(FEEDBACK) FORMULA D ATLANTA May 8-9th 2009

[Hach1r0k1d03]

Are you implying that there are more rules that don't matter? OMG no way...

well i just wanted to see what formula d's response would be seeing how the tire rule was stated and enforced. even though it has some problems its in the book unlike the mirror rule which is stated and not enforced.

[courantcom]

ok so did anybody answer or figure out why the oem side mirror rule is in the rule book but doesnt matter?

Are you implying that there are more rules that don't matter? OMG no way...

[Hach1r0k1d03]

ok so did anybody answer or figure out why the oem side mirror rule is in the rule book but doesnt matter?

[courantcom]

6,000+ views, 10 pages in less than a week? Awesome!

[courantcom]

I agree that the gauge should be calibrated every day of any event and logged with date, reading (pass/fail or numeric value) and initials of person that calibrated the gauge.

The log book should be open for any team to view at any time.

...for a single tool that can determine immediate disqualification? Absolutely.

[wrxwagon]

I also think a durometer test is something that can be done incorrectly. It's not exactly a tire pressure gauge. The "expensive gauges" also come with a standard - a piece of material that you can test the gauge on to see if it's still holding it's accuracy.

For something that important (...failure means immediate disqualification), I think the gauge needs to be constantly measured against the standard and that a log book needs to be kept to record when the standard was tested, temperature, person/operator, etc.

I agree that the gauge should be calibrated every day of any event and logged with date, reading (pass/fail or numeric value) and initials of person that calibrated the gauge.

The log book should be open for any team to view at any time.

[courantcom]

Those pics were from Friday's qualifying session. Seems like the test in question was during Saturday's top 16 runs, which may have had a different person administering the test / different procedure.

Well, according to Formula D, it was Doug doing ALL the testing... Maybe this is what Doug looks like without his sunglasses? =)

[courantcom]

My opinion is that the rule should be removed for the rest of the year for further evaluation. So that the test procedures are validated and reproducible, this would also confirm and validate the acceptable durometer reading. An annual validation should be performed on approved tires for the series. Meaning Tire companies must submit a tire each year. Even if the tire is still being used in the series, the lot /batch will need to be tested. Once the test procedure approved and validated. Formula D should hold tech day/video to show how the durometer test will be performed, so that all the teams can perform the test the same way.

In Pat’s case: He should be awarded his points back and reimbursed all his fees for the Atlanta event.

You're suggesting that certain rules need to be removed until the end of the year? I'm all FOR that! Oh wait...I tried to suggest that LAST year when the front suspension on SA-Drift's R34 (Takatori) car was under attack. Everyone knows how all that went down. It's easy to recap though...basically SA Drift still had to change the front suspension over...but nobody else had to change their suspension setups.

Maybe this time around, it's a more serious subject because Pat got disqualified. Takatori wasn't disqualified. ...just fines and point deductions.

I like your suggestions...all of them. I think everyone will like it too...

[courantcom]

On something as important as this testing is, wouldn't you want some consistency in the results ?

Its serious enough to get someone disqualified, I would want to see the same guys running the test though out the event.

I think a durometer test is something that can be done incorrectly, so it seems to need someone skilled enough at reading the gage, and preforming the test. The expensive gages have a tolerance of +/- 1 number. I wonder on the gages that Formula Drift was using, what the actual tolerance of the gage was. I wonder when the last time their gage was calibrated vs a standard. I wonder if the gage was dropped at all during the course of the event. I did gage calibration for 4 years, and you might be surprised what might be considered tolerable on a non critical gage.

I also think a durometer test is something that can be done incorrectly. It's not exactly a tire pressure gauge. The "expensive gauges" also come with a standard - a piece of material that you can test the gauge on to see if it's still holding it's accuracy.

For something that important (...failure means immediate disqualification), I think the gauge needs to be constantly measured against the standard and that a log book needs to be kept to record when the standard was tested, temperature, person/operator, etc.

[tyndago]

On something as important as this testing is, wouldn't you want some consistency in the results ?

Its serious enough to get someone disqualified, I would want to see the same guys running the test though out the event.

I think a durometer test is something that can be done incorrectly, so it seems to need someone skilled enough at reading the gage, and preforming the test. The expensive gages have a tolerance of +/- 1 number. I wonder on the gages that Formula Drift was using, what the actual tolerance of the gage was. I wonder when the last time their gage was calibrated vs a standard. I wonder if the gage was dropped at all during the course of the event. I did gage calibration for 4 years, and you might be surprised what might be considered tolerable on a non critical gage.

[Slapshotnerd]

Heres some photos of durometer testing from Atlanta. http://tunericons.com/mod_articles/a...&article_id=57

I don't know what the starter - Doug is it ? Looks like. Is that him doing testing ?

Those pics were from Friday's qualifying session. Seems like the test in question was during Saturday's top 16 runs, which may have had a different person administering the test / different procedure.

[wrxwagon]

My opinion is that the rule should be removed for the rest of the year for further evaluation. So that the test procedures are validated and reproducible, this would also confirm and validate the acceptable durometer reading. An annual validation should be performed on approved tires for the series. Meaning Tire companies must submit a tire each year. Even if the tire is still being used in the series, the lot /batch will need to be tested. Once the test procedure approved and validated. Formula D should hold tech day/video to show how the durometer test will be performed, so that all the teams can perform the test the same way.

In Pat’s case: He should be awarded his points back and reimbursed all his fees for the Atlanta event.

[Justin Banner]

blantant self promotion 2

I'm going to be discussing the tire controversy and the weekend as a whole. Listen to 1340whap.com at 6pm EST (the topic will go from 6pm-6:30 and is an 1.5 hour show tonight) and call 804 452-4999 to voice your opinion!

[tyndago]

Heres some photos of durometer testing from Atlanta. http://tunericons.com/mod_articles/a...&article_id=57

I don't know what the starter - Doug is it ? Looks like. Is that him doing testing ?

[APACHE-R]

new rule: it should be the responsibility of the teams crew chief, tech, mechanic, or whomever on the team to thoroughly go throw the rulebook and abide by it.

if this durometer testing is such a big issue, why havent ANY of the teams bitched about it pre-season!? Most of the cars out there are new builds, or had to be adjusted to meet the new guidelines, why isnt the techs or crew chiefs complaining about this before atlanta?

my point is.. it is unfortunate that pat got screwed. I know pat as a person, and hes not going to manipulate his tires or whatever the case is. Tire manufacturers fault? possibly. But if this is common knowledge that the tire wont meet the durometer requirements on any brand (when its tested HOT), then someone should've said something beforehand.

This goes for all the rules in that rulebook. If you see a discrepancy, then acknowledge it before an incident occurs.

It's not just a discrepancy with the rule, it's how they're testing...they have already admitted their testing this year is giving them inconsistant results when compared to the last two years...how can that be explained? How can the rule possibly remain? It shouldn't, but that's beside your point....Just because it wasn't posted on here or made public doesn't mean there weren't complaints beforehand. You definatly can't assume that.