Cal Club Autocross Forums

Jeff Stuart wrote:

Kurt Rahn wrote: Anyway, back to the question at hand, I've never measured the base of a cone, but if you figure it's 10" and that when you outline it, that outline will be around .5" wider than that on each side, a cone can still be legal when the person before you hit it, and cause a 10" change to the course when you approach it (okay, maybe 8" when you count the part of the cone that rises from the base). Going through a Chicago box, slalom or other such precision element, that could be a huge difference. It seems like a no-brainer that two different sets of criteria should be applied to cones hit and stopping for a cone and getting a re-run. It'd be pretty easy to create a real-world example and convince anyone who thinks otherwise.

The problem wasn't that the cone was protruding outside of the chalk line, it was that the cone was rotated, but still contained wholly within the chalk line, at least that's my understanding. I definitely noticed a few very generously boxed cones when I was walking, where the chalk was a good 2 inches outside of the cones edge. I remember thinking at the time that it didn't seem fair, because the cone could be placed in two different but legal ways, and make the course two inches wider/narrower.

That (chalk lines way wider than the actual cone's base) is a whole different and very-hard-to-police issue. I'd think that would eventually have to be dealt with by the chief of course.

However, if you have to make a black-or-white judgement regarding the cone being moved at all from its original position, even if it was just nudged, if someone driving the course after someone else nudged it was able to tell that that cone was out of position and was willing to sacrifice a run to make that statement, then I think they should be given a re-run (assuming the cone was actually moved out of place enough to tell).

I wish we could make it the FJr's special job to mark the cones ... they're so much lower to the ground. ;)

Mako Koiwai wrote:I wish we could make it the FJr's special job to mark the cones ... they're so much lower to the ground. ;)

We have a stencil for marking cones with spray chalk, assuming we would be allowed to do that at El Toro.

... and Team Blew has a bunch of left over cans of Spray Chalk

Robert and a spray can. Are you sure you want that???

KJ Christopher wrote:

Doug Kott wrote:So did the protest concern a rerun because of an "out of position" cone that was upright and still clearly in the box, but rotated 45 degrees? If so, we're getting into some real gray areas. Say a cone was still legal, but only one tiny corner of the base was touching the chalk line, but it was sticking into the racing line, reducing the track's width by nearly a cone-width. Rerun? I'd say yes. But the first scenario????

...
Interestingly enough, after the protest was filed for public viewing, several people mentioned that this situation had been ruled the same way as the PC did on Saturday at a few national events - more recent than rulings in the other direction.

KJ, here's a documented case (that is very similar to your case) from Nationals in 2008 that I'm somewhat familiar with.

http://sccaforums.com/forums/thread/321874.aspx

So back to the original theme of posting video's of the weekends runs and maybe getting some constructive feedback on technique or just a chance to watch the masters at work?

Ok,
Me:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAM0EO7poTo" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Christine:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHxgyma1RWY" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

lol.... love the "DAMMIT" at the end of Christine's run.
Mark D.

Marshall the laugh at the end sounds way to close to that of an evil overlord.

Arthur Grant wrote:Marshall the laugh at the end sounds way to close to that of an evil overlord.

You should see his video from last year at Nationals, my all time favorite ax-video

Pretty Funny... Robert Ekstrand 6yo FJC'r providing his own soundtrack over the vuvuzela drone of a tapped out 2hp Comer50...
Not his fastest lap, but soooooo cool.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj3-iOfioTw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Okay, his quieter more boring fastest lap 140.126
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3il6A_ILDVk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

My sucky "fastest" clean run.... Fastest just doesn't seem appropriate... 91.490 3 seconds off the pace. HELP!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAhywGx4oYk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


All three videos are in 720p HD so be sure to select that, play them full screen and turn up the volume (especially on Robert's first one).

That first one is too cool! Amazing that he doesn't get lost ... sounds like he's having a LOT of fun. Are there any power mods that you can do ?! }:)

Stock HP is 1.8. Blueprinting can get to say 2.5. But the increase isn't really more "power" you just rev them higher. Top speed is in the mid 30's, but it takes forever to get there. If it doesn't get a run at the hills of lot 12 or especially Qualcomm West, it won't make it. Spec gear, spec tire diameter, no engine "mods". Still the CalSpeed top kid kart is hitting 41mph consistently which doesn't jive with the math (1800-2000rpm higher than other top blueprinted motors). The "factory" theoretical top speed is 24mph. Robert AVERAGED 30-31 mph on his fastest lap Sunday. Robert and his kart are overweight by 35lbs by SCCA strange weight rules (he's 5lbs under by region 7 IKF rules), but that probably doesn't effect top speed which is effectively limited by how many RPM's the motor will turn.

Mako Koiwai wrote:That first one is too cool! Amazing that he doesn't get lost ... sounds like he's having a LOT of fun. Are there any power mods that you can do ?! }:)

I made him walk the course THREE times for Saturday and TWO times for Sunday. He hated me. But none of the kids got lost this weekend.

run #2: 89.1 +2
http://jonlugod.blip.tv/file/3815666/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Run #3: 88.495 dnf =(
http://jonlugod.blip.tv/file/3815679/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

i tightened up my line big time on the third run compared to my first two. Steve you lost time being too wide before the first chute turnaround and for the sweeper before the slalom. You lost momentum in the slalom to the turn around. The rest looks good.

KJ, here's a documented case (that is very similar to your case) from Nationals in 2008 that I'm somewhat familiar with.

http://sccaforums.com/forums/thread/321874.aspx[/quote]


This case is good for a tour or nationals where the boxes are marked like 7.9.1 describes. You have an outline of the cone, a 2" box as well as nice 90 deg corners. The divisional course was marked with a single yellow line that varied from outlining some cones to being more than 2" off others. Also the corners were sometimes together but often stopped short of joining. Not many were 90 deg corners.

So it is hard to apply that cone marking rule here.

It was hard to distinguish how offset the cone was since it had allready been moved by the time I got there. But the box was not square and there was room between the cone and the yellow line. So since the corner worker said the cone was 100 % in the box, in this case we stayed with the original call by the corner that all the cones were in the box.

If the box was marked like at a tour or nationals, a rerun would have been awarded since the cone was displaced.

The chief steward did offer a provisional rerun, just in case.

Thanks for all the hospitality. Another great event for those of us coming over from AZ.

One of my runs from Sunday:

http://www.youtube.com/user/DoubleTroub ... nokjXc3Hh0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Even if I'm slow, I still have fun in my STR 10AE miata!

Larry Burrow