Honestly Mark, I feel you would have more fun at a BMW club event if you take your miata. I took my stock car to a couple of WMC events and it is like taking a gun to a pillow fight. I had people whine to me about closing rates (yes jeffw you where one of them). Granted I had lots of track time, but in the end, I had tons more fun when I ran with them with my Trans Am.breakaway500 wrote:"Atoms and Miatas are also lucky to have Boston BMW to run with".
Boston BMW have not confirmed Atoms for their events.I am waiting for the good word...
BMW White Mountain says no Atom,no solo.
Re: BMW White Mountain says no Atom,no solo.
- breakaway500
- Speed Racer
- Posts: 2663
- Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 8:47 am
- Location: In my shop,usually.
Re: BMW White Mountain says no Atom,no solo.
Thanks for the heads up,Jonathan.I will be trying to get as much seat time in the Atom as possible this year,which will depend on the weather as well.
It's not what you drive, it's how you drive. "Lap times matter"
Re: BMW White Mountain says no Atom,no solo.
I resemble that remark. But it would have been good if you'd also mentioned the corner pointbys I gave you toojlwhorf wrote:I had people whine to me about closing rates (yes jeffw you where one of them). Granted I had lots of track time, but in the end, I had tons more fun when I ran with them with my Trans Am.breakaway500 wrote:"Atoms and Miatas are also lucky to have Boston BMW to run with".
Boston BMW have not confirmed Atoms for their events.I am waiting for the good word...
Jeff Wasilko
On the Track: 1995 Miata #08
To the Track: 2007 Volvo 780
On the Street: 2017 Volvo V60 Polestar
On the Track: 1995 Miata #08
To the Track: 2007 Volvo 780
On the Street: 2017 Volvo V60 Polestar
Re: BMW White Mountain says no Atom,no solo.
Don't worry Jeff its cool. I know I caught you by surprise, but I did lift for you too. In a COM event, I would not have lifted at that point on the front straight. I thought I was easy on you guys that event, but at the end of day Dick Cadieux came sniveling to me telling me that people where complaining that I was running them too hard. That's why I was warning Markjeffw wrote:I resemble that remark. But it would have been good if you'd also mentioned the corner pointbys I gave you toojlwhorf wrote:I had people whine to me about closing rates (yes jeffw you where one of them). Granted I had lots of track time, but in the end, I had tons more fun when I ran with them with my Trans Am.breakaway500 wrote:"Atoms and Miatas are also lucky to have Boston BMW to run with".
Boston BMW have not confirmed Atoms for their events.I am waiting for the good word...
- breakaway500
- Speed Racer
- Posts: 2663
- Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 8:47 am
- Location: In my shop,usually.
Re: BMW White Mountain says no Atom,no solo.
In all honesty,the last event with the Atom at NHMS,I was out with the SS cars and it was fine.They did not have to lift and I could pass off line no problem! As long as they saw me coming for the point by,I didn't even have to lift.It was like an LMP1 car out with the GT cars....
It's not what you drive, it's how you drive. "Lap times matter"
Re: BMW White Mountain says no Atom,no solo.
What ever happened to the concept that if you're getting caught, you're slower and owe the pass? Every rule book and training I've been exposed to says the same thing - if you're being overtaken, you may have a faster car, but you're not the faster driver...lift.
Jeff Baker
Wilton, NH
#42 95 Miata
72 TR6
79 TR7 V6 in shed
Wilton, NH
#42 95 Miata
72 TR6
79 TR7 V6 in shed
- breakaway500
- Speed Racer
- Posts: 2663
- Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 8:47 am
- Location: In my shop,usually.
Re: BMW White Mountain says no Atom,no solo.
Non sequitur.
It's not what you drive, it's how you drive. "Lap times matter"
-
- Speed Setter
- Posts: 161
- Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2009 9:35 pm
Re: BMW White Mountain says no Atom,no solo.
why do people in this thread insist on continually comparing the White Mountain Chapter to the Boston Chapter?jlwhorf wrote:Honestly Mark, I feel you would have more fun at a BMW club event if you take your miata. I took my stock car to a couple of WMC events and it is like taking a gun to a pillow fight. I had people whine to me about closing rates (yes jeffw you where one of them). Granted I had lots of track time, but in the end, I had tons more fun when I ran with them with my Trans Am.breakaway500 wrote:"Atoms and Miatas are also lucky to have Boston BMW to run with".
Boston BMW have not confirmed Atoms for their events.I am waiting for the good word...
- breakaway500
- Speed Racer
- Posts: 2663
- Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 8:47 am
- Location: In my shop,usually.
Re: BMW White Mountain says no Atom,no solo.
Yes,they are different clubs.And yes,they do have different track policies for vehicles.But,I did start the thread discussing WMC,so that is probably the reason both clubs are getting tangled up.(and no,it's not fair). I am still waiting for clairification about the Atom with Boston BMW.They wanted pictures of my car..
It's not what you drive, it's how you drive. "Lap times matter"
Re: BMW White Mountain says no Atom,no solo.
Maybe be cause their policies are so different people can't figure out whether they can run in which chapter with their COM legal cars? Boston seems to be the oddball out (that is not meant in a harmful sense) because White Mountain and Patroon chapters require full roll cages in all convertibles, while Boston does not (which is a thumbs up for Boston).CalypsoBean wrote:why do people in this thread insist on continually comparing the White Mountain Chapter to the Boston Chapter?jlwhorf wrote:Honestly Mark, I feel you would have more fun at a BMW club event if you take your miata. I took my stock car to a couple of WMC events and it is like taking a gun to a pillow fight. I had people whine to me about closing rates (yes jeffw you where one of them). Granted I had lots of track time, but in the end, I had tons more fun when I ran with them with my Trans Am.breakaway500 wrote:"Atoms and Miatas are also lucky to have Boston BMW to run with".
Boston BMW have not confirmed Atoms for their events.I am waiting for the good word...
Sam
Chief of Operations
#41 Nissan 200SX SER T40
Chief of Operations
#41 Nissan 200SX SER T40
Re: BMW White Mountain update from the track
Gang,
This morning, the Chief Steward of BMW WMC quite nicely and thoroughly explained the open-car rule as it stands for this season, and how it came about.
To whit:
In a national Stewards meeting on October, chapters were told by the insurance carrier of BMW that convertibles were to be managed under 1993 crash specifications. Any Steward signing off on a convertible that did not meet same could be help PERSONALLY liable for approving the car - and this liability included any OTHER safety deviations: out of date harnesses and helmets, etc.
The 1993 limitations are such that a Miata with a bolted-in-place hard top AND SFI rollbar as approved for COM is NOT approved for any BMW chapter.
My Miata was REJECTED for ANY and ALL classes, for not having a COMPLETE CAGE.
Any other published, word-of-mouth, or otherwise learned information is being rejected by the Chief Steward and Tech at the site.
In passing, the Steward mentioned that other open cars without complete cages would be rejected as well, without specifying car model.
This morning, the Chief Steward of BMW WMC quite nicely and thoroughly explained the open-car rule as it stands for this season, and how it came about.
To whit:
In a national Stewards meeting on October, chapters were told by the insurance carrier of BMW that convertibles were to be managed under 1993 crash specifications. Any Steward signing off on a convertible that did not meet same could be help PERSONALLY liable for approving the car - and this liability included any OTHER safety deviations: out of date harnesses and helmets, etc.
The 1993 limitations are such that a Miata with a bolted-in-place hard top AND SFI rollbar as approved for COM is NOT approved for any BMW chapter.
My Miata was REJECTED for ANY and ALL classes, for not having a COMPLETE CAGE.
Any other published, word-of-mouth, or otherwise learned information is being rejected by the Chief Steward and Tech at the site.
In passing, the Steward mentioned that other open cars without complete cages would be rejected as well, without specifying car model.
Jeff Baker
Wilton, NH
#42 95 Miata
72 TR6
79 TR7 V6 in shed
Wilton, NH
#42 95 Miata
72 TR6
79 TR7 V6 in shed
Re: BMW White Mountain says no Atom,no solo.
Jeff,
That is precisely what he told me when I discussed the matter with him on April 3, except he told me 1995 safety standards. He added that he felt all the other BMW Chapters would follow suit, and, indeed Patroon BMW from the Albany, NY area, also prohibits convertibles without full cages. Now, can someone tell us what the safety standards say??
That is precisely what he told me when I discussed the matter with him on April 3, except he told me 1995 safety standards. He added that he felt all the other BMW Chapters would follow suit, and, indeed Patroon BMW from the Albany, NY area, also prohibits convertibles without full cages. Now, can someone tell us what the safety standards say??
Sam
Chief of Operations
#41 Nissan 200SX SER T40
Chief of Operations
#41 Nissan 200SX SER T40
- breakaway500
- Speed Racer
- Posts: 2663
- Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 8:47 am
- Location: In my shop,usually.
Re: BMW White Mountain says no Atom,no solo.
It is almost like they are expecting us to put the thing on the roof.
I HATE insurance companies. Yes,I know..a necessary evil. All I can say is don't let then dictate safety policies. We will all be sitting around on our hands shortly...
Like Sam says..whose 1995 safety standards? NHTSA? DOT? BATF? ( )
Here is a link to the NHTSA 1995 rollover standards....http://www.iihs.org/laws/comments/pdf/n ... 111805.pdf
A paragraph toward the end...
"The importance of vehicle roofs in preventing occupant injuries in
rollover crashes is illustrated by the relative risks of serious and
fatal injuries for drivers in vehicles with and without roofs. The
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety identified 55 pairs of
convertible/hardtop vehicle models. Comparing the percentages of
deaths of belted drivers in rollovers, Institute researchers estimated
the fatality risk in rollovers for drivers of vehicles with roofs
relative to drivers of vehicles without roofs. A 95 percent
confidence interval was calculated for the estimate of relative risk."
And so on and so forth...
So,why did the NHTSA allow convertibles to be sold after 1995 if they adopted these standards? Because,I believe the NHTSA never did adopt those standards.
However,the Insurance company IS trying to enforce those old test standards..which basically would eliminate convertibles from "coverage".
Insurance companies should be basing coverage on actual RISK to event participants on track in convertible/topless cars..like the SCCA..not some highway test standard that they proposed...25 years ago...
Damn good thing all insurance carriers don't use this standard.
I HATE insurance companies. Yes,I know..a necessary evil. All I can say is don't let then dictate safety policies. We will all be sitting around on our hands shortly...
Like Sam says..whose 1995 safety standards? NHTSA? DOT? BATF? ( )
Here is a link to the NHTSA 1995 rollover standards....http://www.iihs.org/laws/comments/pdf/n ... 111805.pdf
A paragraph toward the end...
"The importance of vehicle roofs in preventing occupant injuries in
rollover crashes is illustrated by the relative risks of serious and
fatal injuries for drivers in vehicles with and without roofs. The
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety identified 55 pairs of
convertible/hardtop vehicle models. Comparing the percentages of
deaths of belted drivers in rollovers, Institute researchers estimated
the fatality risk in rollovers for drivers of vehicles with roofs
relative to drivers of vehicles without roofs. A 95 percent
confidence interval was calculated for the estimate of relative risk."
And so on and so forth...
So,why did the NHTSA allow convertibles to be sold after 1995 if they adopted these standards? Because,I believe the NHTSA never did adopt those standards.
However,the Insurance company IS trying to enforce those old test standards..which basically would eliminate convertibles from "coverage".
Insurance companies should be basing coverage on actual RISK to event participants on track in convertible/topless cars..like the SCCA..not some highway test standard that they proposed...25 years ago...
Damn good thing all insurance carriers don't use this standard.
It's not what you drive, it's how you drive. "Lap times matter"
Re: BMW White Mountain says no Atom,no solo.
FYI I was at a WMC BMW event today and asked the question again. Straight answer was 'Convertibles or cars with no roof must have full cage and roof.' then I said " Boston BMW seem to be more flexible" Answer was a definitive "All BMW chapters play by the same safety rules, Full cage and roof"
Re: BMW White Mountain says no Atom,no solo.
SIGH...............timmmy wrote:FYI I was at a WMC BMW event today and asked the question again. Straight answer was 'Convertibles or cars with no roof must have full cage and roof.' then I said " Boston BMW seem to be more flexible" Answer was a definitive "All BMW chapters play by the same safety rules, Full cage and roof"
Sam
Chief of Operations
#41 Nissan 200SX SER T40
Chief of Operations
#41 Nissan 200SX SER T40
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 0 guests