Disqualification, legal helmet colors

[Brian10s]

Well as for the renamed MOD Classes. At the Divisionals I was asked by a spectator why 500cc mod hydro was going so much slower then the 250cc pro hydro. I laughed and said we were told it would be easier to understand.

You mean B Alky, right? No wait - the Pro's dropped the A,B,C,D years ago and now only very few still remember the classes by their previous names. By the way, did the spectator also ask what the C in CSH meant?

When are we going to get our heads (and helmets) out of the 50's?

[DiGia54D]

Quote:
Originally Posted by DiGia54D
Well as for the renamed MOD Classes. At the Divisionals I was asked by a spectator why 500cc mod hydro was going so much slower then the 250cc pro hydro. I laughed and said we were told it would be easier to understand.

You mean B Alky, right? No wait - the Pro's dropped the A,B,C,D years ago and now only very few still remember the classes by their previous names. By the way, did the spectator also ask what the C in CSH meant?

When are we going to get our heads (and helmets) out of the 50's?



Well, actually I was standing next to Scott Clarks CSH and his CMH. While we were talking about the classes and the gentlman asked me this question. He said if the only differance between CSH and 500cc Mod is the pipe and downhousing, He said why isnt CSH called 500cc stock hydro? Well I didnt have an answer.
My head was never in the 50's since I was born in 69. I also am not complaining about anything.( class names, numbers, helmets ) Just adding to a post relaying to one Ed put up earlier.

[ian]

My only complaint is that Brian is stupid.....but maybe I'm just jealous.....

[Brian10s]

Quote:
Originally Posted by DiGia54D
Well, actually I was standing next to Scott Clarks CSH and his CMH. While we were talking about the classes and the gentlman asked me this question. He said if the only differance between CSH and 500cc Mod is the pipe and downhousing, He said why isnt CSH called 500cc stock hydro? Well I didnt have an answer.
My head was never in the 50's since I was born in 69. I also am not complaining about anything.( class names, numbers, helmets ) Just adding to a post relaying to one Ed put up earlier.

Wayne - the 50's comment was towards most of the opinion on change in anyway. Was not trying to pin it all on you.

By the way, the follow up question was a good one.

My only complaint is that Brian is stupid.....but maybe I'm just jealous.....

Ian - I'm rubber & your glue! Whatever you say, bounces off me and sticks to you!!

[pearson95m]

I can't believe I just wasted 20 minutes of my life reading all of this....

[Skoontz]

I like K.I.S.S. personally, and, I can't think of an easier way that to figure out a way to remove discretionary rules, period. If the book says X, and X is followed, that is what it should be. No one should be able to coulda shoulda woulda cause'n they think so be able to DQ if the measurements, colors by chart, and descriptions are followed as the book says.

Far as Theodorophus the scotch dripping oraphis and his speech....All I could think of is his pregnant girlfriend in that '71 Oldsmobile gargling for her last breath while he cracked open another bottle....

That thing could not wear his brothers shoes.

[Steve Warnock]

Mod Classes

Put it on the agenda to rename the classes as intended (AMH, AMR). I hate to say it but I can't figure whats what and niether can the scorers. When the ladies are happy, you figure it out.

The renamed Mod Classes do not work! Even for the spectators and promo materials!

Warbs

[STEVE FRENCH]

Put it on the agenda to rename the classes as intended (AMH, AMR). I hate to say it but I can't figure whats what and niether can the scorers. When the ladies are happy, you figure it out.

The renamed Mod Classes do not work! Even for the spectators and promo materials!

Warbs

Wow Steve......3:02 am?

I couldn't sleep either..........was out in warehouse try'n to rig a old kg-4 tank to my Merc A-MOD.....Gave up when one of the water jacket cover bolts felt like it was gonn'a bust.......... just finished loaded trailer for Lock Haven and off ta work bust'n rust on Uncle Sam's Postal trucks.........maybe I should'a been a farm Doctor like Dad instead.......Na, he got kicked by critters more than I got fingers/toes to count................

I sort'a understand the think'n for the CC thing for the general puplic to relate to, but it does seem to complicate things........

19P......"Does not Play well....with others".......

"
That is really the best post on this topic I've ever seen. I apologize for adding rules for the sake of safety. I'll get back to proposing rules so a 200 year old Merc Wizard can still run in BMod. That's definitely a better use of time and resources.
Nate

You seemed to enjoy driving mine in 25MOD/BMH............
(appoligies Nate.........could'n resist that one.........)

[Dave M]

Okay I am Serious Now

I feel our helmet rules as it is is decent. The only thing I feel is wrong is the fact they do not need to be Snell rated any longer. I always felt, not researched, that the Snell rating was far superior to a DOT rating. If this has changed, shame on my, I did not know. I buy the helmet that works, and fits best. Doesn't everyone ? The only time I can think of that I did not wear a helmet that fit was when I flipped in FEH in Omaha NB and my shield was ripped off and I had no extra parts to replace the ratchets. We patched the boat up and I ran the second heat with a borrowed helmet that was a little to small. It worked.

99, I simply feel like we are over teching today with regards to saftey. The internet is available for anyone to look at and research. Articles are read and ideas are born. Now we seem to be trying to cover every possible accident that could potentially happen. If you revise the helmet rules, you will be adding to it, so I think I am right in that respect. You claimed you wanted to revise it and add in some sort of sizing requirement. That would be adding...

Do whatever you like, I know I am legal no matter what happens as I tend to use that little concept called common sense. Some have it, some don't. I see your points very clearly and agree with you 100%. Can you name particular instances and the amount of instances you have witnessed where someone is using the wrong size ? I feel color is a non issue. Sometimes you are gonna get hit in the noggin when flipping, that is why we wear helmets that can withstand the impact. I believe we all try to avoid any and all orange, yellow, pink, red, and whatever color is on the water that is not the color of water.

I guess the thread took a turn, so I will leave it to your ideas and thoughts, put it on the ballot and let the drivers vote. Oh wait, it is a saftey item so we won't ge to vote. Have at it.

[14-H]

**** to rename the classes as intended (AMH, AMR). ***
Warbs

OMG! Warby and his "intent" again.

[forshey99]

Dave

Allow me to clarify my position on our current rule so as to eliminate any confusion.

Our current rule limits helmet colors to red, yellow, orange...blah,blah,blah.

The verbage of the current rule limits driver's choice of helmet manufacturer based on the fact that only select manufacturers offer solid colors within the requirements. This exclusion of manufacturers per color requirements automatically eliminates drivers choice to shell shape/fit options provided by some manufacturers.
Regarding color. Color is not a matter of style in this case. It's a matter of physics. Colors occur to the human eye as reflected bands of the visible light spectrum. These bands occur in wavelengths. Our eyes and brains process these different wavelengths differently, this is known science. From reaction time to peripheral detection and low-light detection, our eyes see certain colors better than others. Ironically, red has one of the lowest ratings regarding peripheral vision. Yellow and Yellow Green are the most easily identified peripherally. Orange falls nearer to red in terms of how the human eye processes its presence in our field of view.

Quite simply, our rule in an effort to use "common sense" has to some extent disregarded the facts about color and visibility.

Additionally, visibility and conspicuity cannot be addressed without also addressing pattern. Our rule again disregards known facts about pattern as it relates to identification. By eliminating patterns on helmets(graphics), our rule has unintentionally created a scenario where buoys and helmets are of the same color, shape, size and therefore more likely to be mistaken given the cir***stances we might be asked to distinguish between the two.

I would propose that our rule allow for a larger variety of color and pattern rather than the more restrictive "common sense" approach. I challenge you to push away from HR for a minute and do some reading regarding color theory and contrast. What you learn might surprise you.

Nate

[Dave M]

Dude........

Allow me to clarify my position on our current rule so as to eliminate any confusion.

Our current rule limits helmet colors to red, yellow, orange...blah,blah,blah.

The verbage of the current rule limits driver's choice of helmet manufacturer based on the fact that only select manufacturers offer solid colors within the requirements. This exclusion of manufacturers per color requirements automatically eliminates drivers choice to shell shape/fit options provided by some manufacturers.
Regarding color. Color is not a matter of style in this case. It's a matter of physics. Colors occur to the human eye as reflected bands of the visible light spectrum. These bands occur in wavelengths. Our eyes and brains process these different wavelengths differently, this is known science. From reaction time to peripheral detection and low-light detection, our eyes see certain colors better than others. Ironically, red has one of the lowest ratings regarding peripheral vision. Yellow and Yellow Green are the most easily identified peripherally. Orange falls nearer to red in terms of how the human eye processes its presence in our field of view.

Quite simply, our rule in an effort to use "common sense" has to some extent disregarded the facts about color and visibility.

Additionally, visibility and conspicuity cannot be addressed without also addressing pattern. Our rule again disregards known facts about pattern as it relates to identification. By eliminating patterns on helmets(graphics), our rule has unintentionally created a scenario where buoys and helmets are of the same color, shape, size and therefore more likely to be mistaken given the cir***stances we might be asked to distinguish between the two.

I would propose that our rule allow for a larger variety of color and pattern rather than the more restrictive "common sense" approach. I challenge you to push away from HR for a minute and do some reading regarding color theory and contrast. What you learn might surprise you.

Nate

I concede. You are starting to sound like Ed with his lawyer cap on. Maybe he can let me know what you said in layman’s terms. You are simply proving my point to the fact that most of us are not of the scientific terminology culture.

I will leave the research up to you and trust your opinion when you submit it as a rule change, addition, or whatever it is.

[ryan_4z]

You mean B Alky, right? No wait - the Pro's dropped the A,B,C,D years ago and now only very few still remember the classes by their previous names. By the way, did the spectator also ask what the C in CSH meant?

When are we going to get our heads (and helmets) out of the 50's?

Not being a PRO guy I'm not sure, but I think that 250ccH was A Alky. The reason that the cc class designations work in PRO is because the engines are built to those specs. The motor most used in 500ccMH is a approx. 400cc motor, how much sense does that make? FAH is now 200ccMH, but the OMC A is more than 200ccs. It's craziness. Just another example of why representative government has historically been shown to be more effective than true democracy.

[sam]

This is scary ... Ryan is right on all accounts

[ryan_4z]

Nate, I like the fact that you have done your homework here. We all have a lot to learn. I have to say though, that your arguement that the limited colors limits the manufacturers that we can buy from just doesn't hold up. Any helmet can be painted any color. If someone has problems painting a brand new helmet, I would argue that there are enough choices in helmet brand that offer an acceptable color that this arguement is still invalid. Particularly when you consider that some manufacturers, Shoei or Simpson for example, have a number of different models and sizes of helmets available that can be purchased in the appropriate colors. I am not educated enough to say whether or not the rule needs any revisitation. I will say though, that I do not think that the color requirments should be eliminated. Red may not be ideal(but unless it is florescent it's not legal anyway), but it is certainly better than blue, purple, black, etc. I personally would rather other drivers not run my head over because they can see it, even if my helmet is substandard, than get hit in my super high-tech, perfectly fit helmet, that can't be easily seen.