I just had a panic attack after looking closer at some rules changes the TT board made earlier this year with one small thing that I feel was left out, and this might keep us from attending TT Nationals in October. I cannot afford to have an illegal car, after driving 30+ hours round trip to NCM and blowing a week attending TT Nationals. Our Max1 build was 100% legal up through the end of 2023, but maybe it is not 100% now, due to a rules take back, which would make our car less safe, too. I will explain, and the best way to read this is on this forum link - because it needs pictures and the online question form doesn't allow for that. This is also time sensitive, as I am sitting on my TT Nats entry.
Today I was helping someone try to class their car for SCCA Time Trial, who was potentially moving over from NASA TT1. As someone who has built around SCCA TT Tuner and Max for the past 4 years and who is "on a committee" that I cannot talk about for some weird reason, I felt like I was pretty knowledgeable and could help. I am always trying to push folks to come out and try SCCA Time Trial - in our region (Texas Region) we sponsor the 8 event per year series and help instruct in a pinch.
https://photos.smugmug.com/Racing-Ev...IMG_6250-L.jpg
I have read the Max and Tuner rules backwards and forwards, both to help class cars but to look for ways to maximize our builds. We have prepped many cars for SCCA Time Trial in my shop, both for ourselves and customers. We have 4 more cars we are prepping for Max classes at this very moment. I attend 30+ track events per year and work with lots of potential entries - people we talk to at the track, customers that call our shop (we average 1000 new customers per year), and thousands of folks on the many Facebook track related groups that I admin or moderate + the handful of forums that still exist.
https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-...-zQzndR7-L.jpg
Anyway, this guy was asking about aero rules, and discussing a chassis mounted vs trunk mounted rear wing. I recommended the latter from ease of installation, but showed our chassis mounted wing built to the 8.0 sq foot limit of CAM/XS and Max. He said he didn't think he could do a wing like our Max1 Mustang's because Lexan wasn't allowed in Max - he had just written a letter asking about that and was told that was an Unlimited class only mod. Wait.... What??
https://photos.smugmug.com/Projects/...IMG_4664-L.jpg
When we first started building out 2015 Mustang for Max class in 2020 there was a written rule (below) that said you could use Max classing or ALTERNATE classing for CAM / XS, and that rule was still in effect until early 2024. This rule was to encourage CROSSOVER entries.
https://photos.smugmug.com/TechArtic...ss-rules-M.jpg
It was to get SCCA autocrossers to also run in SCCA Time Trial, and THAT WAS ALWAYS A GOOD IDEA. Rules compatibility between series within the same organization is a smart thing - NASA has Super Touring (W2W) and Time Trial classes that are a 100% direct crossover - other than safety regulations. The same allowed modifications, aero limits, power and weight breaks, tire rules, etc.
https://photos.smugmug.com/Racing-Ev...9161081-X2.jpg
When we switched from primarily building around NASA TT rules (we ran many cars in NASA competitively from 2006-2019, including 3 trips to NASA Nationals) over to the SCCA Time Trial series rules in 2021, this exact CAM "alternative rules allowance" is what made me jump series to SCCA. Because it made sense, and allowed us to tweak a single car to run primarily in both SCCA TT and SCCA Solo using the same ruleset - then we'd run NASA and Apex Lap Attack (a local series to us in Texas) as secondary series, with compromised classing. It was risky, but I found that the SCCA TT rules board was quicker to react than NASA TT board, when we wrote in with questions or possible rules changes. Both of them are 100x faster to react than SCCA Solo rules board, of course.
Apparently not many current SCCA TT competitors in 2021-23 knew about the "alternative classing allowance", but we showed this in our documented build threads and some people cried foul. There were some letters written, and then with an admittedly poorly executed rollout in early 2024, the allowance was taken away - BUT the SCCA TT board did adopt the CAM/XS aero rules. That seemed to solve any lingering problems, but it left out one key allowance.
https://photos.smugmug.com/TechArtic...24-LExan-L.jpg
What I didn't catch until TODAY - 7 weeks before TT Nationals - is that the TT board left out one key allowance that are still in the CAM/XS interior rules. They are now similar, but there is one thing: allowing Lexan.
https://photos.smugmug.com/TechArtic...or-rules-L.jpg
Now I am not one who personally loves the use of Lexan windows, especially front windshields. We talk people out of Lexan for street cars all the time. This plexiglass variant does scratch easier than glass, but it is half the weight of glass (typical in 4mm thickness options), and safer in that it doesn't shatter or break like tempered glass. It can also be cut and shaped very easily, and THAT allows for some other good uses: Venting of side quarter windows (for things like a driver cooling system), or notching to allow for chassis mounted wings like ours', which pokes out the back window. You can pick up Plexiglass / Lexan at home hardware supply stores, too. It is easy to work with and can solve some problems.
https://photos.smugmug.com/Projects/...IMG_4848-L.jpg
Again, I refuse to use Lexan for front windshields, as it makes windshield wipers almost impossible to use - wipers scratch Lexan very easily. And even SCCA Solo CAM/XS rules penalize front Lexan windshields with a 150 pound minimum weight penalty and they have minimum thickness requirements, which is smart. Double layer safety glass windshields are actually safer and better than Lexan in almost every way, except weight (again, this is NOT tempered glass, which is used in every other window location of a car). So that CAM class weight penalty for front Lexan windshields makes sense. The CAM/XS rules are pretty well written there, and we kept even more of our interior (to meet CAM rules) than our Level 3 Safety updates require.
https://photos.smugmug.com/Projects/...IMG_4839-L.jpg
I am hoping that the SCCA TT Board just overlooked this small allowance and will adopt the CAM/XS Lexan rules shown above, hopefully in time for 2024 TT Nationals. I am sitting on my entry for TT Nats and UTCC until I hear back, because we cannot and will not be able to change our chassis mounted wing mounts in time, and that wing mounting requires a Lexan rear window that has small notches for the uprights.
We could get cute and try to use a loophole from the 4.1.I rule, listed above. That is the ultimate "catch all" allowance (which was brought over from CAM/XS rules) - making an aero package "commercially available" that includes a notched Lexan rear window as part of the mounting for the wing. Which it absolutely would have to include, and I could list that on our website TODAY. And yes many people have asked us to make this wing kit, and it would sell - this would not be a fake loophole exploit.
Please, address this oversight and don't make us use this risky loophole. The real issue is I do not want to tow 30 hours round trip to Kentucky for TT Nats only to be protested, then have some rule maker decide in the moment that "well, we don't like your interpretation" and I get bounced. Then everyone is unhappy and this all gets blown out of proportion in the public. This CAM/XS allowance is a trivial thing, and doesn't amount to 20 pounds total for all side and rear window replacements. I purchased my entire Lexan rear and quarter side window package from Plastics 4 Performance for under $639.25 shipped from the UK, which barely covers the cost of one tire for this car.
https://photos.smugmug.com/Racing-Ev...air-5681-L.jpg
Let "Max" class mean something more than an OEM car with a wing stuck on the trunk. If you want to encourage "Real" Max builds, which I feel like our car represents, it would help if some of these small interior and window limitations were removed, many of which the Safety Level 2 and Safety Level 3 allowances do now. I don't want to play the "safety card" but it is true.
https://photos.smugmug.com/Projects/...IMG_1821-L.jpg
We have a FULL roll cage + window net + fire system in our 3617 pound Mustang, which is heavier than many other Max1 cars by 400-500+ pounds (that weight shown above is with alternate tires and a longer front splitter we use for NASA and Apex, which isn't legal for Max 1.... well, unless we "add it to our website" then we could sneak that in under loophole 4.1.I - see how that is a bad idea?)
https://photos.smugmug.com/Racing-Ev...DSC02677-L.jpg
Our car is also as SAFE as we can possibly make it (except that we had to limit the door bars to not intrude into the door cavity, so we could keep "door side windows", which we cannot ever even run with them up at TT events - another rule limitation making cars less safe). Having tempered side and rear glass shattering in a crash and showering the driver is a less than ideal situation, from a safety standpoint.
https://photos.smugmug.com/Projects/...-trigger-L.jpg
Please look at this as soon as you can and get back to us. We have spent the last 2 seasons and more money than I care to admit building / testing / competing in this car to be ready to bring it to TT Nationals in Max 1. GRM is excited to have us run this car in UTCC, even if we have to keep our 200TW street tires and Max1 aero on the car, since we cannot change those for even a single UTCC session (don't get me started).
We cannot un-do the aero changes we made to this car in 2023, back when the alternative CAM classing allowance was in place and all of this Lexan WAS legal for Max. Take backs are the worst, and that is what this is - we just found it a bit late in the season. Adding tempered glass back to this car only makes our car less safe.
Thank you for reading,
Terry Fair, SCCA member # 338999
Today I was helping someone try to class their car for SCCA Time Trial, who was potentially moving over from NASA TT1. As someone who has built around SCCA TT Tuner and Max for the past 4 years and who is "on a committee" that I cannot talk about for some weird reason, I felt like I was pretty knowledgeable and could help. I am always trying to push folks to come out and try SCCA Time Trial - in our region (Texas Region) we sponsor the 8 event per year series and help instruct in a pinch.
https://photos.smugmug.com/Racing-Ev...IMG_6250-L.jpg
I have read the Max and Tuner rules backwards and forwards, both to help class cars but to look for ways to maximize our builds. We have prepped many cars for SCCA Time Trial in my shop, both for ourselves and customers. We have 4 more cars we are prepping for Max classes at this very moment. I attend 30+ track events per year and work with lots of potential entries - people we talk to at the track, customers that call our shop (we average 1000 new customers per year), and thousands of folks on the many Facebook track related groups that I admin or moderate + the handful of forums that still exist.
https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-...-zQzndR7-L.jpg
Anyway, this guy was asking about aero rules, and discussing a chassis mounted vs trunk mounted rear wing. I recommended the latter from ease of installation, but showed our chassis mounted wing built to the 8.0 sq foot limit of CAM/XS and Max. He said he didn't think he could do a wing like our Max1 Mustang's because Lexan wasn't allowed in Max - he had just written a letter asking about that and was told that was an Unlimited class only mod. Wait.... What??
https://photos.smugmug.com/Projects/...IMG_4664-L.jpg
When we first started building out 2015 Mustang for Max class in 2020 there was a written rule (below) that said you could use Max classing or ALTERNATE classing for CAM / XS, and that rule was still in effect until early 2024. This rule was to encourage CROSSOVER entries.
https://photos.smugmug.com/TechArtic...ss-rules-M.jpg
It was to get SCCA autocrossers to also run in SCCA Time Trial, and THAT WAS ALWAYS A GOOD IDEA. Rules compatibility between series within the same organization is a smart thing - NASA has Super Touring (W2W) and Time Trial classes that are a 100% direct crossover - other than safety regulations. The same allowed modifications, aero limits, power and weight breaks, tire rules, etc.
https://photos.smugmug.com/Racing-Ev...9161081-X2.jpg
When we switched from primarily building around NASA TT rules (we ran many cars in NASA competitively from 2006-2019, including 3 trips to NASA Nationals) over to the SCCA Time Trial series rules in 2021, this exact CAM "alternative rules allowance" is what made me jump series to SCCA. Because it made sense, and allowed us to tweak a single car to run primarily in both SCCA TT and SCCA Solo using the same ruleset - then we'd run NASA and Apex Lap Attack (a local series to us in Texas) as secondary series, with compromised classing. It was risky, but I found that the SCCA TT rules board was quicker to react than NASA TT board, when we wrote in with questions or possible rules changes. Both of them are 100x faster to react than SCCA Solo rules board, of course.
Apparently not many current SCCA TT competitors in 2021-23 knew about the "alternative classing allowance", but we showed this in our documented build threads and some people cried foul. There were some letters written, and then with an admittedly poorly executed rollout in early 2024, the allowance was taken away - BUT the SCCA TT board did adopt the CAM/XS aero rules. That seemed to solve any lingering problems, but it left out one key allowance.
https://photos.smugmug.com/TechArtic...24-LExan-L.jpg
What I didn't catch until TODAY - 7 weeks before TT Nationals - is that the TT board left out one key allowance that are still in the CAM/XS interior rules. They are now similar, but there is one thing: allowing Lexan.
https://photos.smugmug.com/TechArtic...or-rules-L.jpg
Now I am not one who personally loves the use of Lexan windows, especially front windshields. We talk people out of Lexan for street cars all the time. This plexiglass variant does scratch easier than glass, but it is half the weight of glass (typical in 4mm thickness options), and safer in that it doesn't shatter or break like tempered glass. It can also be cut and shaped very easily, and THAT allows for some other good uses: Venting of side quarter windows (for things like a driver cooling system), or notching to allow for chassis mounted wings like ours', which pokes out the back window. You can pick up Plexiglass / Lexan at home hardware supply stores, too. It is easy to work with and can solve some problems.
https://photos.smugmug.com/Projects/...IMG_4848-L.jpg
Again, I refuse to use Lexan for front windshields, as it makes windshield wipers almost impossible to use - wipers scratch Lexan very easily. And even SCCA Solo CAM/XS rules penalize front Lexan windshields with a 150 pound minimum weight penalty and they have minimum thickness requirements, which is smart. Double layer safety glass windshields are actually safer and better than Lexan in almost every way, except weight (again, this is NOT tempered glass, which is used in every other window location of a car). So that CAM class weight penalty for front Lexan windshields makes sense. The CAM/XS rules are pretty well written there, and we kept even more of our interior (to meet CAM rules) than our Level 3 Safety updates require.
https://photos.smugmug.com/Projects/...IMG_4839-L.jpg
I am hoping that the SCCA TT Board just overlooked this small allowance and will adopt the CAM/XS Lexan rules shown above, hopefully in time for 2024 TT Nationals. I am sitting on my entry for TT Nats and UTCC until I hear back, because we cannot and will not be able to change our chassis mounted wing mounts in time, and that wing mounting requires a Lexan rear window that has small notches for the uprights.
We could get cute and try to use a loophole from the 4.1.I rule, listed above. That is the ultimate "catch all" allowance (which was brought over from CAM/XS rules) - making an aero package "commercially available" that includes a notched Lexan rear window as part of the mounting for the wing. Which it absolutely would have to include, and I could list that on our website TODAY. And yes many people have asked us to make this wing kit, and it would sell - this would not be a fake loophole exploit.
Please, address this oversight and don't make us use this risky loophole. The real issue is I do not want to tow 30 hours round trip to Kentucky for TT Nats only to be protested, then have some rule maker decide in the moment that "well, we don't like your interpretation" and I get bounced. Then everyone is unhappy and this all gets blown out of proportion in the public. This CAM/XS allowance is a trivial thing, and doesn't amount to 20 pounds total for all side and rear window replacements. I purchased my entire Lexan rear and quarter side window package from Plastics 4 Performance for under $639.25 shipped from the UK, which barely covers the cost of one tire for this car.
https://photos.smugmug.com/Racing-Ev...air-5681-L.jpg
Let "Max" class mean something more than an OEM car with a wing stuck on the trunk. If you want to encourage "Real" Max builds, which I feel like our car represents, it would help if some of these small interior and window limitations were removed, many of which the Safety Level 2 and Safety Level 3 allowances do now. I don't want to play the "safety card" but it is true.
https://photos.smugmug.com/Projects/...IMG_1821-L.jpg
We have a FULL roll cage + window net + fire system in our 3617 pound Mustang, which is heavier than many other Max1 cars by 400-500+ pounds (that weight shown above is with alternate tires and a longer front splitter we use for NASA and Apex, which isn't legal for Max 1.... well, unless we "add it to our website" then we could sneak that in under loophole 4.1.I - see how that is a bad idea?)
https://photos.smugmug.com/Racing-Ev...DSC02677-L.jpg
Our car is also as SAFE as we can possibly make it (except that we had to limit the door bars to not intrude into the door cavity, so we could keep "door side windows", which we cannot ever even run with them up at TT events - another rule limitation making cars less safe). Having tempered side and rear glass shattering in a crash and showering the driver is a less than ideal situation, from a safety standpoint.
https://photos.smugmug.com/Projects/...-trigger-L.jpg
Please look at this as soon as you can and get back to us. We have spent the last 2 seasons and more money than I care to admit building / testing / competing in this car to be ready to bring it to TT Nationals in Max 1. GRM is excited to have us run this car in UTCC, even if we have to keep our 200TW street tires and Max1 aero on the car, since we cannot change those for even a single UTCC session (don't get me started).
We cannot un-do the aero changes we made to this car in 2023, back when the alternative CAM classing allowance was in place and all of this Lexan WAS legal for Max. Take backs are the worst, and that is what this is - we just found it a bit late in the season. Adding tempered glass back to this car only makes our car less safe.
Thank you for reading,
Terry Fair, SCCA member # 338999
Comment