Gibson
Current CSCC Overall Champion
Posts: 502
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2015 12:33 pm
Club: SCNAX

Re: XEV/XS Rules

Post by Reed Gibson »

Even if XEV was CST for EV's running a car with no hood or fenders isn't really in the spirit of the class but whatever.

The interesting point is that we didn't follow the board bylaws to discuss all of the updates at subsequent monthly meetings before voting on them and locking in the rules for the season. So really, you can kinda just do whatever you want because our supps aren't even legal lol.
User avatar
Marshall Grice
Former CSCC Overall Champion
Posts: 1615
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:27 am
Club: CASOC
Car#: 11

Re: XEV/XS Rules

Post by Marshall Grice »

No the point is the board officially announces a rule change and then changes how they implement it without notification. Is it really asking too much of our region leadership to follow the bylaws? This is the 3rd year in a row you asshats have screwed this up.

I do think it is funny you think not having a hood and fenders is an advantage.
User avatar
Reed Gibson
Current CSCC Overall Champion
Posts: 502
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2015 12:33 pm
Club: SCNAX

Re: XEV/XS Rules

Post by Reed Gibson »

Imma be honest, we don't really know what we're doing. No one reads the rules, myself included, and I can't be bothered to care to go and follow them to the "t" as trying to herd a volunteer organization into doing checks and balances is futile. The board procedures really need an entire re-write of the supps to make them easier to follow. But that's a problem for the next guy, I'm not interested in trying to do common sense anymore.
User avatar
Marshall Grice
Former CSCC Overall Champion
Posts: 1615
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:27 am
Club: CASOC
Car#: 11

Re: XEV/XS Rules

Post by Marshall Grice »

I was kind of hoping someone would fill in the blanks on how the rule change went sideways so people could figure out what to do for the rest of the season but I guess hiding behind volunteerism as a flippant excuse for incompetence is all we're going to get.
User avatar
Kyle O'Rourke
Posts: 189
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 6:56 pm
Club: SCNAX
Car#: 860
Location: Torrance, CA

Re: XEV/XS Rules

Post by Kyle O'Rourke »

For me, I would like to see 2 things:

1. Does XEV follow CST rules as originally posted (and voted on?)?

2. Better definition of what CST is.

Summarizing the Supplemental Regulations:
- CST follows the rules of CSM but must run 140+ tires (I thought this went to 200?)
- Vehicles eligible for CSM must be capable of being licensed for street use in CA.

I interpret this to mean a production vehicle that can be (but not necessarily actively) registered in CA (hence capable). If assuming actively, I think this would mean that all CA laws would be applicable. If this were the case, CST/CSM would mostly be a stock class since CA is pretty darn strict :D . Registration (licensing) I believe requires (haven't done this in a while) a smog check.
User avatar
Q V
Solo Safety Steward
Posts: 1395
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: SCNAX
Car#: 69
Location: Orange County, CA

Re: XEV/XS Rules

Post by Q V »

Reed Gibson wrote: Tue Mar 22, 2022 11:20 am Even if XEV was CST for EV's running a car with no hood or fenders isn't really in the spirit of the class but whatever.
Many Exocets don't have hoods/fenders/doors & are legal to run in CST. As a long-time (former?) competitor in CST & CSM, I've had to run w/o body panels for various practical reasons. My car's aerodynamics are better with the body panels on.

What is our procedure/who made the official determination that the Tesla did not follow CST rules on Sunday?
Reed Gibson wrote: Wed Mar 23, 2022 6:42 am Imma be honest, we don't really know what we're doing. No one reads the rules, myself included, and I can't be bothered to care to go and follow them to the "t" as trying to herd a volunteer organization into doing checks and balances is futile. The board procedures really need an entire re-write of the supps to make them easier to follow. But that's a problem for the next guy, I'm not interested in trying to do common sense anymore.
This is the public rules discussion sub-forum, so getting clarification on how to follow the rules to the "t" is appropriate and makes sense here.

When is the next election to vote for the next guy?
Jacob Abrams
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 3:50 pm
Car#: 728

Re: XEV/XS Rules

Post by Jacob Abrams »

Kyle O'Rourke wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 5:59 am For me, I would like to see 2 things:

1. Does XEV follow CST rules as originally posted (and voted on?)?

2. Better definition of what CST is.

Summarizing the Supplemental Regulations:
- CST follows the rules of CSM but must run 140+ tires (I thought this went to 200?)
- Vehicles eligible for CSM must be capable of being licensed for street use in CA.

I interpret this to mean a production vehicle that can be (but not necessarily actively) registered in CA (hence capable). If assuming actively, I think this would mean that all CA laws would be applicable. If this were the case, CST/CSM would mostly be a stock class since CA is pretty darn strict :D . Registration (licensing) I believe requires (haven't done this in a while) a smog check.
Hey Kyle, I know you weren't out to cause issues and I accept your apology. I had a good conversation with Tom today and it would be good to speak you directly as well to clear the air. I am not out to create a witch hunt here, I am ultimately looking at the long term viability of XS class and hoping to foster growth there. Sorry I didn't have a moment to talk to you guys directly on Sunday.

I can't speak for the current state of the rules, but to allow CST cars (ie, exocets at the extreme end) in XS is something that I (and many others) ultimately feel is detrimental to the long term health of the new XS class. As I mentioned initially (and over the phone today with Tom), a possible proposal would be to run a CST index for CST cars running in XS. But that is something that should be handled with careful consideration.

Bottom line is I want this class to thrive and grow, and while the way this all played out was much more dramatic than necessary I hope we can put our differences aside and create a positive discussion moving forward to accomplish those goals of growing the class.
User avatar
Doug Teulie
Posts: 529
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: PSCC
Car#: 99
Location: Orange County CA

Re: XEV/XS Rules

Post by Doug Teulie »

Sorry but I see a few things in this message string that are disturbing. The protest is worth the conversation and getting to a finding is important. What I see is a breakdown in our club's management and some disturbing statements by our Board rep. The breakdown is upsetting and as a result the members are frustrated and confused. Now we have greater issues with championship class standings and results. You can clearly see how upset members are when the Board makes mistakes and the messaging is unsatisfactory.
Marshall Grice wrote: Tue Mar 22, 2022 7:54 pm Is it really asking too much of our region leadership to follow the bylaws? This is the 3rd year in a row you asshats have screwed this up.
It is frustrating running in a club that has lost respect for rules and can't understand how to govern. This protest is just one issue of many. We all have a responsibility to enforce the rules.
Reed Gibson wrote: Wed Mar 23, 2022 6:42 am No one reads the rules, myself included, and I can't be bothered to care to go and follow them to the "t"
This statement is irresponsible and should not stand from a person in your position that represents the Board.
This is the end of this club, sadly. It is a disappointment that our Board can't be responsible and set an example with integrity. Sorry but the Board needs to understand the rules and stop undermining local and SCCA class rules with one person's values and spin.

QV''s statement should be taken seriously:
Q V wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 9:49 am This is the public rules discussion sub-forum, so getting clarification on how to follow the rules to the "t" is appropriate and makes sense here.
When is the next election to vote for the next guy?
I have seen a string of rule interpretation's posted from the Board that are clearly rule violations and encourage drivers to ignore rules.
Reed Gibson wrote: Tue Mar 22, 2022 11:20 am The interesting point is that we didn't follow the board bylaws to discuss all of the updates at subsequent monthly meetings before voting on them and locking in the rules for the season. So really, you can kinda just do whatever you want because our supps aren't even legal lol.
You still can't do what ever you want unless it is a practice. If the Board wants to make a rule change and does it incorrectly the old rules should apply provided a protest is heard and a finding is made by responsible persons that read and understand the rules. The guilty party can't make the call. The Board can't be the protest committee when the Board is protested, that is a conflict of interest.
Marshall Grice wrote: Wed Mar 23, 2022 9:28 pm flippant excuse for incompetence is all we're going to get.
The Board needs to be carful when rules are the topic. The rules are spelled out in the rule books until they are messed up due to mistakes made by the Board. When a mistake is made step up and be responsible but make the corrections using the real rules.

Some online posts with misinformation have sent drivers home to San Diego not to return. If the Board can't read the rules then please stop making up bogus statements and posting them on public media. Public or social media is the wrong place to have rule discussions and post findings because the pages move and the information is lost for the most part.
Reed Gibson wrote: Wed Mar 23, 2022 6:42 am we don't really know what we're doing.
Agreed. When you don't know what you are doing stop and read the real rule books.
Doug T
PSCC CSCC #99 /SCNAX SD #151 LT Points 23,600.
TEAM DHE/FAST 1976 KARMANN 8V FSP MK1 SILVER SCIROCCO
TEAM DHE/FAST 1980 KARMANN 8V FSP MK1 RED SCIROCCO
Need VW parts?--->http://www.parts4vws.com Need Wax?--> Mother's
User avatar
Marshall Grice
Former CSCC Overall Champion
Posts: 1615
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:27 am
Club: CASOC
Car#: 11

Re: XEV/XS Rules

Post by Marshall Grice »

I also want to point out that I think that lodging and upholding the protest is/was the correct thing to do. I don't know if Jacob is the one who filed it but who ever it was don't feel bad, you did the right thing. the misunderstanding is that Kyle/Tom thought they were running a CST car on a CST index but what really happened is they were running a CST car on an XA index, clearly not correct. My beef is with the break down (again) of the rules making process.
User avatar
Doug Teulie
Posts: 529
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: PSCC
Car#: 99
Location: Orange County CA

Re: XEV/XS Rules

Post by Doug Teulie »

Marshall Grice wrote: Sat Mar 26, 2022 7:15 am My beef is with the break down (again) of the rules making process.
Consider protesting the Board.
Doug T
PSCC CSCC #99 /SCNAX SD #151 LT Points 23,600.
TEAM DHE/FAST 1976 KARMANN 8V FSP MK1 SILVER SCIROCCO
TEAM DHE/FAST 1980 KARMANN 8V FSP MK1 RED SCIROCCO
Need VW parts?--->http://www.parts4vws.com Need Wax?--> Mother's
User avatar
Rick Brown
Current Solo Director
Posts: 5076
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:25 am
Club: PSCC
Car#: 240
Location: Lake Elsinore, CA

Re: XEV/XS Rules

Post by Rick Brown »

Doug Teulie wrote: Sat Mar 26, 2022 9:10 am
Marshall Grice wrote: Sat Mar 26, 2022 7:15 am My beef is with the break down (again) of the rules making process.
Consider protesting the Board.
Not sure what that actually means. If you read the SuppRegs, you can only protest vehicles for classification, or the event itself.

No question rules making procedures were not followed. Propose a rule (to be for the following year, unless made as an emergency action), post for public comment, vote on rule, post for public comment, 2nd vote on rule. Publish updated rules prior to first event of the year.

There were many things wrong with the way this protest was handled. Rules say written (while not being said, email/text seems to qualify) protest must be submitted to the Event Chair prior to the end of the event and he must appoint a 3 person protest committee at that time. This was not done until Monday morning and not by the protester, but by a Board member, protest should have been disallowed. The protestees should be notified of the protest immediately, not sure they were ever officially notified, nor were they interviewed about the protest prior to a decision being made. I'll admit to screwing up, and I should know better since I was part of the group that wrote the rules in 1985 when we (the local club based organization) became the local SCCA Solo Committee as part of CalClub. It was a combination of SCCA and the existing local rules at first.

One other comment: Don't like what the Board is doing? Maybe think about running for office, we have had almost a complete lack of new or old people willing to take on the jobs the last few years. Yeah, it's volunteer and we are all busy, including those of us that put in many hours behind the scenes to make things happen.
Since light is faster than sound...many people look bright until they speak...
User avatar
Kyle O'Rourke
Posts: 189
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 6:56 pm
Club: SCNAX
Car#: 860
Location: Torrance, CA

Re: XEV/XS Rules

Post by Kyle O'Rourke »

Thanks Rick, I know you've tried to provide me with some information and you do a ton for the club as is.

I'm not trying to blame anyone in particular, but I still haven't received any formal information about being protested or what was actually protested.

As of right now I'm in limbo and being told I can't run in XS-XEV, CST, or why the car is non-compliant and how to make it compliant. Looks like I'll have to toss the 2022 season.
User avatar
James Yom
Current Solo Director
Posts: 283
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:29 am
Car#: 28

Re: XEV/XS Rules

Post by James Yom »

I'd like to make some clarifications here.

First of all, Rick Brown is wrong in that a board member was the one who filed the protest. Jacob Abrams was the who submitted the protest, first verbally while at the event to me, and then thru email, which was sent to me and then I forwarded to the board. Bob Endicott had also stated verbally to me that he is protesting the running of said Tesla in XA. Randy, who was the event chair, was not readily present at the time this was going down and I was the only person part of the leadership that was around.

Bob Endicott approached me about the legality of said Tesla, and as the board member that was spearheading the effort in finding a place for the EVs to play in XS, I knew full well what the actual rule was. EVs play in XS under the XS rule set. Common sense right?

What Rick posted on the forum was wrong. The board never voted to allow EVs to run XEV with the CST rules set. I know this because again, I was the one spearheading the whole EVs in XS movement and trying to find a happy balance for all our members.

It's clearly written in the supps what the actual rule was. If what Rick wrote on the forum goes in direct contrast to what is actually written in the supps, wouldn't common sense be to point this out in detail before the event? Or even before the run group?

For whatever faults the board may have, there is the responsibility of competitors to use common sense. If a class requires body panels, an interior, and lights, and you show up to the class with none of those, wouldn't common sense tell you that the car is not legal?

And if the board did really approve CST rules in XS for the EV cars, why would we give XEV the XSA pax of .842 when CST runs a PAX of .864? Again, if you used common sense you'd obviously see that XEV has no place using the CST ruleset. The numbers don't even match up.

Common sense by competitors and members of the club could have completely avoided this getting to a point that a protest needed to be filed. An utter lack of common sense from members who have been doing this for decades, or an underhanded attempt to exploit a non-existent loophole, is the real reason why this has gotten to where it has, not a failure of the board.

As someone who volunteers his time to take care of this club, I did my best to try to make everyone happy with this whole EVs in XS problem. I personally talked to many of the members of XS and EV owners to try to find a good solution, and I think we did find a great solution. And then to see the work I put into this all come crashing down because of a total disregard for common sense, it's very disheartening.

Do you guys think we do this because of the whopping 25% discount we get from events, which I don't even use? This stress isn't even worth it if I got free entry. I do this because I care about the club. Instead of blaming the leadership for something it didn't even primarily cause, why don't you guys step up and volunteer? A big chunk of the "asshat" leadership can be solved if we had a Secretary that wasn't MIA or someone would step up and be our Rules chair, which no one seems to want to do. Change doesn't happen by blaming others, change happens when you do something about it. Care to step up?
User avatar
Marshall Grice
Former CSCC Overall Champion
Posts: 1615
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:27 am
Club: CASOC
Car#: 11

Re: XEV/XS Rules

Post by Marshall Grice »

I realize it may seem crystal clear when you have inside information and that is exactly why our bylaws specify a process for disseminating information relating to board actions and sup reg changes that is clear and transparent so that everyone is operating with the same level of information. This is a basic principal of good governance. When the region leadership is proposing/approving/implementing sup reg changes by private email and does not make any attempt to inform the membership of the changes, that is a failure of the region leadership to execute their responsibilities and not a failure of the members to use 'common sense'.

so help us out, what day was the wording that made it into the sup regs voted on and approved by the board and what method of notification was provided to make the membership aware of the change?
User avatar
James Yom
Current Solo Director
Posts: 283
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:29 am
Car#: 28

Re: XEV/XS Rules

Post by James Yom »

Sounds like a task our secretary should handle, so I'll defer the answer to our secretary.
User avatar
Q V
Solo Safety Steward
Posts: 1395
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:26 am
Club: SCNAX
Car#: 69
Location: Orange County, CA

Re: XEV/XS Rules

Post by Q V »

James Yom wrote: Tue Mar 29, 2022 5:11 pm Sounds like a task our secretary should handle, so I'll defer the answer to our secretary.
Please help me understand. Were the supp regs that Marshall is asking about voted on? and how was the vote carried out? Or is that also something a board member shouldn't have to know?
User avatar
Rick Brown
Current Solo Director
Posts: 5076
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 11:25 am
Club: PSCC
Car#: 240
Location: Lake Elsinore, CA

Re: XEV/XS Rules

Post by Rick Brown »

James Yom wrote: Mon Mar 28, 2022 12:15 am I'd like to make some clarifications here.

First of all, Rick Brown is wrong in that a board member was the one who filed the protest. Jacob Abrams was the who submitted the protest, first verbally while at the event to me, and then thru email, which was sent to me and then I forwarded to the board. Bob Endicott had also stated verbally to me that he is protesting the running of said Tesla in XA. Randy, who was the event chair, was not readily present at the time this was going down and I was the only person part of the leadership that was around.
I didn't say a board member filed it, I said a board member brought it to the board. It was supposed to be submitted to the Event Chair so he could form a protest committee. The board didn't need to be involved at that point. Randy may not have been present "at the time this was going down", but he was there until the end of the event (and likely one the last to leave the lot as usual) which is the deadline for filing a protest in the SuppRegs. Another issue is the inappropriateness of this issue happening while the competitors were running. Certainly don't think that would be allowed at the National level, handel it before or after the run group, not while people are taking there runs. XS ran 2nd group, plenty of time to daft a protest, present to Event and to the competitors, and Randy to form his Protest Committee.
Bob Endicott approached me about the legality of said Tesla, and as the board member that was spearheading the effort in finding a place for the EVs to play in XS, I knew full well what the actual rule was. EVs play in XS under the XS rule set. Common sense right?

What Rick posted on the forum was wrong. The board never voted to allow EVs to run XEV with the CST rules set. I know this because again, I was the one spearheading the whole EVs in XS movement and trying to find a happy balance for all our members.
It's possible I was wrong, do not remember for sure, but was in my mind at the time that that's what we settled on. Why did it take 3 months for that to be pointed out? Unfortunately, our meeting minutes are not that detailed, but most of our meetings are recorded, too, if it's that important.

It's clearly written in the supps what the actual rule was. If what Rick wrote on the forum goes in direct contrast to what is actually written in the supps, wouldn't common sense be to point this out in detail before the event? Or even before the run group?

Common sense by competitors and members of the club could have completely avoided this getting to a point that a protest needed to be filed. An utter lack of common sense from members who have been doing this for decades, or an underhanded attempt to exploit a non-existent loophole, is the real reason why this has gotten to where it has, not a failure of the board.

As someone who volunteers his time to take care of this club, I did my best to try to make everyone happy with this whole EVs in XS problem. I personally talked to many of the members of XS and EV owners to try to find a good solution, and I think we did find a great solution. And then to see the work I put into this all come crashing down because of a total disregard for common sense, it's very disheartening.
That seems a bit dramatic, if this had been handled at the time with common sense, we wouldn't be here. As the spearhead in the EV in XS, why didn't you point this issue out before it got to this point? My post was way back at the end of December, where Kyle specifically asked if he could run a modified electric vehicle in XS under CST rules. No one challenged that. So the only real issue is the level the car was taken to in March, to be considered CST. I agree it does not qualify for CST at the moment. I believe they indicated at the time they were willing to be reclassified. Unfortunately, from further research, it appears the car would not qualify for any SCCA class as it was run in March, not even AMod (no electric motors, no ABS, etc).

Since the protest was not properly presented, it should be disallowed. The car/drivers should be restored to the results and reclassed as Time Only.
Since light is faster than sound...many people look bright until they speak...
Post Reply