Home » Blogs » Troy Harrison's Blog

Controversy everywhere - and the season hasn't even started!

Posted by Troy Harrison at 10:27:00 AM

Well, if you're looking for controversy, the A-Modified class in this area is a good place to find it.  For those who need to be caught up to speed (perhaps you've been vacationing in sunny  Yemen for the last few weeks), Inthepits.net broke a story about how some Modified builders were raising the right front frame rail (the stock clip section, approximately 3 to 3-1/2") on their cars.  Apparently, this all stemmed from a loose lipped racer at a racing banquet who didn't realize that he was speaking with an inspector present.  A little checking by the inspector followed, and sure enough, a lot of the fast cars at his track were running this setup.

Now, just to clarify something - this setup is illegal.  It's illegal as hell.  The frame rules for nearly every Modified track are cribbed from IMCA or UMP's rules in some form, and each set of rules says exactly where and how the OEM frame rails can be cut.  You can't raise the right side rail without cutting the frame where it kicks up for the front stub.  Enough said.  It's illegal.  The question is whether the tracks will, or should, enforce the rule.

The reason that builders have started doing this modification is that the higher right rail allows the car to roll farther and quicker onto the right front, which indexes the left rear birdcage, which allows greater traction coming off the corner.  Since the modern 4-link car hooks up based on physical leverage, a greater angle of indexing is a significant advantage, and might explain why certain builders' cars have become THE cars to have over the past couple of years.  It's been done on dirt late models for quite a while - but dirt late models are already fully fabricated cars.

The offended (illegal) racers who now are staring disqualification in the eye are running the normal playbook.  For those who don't know, there is a defined sequence of claims and comments that happen whenever racers want to make something legal that was previously illegal.  Whether it's beadlocks, quick changes, roller cams, dry sumps, or yes, raised right side frame rails, the playbook is the same.  For the sake of clarity, let's just call the item the New Trick Part, or NTP for short.

Play 1:  Call the NTP a safety or reliability improvement.  Yep, they're doing this.  See, unbeknownst to us, race fans are in tremendous peril from flying dirt clods that happen when the right front rails of non-raised cars dig into the track.  Nevermind, of course, that the section that isn't raised is actually rounded in such a way that flinging said clods over the fence with sufficient force to injure a fan is difficult to say the least.  By God, according to these guys, not only should the modification be legal - the 20,000 or so Modifieds that aren't raised should be done so immediately.  Do it for the fans.  Hell, do it for the children.  It's only right.

Play 2:  Since it only takes a second or two for anyone with a brain to spot Play 1 as BS, you've got to go to the second play.  The second play is to claim that it's really not a performance advantage; it's just personal preference as to how some guys want to build their cars.  Of course, it's also coincidence that the cars that have this modification are faster and behave differently on the racetrack.  Here's the bottom line - chassis builders are in business to make money.  One of the builders that does this can't even come up with a cage that won't collapse on a guy.  Do you really think that he (and the others) would go to all the work to cut 3 inches out of the frame, splice it back together, weld it, then grind and dress the weld so it looks like it wasn't cut at all (because of course THEY know it's illegal) - if there were no advantage?  Fact is that this is a significant advantage and allowing it nearly forces everyone else to spend the money to do so on their own cars.

Play 3:  Claim it's not an extra expense.  Usually, the racers do this by comparing the NTP to the ultimate version of the old legal parts, using all variations, with a 2 year supply.  In this case, even proponents can't claim this for long, since labor = money, and this modification = labor.

Play 4:  Get personal.  Insult legal racers by saying "Well, this NTP isn't the reason you're getting beat, anyway."  Sometimes, this works - racers tend to take things personally, and they'll vote to allow NTP out of basic honor.

Play 5:  Claim it's impossible to tech.  This was the primary argument behind traction control, for instance, and I've even seen one racer using it here.  Get real.  This one is so easy to tech that you could have Stevie Wonder as your tech man, and he'd spot the raised rails.

We've seen all five plays run in this instance with varying results.  Some tracks (Thunderhill, Heartland Park, IMCA tracks, a few others) say they are ready to send racers home who show up with illegal frames.  Others (Lakeside) are employing all the spine of a wounded jellyfish, and saying that "they'll decide when they have cars to tech."  In other words, they need to figure out who is illegal before they send anyone home.

Bottom line - more traction = more horsepower that can be hooked up.  That means it takes more motor to win.  In a class where $20,000 engines are becoming the norm, that's nuts.  Modifieds were designed to be an everyman's race car; an alternative to expensive late models.  Well, guess what?  20 years later, late model fans have been run off from Modified-only tracks, and the Modified guys want to make their cars into late models without the fan appeal.

In the interest of full disclosure, I will point out that I do have a dog in the fight.  I sponsor a Modified at Thunder Hill, and it's legal - no raised rail.  The guy who runs it is a low-dollar driver, exactly the kind of driver that the Modifieds were supposed to be for.

It's time for Modified promoters to grow a set and start protecting these guys from themselves; more importantly, to start protecting the integrity of the Modified class.  This whole process starts down the slippery slope toward fully fabricated cars - which will obsolete about 20,000 race cars that are currently running (not to mention increase the cost of the front end pieces).  What happens when the smoke clears is anyone's guess.  But I'll put my money on the associations and the promoters who decide to keep the Modified class close to its purpose.

Reader Comments

Comments are owned by the posters. Racinboys.com are not responsible for their contents.

Mar 21, 2009 05:20:56 PM by Rooster

You are dead on Troy. This has been unbelievable. And some of the Guys trying to use some of the excuses 1 through 5, have disappointed me. What has happened to the Mods, oh excuse me A-mods. (use to be they were all the same) rules were pushed, IMCA sent back to Iowa, claims dropped, drivers getting new rules, Drivers from other classes that screwed themselves into the same situation now run in the A-mods because they have to travel to run their cars and want to screw the A-mods.........crap it's a joke. I've said it before, the one thing we learn from History, is, we don't learn from History. You can't let the Fox guard the Hen House. Promoters need to grow a pair, back the rules as written, and send cheaters home. This is not a new rule change, it's been in the rules since Keith Knaack and the founding Fathers got off the Mayflower and wrote, Ye shall use an OEM Frame only.........is that so hard to understand......Sorry Troy I just wanted to help.....Great Blog!!!!!!!

Mar 21, 2009 06:03:04 PM by HeyGoat4

Troy, Excellent blog, as usual. I truly enjoy most of what you write, even though I do disagree with some of it. The funny thing is, all it took was a loud-mouth to run his gums in the presence of a tech official, and here we have automotive armageddon. I think that it is a huge step in the right direction. However, the issue that I see is with tech officials enforcing it across the board. They CANNOT play favorites on this one. If they do it will shoot even more holes in their credibility. I do know for a fact that there is one chassis builder that actually cuts material off the bottom of that right side frame rail, and said builder has many cars that run at a local racetrack. And those cars run up front weekly. I think some major overhauling of the rule book needs to be instituted and this needs to be stopped as well. As far as the chassis builder that "cuts the stub, and can't keep the cage from collapsing on the driver", as far as I know, and I have somewhat good knowledge of the practices of this chassis builder, that is not an option available from that chassis builder, rather something that needs to be done by the buyer, at his/her discretion. I applaud the tracks that have moved in the right direction, and hope they do enforce this, FOR EVERYONE, and not just turning a blind eye to the front running favorite.

Mar 21, 2009 07:32:14 PM by MRR

Troy, Nice blog but I am still on the fence with this issue or accually leaning towards it being legal. As far as it being a safety issue, your right its BULL. You comment in part#2 of chassis builders cutting, welding, dressing the rail so its not seen, because they know its illegal, I 'm not sure thats the case. I would tend to say the chassis builder who first started building chassis this way, was doing it for the advantage's you mention in your blog, performance. Not hidding it because it is illegal but hiding it from being detected by other chassis builders. Now if you was building chassis and found an advantage, would you let your competition know about it? I think they have taken the opportunity to play with yet another gray area of the rules. I have read most all the rules from I.M.C.A. to all the local tracks in the area. Those rules state, OEM perimeter American rear-wheel drive passenger car frame only. Frame must be full and complete, cannot be widened or narrowed. Frame may be cut a maximum 36 inches forward from center of rear end housing. If you cut a frame to raise it, its not widened or narrowed, its still cut 36 inches forward. I really dont see the problem. Now if the rules was to say no alteration of the OEM production frame front stub area including side rails unless specified, then I would say we have a problem. Innovation and engineering with chassis builders. Unless its written in black and white, chassis builders will still push the gray areas. Wait and see whats next. If I had to guess, the next issue that will be addressed will be tire softening, I have already done a lot of checking on this matter and found exactly, who, what, where and how its done. Its coming out in the open real soon. There is already one competition director that has compiled notes and possibly attended a gathering where tire softening is being done. Lets see what transpires from this.

Mar 23, 2009 10:37:45 AM by mburgoon

I do not have a dog in this fight, but will fight "rules creep" when I see it. In response to MRR on the IMCA rules, You say the rasied rail does not violate the rule. But the modification I have to do to the frame rail does violate the rule and you typed it yourself. FRAME MUST BE FULL AND COMPLETE. If I raise the rail, it is no longer full and COMPLETE. I have taken a section out of it.

Apr 05, 2009 11:34:03 PM by shagger1

I just would just like to know if you are related to Bill & Garry Harrison From Topeka Ks. My dad used to race with bill in the old IMCA. Thanks let me know. P.S. Great Blogs.

May 03, 2009 08:16:54 AM by Racewriter

Shagger1 - sorry I missed this comment earlier. Bill was my grandfather, Gerry is my dad. Feel free to PM. I'm "Racewriter98" on the forum.

 

To post a comment, please login first:
Username: Password:

Forgot your password? click here
New User Register for FREE Now