Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2019.
 

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

Just from a bleacher jockey perspective this Sprint Car Council has the potential to bear some very significant fruit. A small, but very important, slice of our life is dedicated to the enjoyment that is derived from watching extremely extraordinary things accomplished in open wheel racecars by seemingly ordinary people. It's a safe assumption that everyone reading this feels much the same way. ANYTHING that can be enacted by anyone or any group which will reduce the incidence and possibility of bad things happening to any and all those responsible for putting on "the show" is a heartening development.

It's great to see that Casey is equally involved with this combined effort. In the long run that involvement can only bring about positive changes while mitigating the financial strain over a reasonable period of time. Many of us wingless open wheel enthusiast's :27: that hail from to the west of Indiana hold Casey's WAR Sprint Car Series as somewhat our own given that several races close to home are on the schedule from year to year.

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

My only wish is that Casey would have put a year in the future that WAR would be required to follow the rules. I understand not making everyone do it this winter, but having it a year or two in the future would require everyone to prepare for it.

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

I want to thank Casey for giving us time, as a War Regular we work regular jobs and odd jobs too just to make it to the track. We don't have 100k or 200k budgets. We just love to race and have non wing racing close to home. If Casey enforced the rule this year, his car count would be down by 10 to 12 cars. Anybody that know me know my cars will be legal, but we will have to have to cut cost on tires or shocks. Casey and Brooke take care of their racers and I would not want to race with any other series. Thank You

As of right now there is a strong possibility we will require the changes for the 2020 season, but we have to also understand that in the next 5-6 months, there could be developments or tweaks to the rules that the council has just posted. We are going to keep an eye on it, and continue to be involved with the councils meetings. The council has a solid group of people involved, and they have one common goal to make this sport safer in all areas, including track safety. We really do encourage our teams to strongly consider the changes for the upcoming season.

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

Originally Posted by cshuman:
As of right now there is a strong possibility we will require the changes for the 2020 season, but we have to also understand that in the next 5-6 months, there could be developments or tweaks to the rules that the council has just posted. We are going to keep an eye on it, and continue to be involved with the councils meetings. The council has a solid group of people involved, and they have one common goal to make this sport safer in all areas, including track safety. We really do encourage our teams to strongly consider the changes for the upcoming season.

Thank you for all you do

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

I see Caseys decision as being spot on for a blue collar series.....Or any series that only survives when owners can field cars and healthy talented drivers are available 2 gas em up....

Almost makes me think maybe Casey has experience with owning cars, driving cars, driving for a low budget owners, driving for big buck mega teams, at a tight bullring with no ambulance for $600 to win last night and tomorrow night at a dirt superspeedway for 6 figures to win with the same car. Surely nobody under the age of 70 could have that much experience though..

I will never understand how a 3rd year promoter still in his 30s has been able to take a series that grew so fast with Andy, Hoss and posse in charge and maintain the steep and steady trajectory WAR had since day one. More nicer tracks, more cars, more drivers willing to haul 6 hours and pass 25 other racetracks to get to a WAR show... oh wait...they aren't coming because of Casey, they come because their ego loves the thought of winning a race that people can watch on TV. Betcha Casey found that website... FLYONTHEWALLdotcom, that lets him overhear 20 years worth of discussions/negotiations between track owners, series bosses, contingency sponsors, manufacturers, and advertisers and understand what each needs out of a deal. Or maybe hes blackmailing Forest Lucas to get all those televised races on Mav and dates at nice facilities... gotta be one or the other but it's working so keep it up.

Ya know... seems like there was a similar story a couple decades ago... some dirt racer guy out west started trying to book a few races at a few tracks to go along with a strong weekly show at one track.. if I remember right, within a few years this local extracurricular series grew into the sanctioning body for all the highest paying nonwing shows from coast to coast, had 20 or so teams willing to cross the country once or twice a year to support the series, and plenty often the big check stayed within the series instead of being cherrypicked by some of the big name USAC teams they went head to head with when they went on the road. That dude learned how to accommodate the needs of all the business partners, please the paying customer, and maintain a good core group of owners/drivers who woulda drove the rig off a cliff if the guy told em he could book a show down at the bottom.

In my old age I'm havin a hard time remembering that guys name... I wanna say Don Shoemaker but thats wrong...he was a famous horse racer...or Miami Dolphins coach??? If any IOWers can remember any race history before messageboards maybe youll know who I'm talkin about... maybe Casey could call him or meet him someday and ask for some pointers.

Or maybe the only credit Casey deserves is props for marrying up... maybe WAR keeps kickin butt cause Casey married a girl whos entire extended family spent 4 nights in the shop and 3 in the pits every week of her life..never with unlimited budgets...maybe a family with more heart and talent than one gene pool should ever get...maybe her family dipped a toe in promoting to honor someone they lost, and due to another loss they worked harder to honor both and created the biggest, most diverse, most coveted 3 day openwheel show ever imagined in their part of the country..

It's likely that nobody will ever understand why one promoter can be successful, supported and appreciated year after year while another promoter a few miles away is surrounded by chaos, drama and discontent until they suddenly close down for good mid season. But one thing we can all do is recognize when somebody lucks into having a good growing track or series. Recognize em, jump on the I KNEW ITD WORK bandwagon, and make sure we smack talk every troll who ever asks a legitimate question or offers an idea on twitter.

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

As for this particular choice regarding these particular rules... I see at least 2 that don't apply here... if you show up at a WAR show with unsafe wing mounts IK for sure they make you remove all the wings as a penalty

Seems like many of the WAR cars have 4 point nerfbars.... the bulk of the rest are on full length 3 point nerfs... so far not many guys think tiny featherweight qualifying bumpers cotterpinned in the spuds are a speed secret for a nonwing group with a slightly chubby weight rule.

On the others lets remember how we got here.... 10 or so years ago somebody decided that all aluminum can only break, not bend, and all steel can only bend and will never break. since we already knew its dangerous to race with no steering we mandated only steel tie rods and draglinks were good enuf to tie aluminum pittman arms to aluminum steering arms on aluminum spindles... Now most of this contact will just BEND the steering, not break it, and still give the driver some control throughout the rest of the crash..

Usually cars quit steering cause the front axle was knocked out from under the arms... a huge percentage of front axles were knocked out because they clipped a giant yuke tire that, despite its mass, never finished a race night in the place it was set earlier.

Darland and Stanbrough are legends, but even on their best day I can't picture em being able to "Save it" 3 flips into a 12 rotation snap roll because a steel draglink bent without breaking. And you could build tierods outta krypton and kevlar all day long but a yuke tire will still knock the beam out from under the spring and park you. Did we put our heads together, develop a berm profile that allowed an escape path but still discouraged the infield groove, and demand the removal of yuke tire infield markers. No, we let em mandate steel tierods, draglinks and steering hiems.... I don't remember a reduction of wrecked cars continuing on until the broken draglink put em in the wall... but I do seem to remember more stories that included the phrases Hand Injury, Wrist Injury, arm fracture. No need to rush into mandating more steel rods and hiems.

I hate to take part in any discussion focusing on tethers. Unlimited hydroplane raceboats and fighter jets both have amazing crash survival numbers. I tend to think thats because as soon as something goes wonky either the drivers compartment or the pilot are ejected away from the object thats gonna carry all the inertia through each impact...they also get ejected away from fuel storage, spinning prop blades, etc.

If getting the driver away from the equipment helps those guys laugh off a crash why are we trying so hard to keep all these broken parts tied to the same part of the car that the driver is tied to? I remember... a once in a lifetime accident at Knoxville sent most of a front axle assembly over the fence, across the highway and through a hyundai windshield in the grocerystore parkinglot. Everybody said WHAT IF ITD HIT IN THE GRANDSTANDS INSTEAD OF THE HYUNDAI???? We gotta do something about these cars before this once in a lifetime event happens again.... Many of us replied with WHAT IF YER FENCE WAS 16 INCHES TALLER AND KNOCKED IT DOWN... didn't matter..too late.. no way the track can afford to make the fence 2ft taller, especially not in a week.. lets just mandate something in the name of safety.. they were barely on the market a couple weeks prior and now suddenly we need a pair on every wing car front axle in the country this coming weekend. Sure our drivers are now a human pinata with 10 ballbats worth of tethered broken twisted steel rods and tubes swingin at em while in a crash... but thats OK cause all our mandates always lay responsibility back on the teams instead of our facilities. Now the tethers we all had to buy not long ago aren't even OK unless you convert them to wraparound mount... So I hate tethers, the tether people say they suck until you quit bolting them on, we are drastically increasing the chances of another Kevin Gobrecht type injury by keeping steel spears tied to the motorplate, but we act like tethers are great because since the mandate weve not had one more stinking front axle kill a hyundai windshield in a grocerystore parkinglot..... probably really smart of Casey to not rush to mandate that revised mandate

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

Honestly, I hate that it cost so much more just to put the car on the track due to mandates.

That being said, Safety should be long before the brand new chassis and the Rider engine.

JUST DO IT! You can run on a injected lawn mower engine till you got that covered.

So are we going to see USAC give teams an adequate amount of time (in terms of a deadline like WAR) to make the necessary safety changes? More often than not the back half/quarter of the field are local racers on a lot of nights.

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

Originally Posted by Slider20:
So are we going to see USAC give teams an adequate amount of time (in terms of a deadline like WAR) to make the necessary safety changes? More often than not the back half/quarter of the field are local racers on a lot of nights.

Adequate time? Does everyone realize all of these changes cost less than to powder coat the chassis over the winter? Depending on self sufficiency, it's about the same price as one new right rear tire. Nobody should be racing a Sprint Car with USAC if they can't afford a one time safety expense of several hundred dollars. We run Hooker ratchet seat belts to keep the driver more secure that cost $500 and are changed every two years. Should we be allowed to run them for another year or indefinitely because racing is too expensive?

I propose those who can't afford the modifications to sit out one race this year and therefore save enough money to make all the changes. I read opinions on how bad ass, and real men that Sprint Car racers are, then everybody acts like they're destitute, living in a van down by the river when it comes to spending the money to race. Sprint Car racing is for the successful racers from lower levels to move up and put on the best show on dirt, not for those that have to borrow money for gas in the tow rig to get to the races to put a worn out car on the track that causes yellows when it breaks. If you can't afford two pieces of Chromoly tubing welded to your roll cage, you shouldn't be on the track, because you also haven't rebuilt your steering gear, replaced worn rod ends, thrown out old and crashed front spindles, wheel centers, etc... Is USAC Sprint Car racing for the best in the business, or the playgound of the underprivileged?

There is more to our decision then JUST cost.

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

Originally Posted by cshuman:
There is more to our decision then JUST cost.

10-4. Easy to make statements, but we all need to walk in others' shoes to understand. I include myself in that statement. The WAR series has a great following. If someone from your series starts a fund account for fans and sponsors to contribute, to help all registered car owners from last year with modification expenses, I'm in with the first $20.

Appreciate that, might be a pretty cool idea.

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

I'm waiting to add stuff to my chassis. I want to know if these changes are "The" answer, not just "a" answer. Each time something is changed, everything is changed.

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

Originally Posted by Can26:
I'm waiting to add stuff to my chassis. I want to know if these changes are "The" answer, not just "a" answer. Each time something is changed, everything is changed.

no one has "The" answer, but everyone thinks they do.

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

Originally Posted by Can26:
I'm waiting to add stuff to my chassis. I want to know if these changes are "The" answer, not just "a" answer. Each time something is changed, everything is changed.

Take this with a grain of salt, but Donny Schatz was on Winged Nation and said that late in the year they put the 2019 stuff on the car so they could get ahead on it. Donny's word's were that after running it the first time to his crew chief, "Why haven't we been doing this the whole time?"
Said it actually balanced the car.

Now like I said, because that's Donny and because it was a wing car, grain of salt.

I don't like this sprint car council as it is totally dominated by wing people. They seem to suddenly have an aweful lot of power and could use that in ways that could negatively impact non-wing racing. Maybe I'm wrong but just a thought.

There was 3 non wing groups present at the meeting.

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

I applaud Casey for this decision. I have 2 pretty much brand new sprint cars in the garage, without the new mods. I will probably make the changes before the season, but it will cost me, I'm guessing, 200-300 for the changes plus $500 in powder coat. So for 2 cars I am looking at about 1500 to update. I will survive, it will probably cost me 1 race night, as my budget is finite. But for the guy trying to get into the sport, it my cost him half his season. When I was new, every little new rule change made me miss races. I buy a car, get it together and I am all set to go race. Wing rule change. I now need to buy a new wing $500. A month later I finally have a new wing, oh wait bad weather. Have to work weekends for 2 months. Finally get to race. Wrong gears. Spend more money. work Weekends for 3 more weeks. Iffy weather, tow 300 miles, race cancelled, damn $250 diesel bill for nothing. It's easy to spend other peoples money, but don't ***** about car counts when you do. tire rule changes have probably cost me 10k over the cost of my career. Who has 10 k to throw away? Not me. Thank you Casey, for thinking of the guys like me.

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

Infield Tires are the most unsafe Hazard at most of the Tracks we run. Our car was destroyed from a lapped car hitting a tire last week. Not the first time that's happened. Tracks too Lazy to build a berm........just throw a tire down there anywhere.

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

Originally Posted by jahmo55:
Infield Tires are the most unsafe Hazard at most of the Tracks we run. Our car was destroyed from a lapped car hitting a tire last week. Not the first time that's happened. Tracks too Lazy to build a berm........just throw a tire down there anywhere.

Completely agree! There are several ways to get rid of them but they still seam to be everywhere.

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

Originally Posted by Baylands:
Adequate time? Does everyone realize all of these changes cost less than to powder coat the chassis over the winter? Depending on self sufficiency, it's about the same price as one new right rear tire. Nobody should be racing a Sprint Car with USAC if they can't afford a one time safety expense of several hundred dollars. We run Hooker ratchet seat belts to keep the driver more secure that cost $500 and are changed every two years. Should we be allowed to run them for another year or indefinitely because racing is too expensive?

I propose those who can't afford the modifications to sit out one race this year and therefore save enough money to make all the changes. I read opinions on how bad ass, and real men that Sprint Car racers are, then everybody acts like they're destitute, living in a van down by the river when it comes to spending the money to race. Sprint Car racing is for the successful racers from lower levels to move up and put on the best show on dirt, not for those that have to borrow money for gas in the tow rig to get to the races to put a worn out car on the track that causes yellows when it breaks. If you can't afford two pieces of Chromoly tubing welded to your roll cage, you shouldn't be on the track, because you also haven't rebuilt your steering gear, replaced worn rod ends, thrown out old and crashed front spindles, wheel centers, etc... Is USAC Sprint Car racing for the best in the business, or the playgound of the underprivileged?

"Teams in the many various USAC Sprint Car series across the nation will be provided a timely manner to update their current chassis for the 2020 USAC season as evaluation and the study of traditional sprint car needs continues."

Timely manner = Adequate time

I would have to respectfully disagree. Blunt pit entrance/exits, antiquated catch fences or lack of, random poles or fence post sticking up, concrete barriers with uncovered and exposed corners are just a few things that need to be addressed before infield tires. A simple fix for infield tires is just don’t hit them, it works the same for walls on the outside of the track, if you hit them hard enough, you are going to tear stuff up.

Originally Posted by jahmo55:
Infield Tires are the most unsafe Hazard at most of the Tracks we run. Our car was destroyed from a lapped car hitting a tire last week. Not the first time that's happened. Tracks too Lazy to build a berm........just throw a tire down there anywhere.

Originally Posted by jahmo55:
Infield Tires are the most unsafe Hazard at most of the Tracks we run. Our car was destroyed from a lapped car hitting a tire last week. Not the first time that's happened. Tracks too Lazy to build a berm........just throw a tire down there anywhere.

I could debate your claim of lazy. Did the lapped car move the tire out on the track when it was hit

I respect the hell out of you, but that's like saying dont hit the same blunt concrete edges and poles everywhere. I'll agree, they arent as "dangerous", but they eat up budget racer money more than anything via front ends and shocks. Sure, you can say "don't hit them", but weekend warriors dont always turn perfect laps on the bottom and it usually hits the second or third guy to the mess worse than the guy who accidentally hit one...

Lol That’s fine, we can agree to disagree but I will stand by my statement. When it comes to track safety I believe there are many areas that need to be looked at before we worry about tires marking the infield. All the things I listed come into play when a car has lost control, crashing, and is out of the drivers hands. Those are the areas I want fixed as a driver.

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

I will have to agree with Casey. Infield tractor tires are used to keep you out of the infield. If you want to play chicken with them and you crash, kinda sounds like you messed up and got what was coming to you. You don't get mad at the outside wall if you hit it....

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

Originally Posted by Heromaker:
I will have to agree with Casey. Infield tractor tires are used to keep you out of the infield. If you want to play chicken with them and you crash, kinda sounds like you messed up and got what was coming to you. You don't get mad at the outside wall if you hit it....

I have never hit an infield tire while playing chicken with it. I have hit them when the car in front of me spun and left me no where to go, and when a car came flying across the track, tagged my RF and spun me into one. In both situations, if there was a berm and no infield tire, I would have spun and gone to the back. Instead, the car got torn up. I would rather have a guard rail to bounce off than a uke tire to bring me to a rapid stop. I have also seen the guy playing chicken with the infield tire hit the tire, bounce up a groove, and flip the guy trying to get by on the outside. Now there NEEDS to be an outside wall, there does not NEED to be a tire in the infield.

Sorry I contributed to derailing the topic. I am more interested in seeing water barrels in front of track entrances than removing the tires. They just seem unnecessary.

I think there are people on here talking about 2 very different things. I have no intention to get on here and argue, that is just not productive at all. What I am taking about, and what the council has plans to address as far as track safety is track exits and entrances, catch fences, walls, etc. All areas that can help prevent injuries to drivers in crashes or unexpected situations. I understand your tire argument, even if I don’t necessarily see it the same way. I just don’t think it falls into the “track safety” category that is the focus of the council, but that being said I will bring it up as a concern at the next meeting.

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

we all know that safety of the drivers is the biggest concern when the cars hit the track. since the beginning of sprint car racing things have changed for the better out of that concern: seat belts, crash helmets, fire resistant suits, roll cages, arm restraints, full containment seats, and so on. and many things have got worse: bigger tires, bigger motors, more horsepower, and so on. now people in the "know" have decided to do this and do that to make cars safer. i am like everyone else on this board, nobody has any idea what is going to work. but we all know that slowing down the cars would definitely make the biggest difference. so why haven't we heard from the people in the "know" about slowing them down. instead there experimenting, why experiment when you could just cut 100 cubic inches. slower is safer especially when your talking about the weekend warrior. and if people say that would be to expensive to do, then are those people truly concerned about safety?

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

You can download this week's Dirt Nerds podcast and here our interview with Casey covering these exact topics!!! Its a GREAT interview

Originally Posted by Duane Hancock:
You can download this week's Dirt Nerds podcast and here our interview with Casey covering these exact topics!!! Its a GREAT interview

Awesome podcast each week. Thanks again to you and Elliot. Casey was very open and has his driver's best interest number 1. Well done.

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

Originally Posted by cshuman:
I would have to respectfully disagree. Blunt pit entrance/exits, antiquated catch fences or lack of, random poles or fence post sticking up, concrete barriers with uncovered and exposed corners are just a few things that need to be addressed before infield tires. A simple fix for infield tires is just don’t hit them, it works the same for walls on the outside of the track, if you hit them hard enough, you are going to tear stuff up.

Interesting post. So there is at least one track on the WAR schedule that has most of these issues. When do you think that WAR will stop scheduling races at tracks with issues?

The council has a plan in place to observe, report, and notify tracks of potential problem that should be addressed and have intentions to continue going to tracks that make efforts to fix at least something each time we were to go back. If they refuse then yes, we may decide to not go back.

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

There are several safety hazards at tracks every where. Some we do not see until something happens and we go hmm? One of the most up to date facility in Indiana has one glaring safety flaw (Imo). The fence sets even with the back edge of the wall because the fence supports were installed backward. I once had a discussion with the promoter and was told that was the way they were designed, but me thinks they are backward. The fence supports are designed in a chair shape, instead of having them turn out, they should be turned in, thus, the fence and the wall would be flesh. As it is constructed now, when a car gets in the fence and slides down it can/has ripped cages off/apart! But, I,m wrong, and maybe I am, my point, there are several opinions in the best way to do things, there maybe someone smarter than us that is not sure about the design of the new safety concerns, just as I am not sure about the design of a catch fence?

Re: Rule changes encouraged; not mandatory for WAR Sprints 2
 

Originally Posted by ossuks:
One of the most up to date facility in Indiana has one glaring safety flaw (Imo). The fence sets even with the back edge of the wall because the fence supports were installed backward. I once had a discussion with the promoter and was told that was the way they were designed, but me thinks they are backward. The fence supports are designed in a chair shape, instead of having them turn out, they should be turned in, thus, the fence and the wall would be flesh. As it is constructed now, when a car gets in the fence and slides down it can/has ripped cages off/apart!

I noticed a different track that added fencing do the same thing. At first it looked like the brackets were going to be turned in but when I saw the finished product they were out. You would think it to be a good idea to have the fence flush with the inside of the concrete. But it could be the fences purpose is to keep things from flying out and brackets out makes the strongest fence. maybe something else can cover the concrete, dirt, foam?