October 2025 Fastrack Preliminary Minutes/Tech Bulletin
09/18/25 - Preliminary Minutes
09/18//25 - Preliminary Tech Bulletin
09/18/25 - Preliminary Minutes
09/18//25 - Preliminary Tech Bulletin
October 2025 Fastrack
- Thread starter Greg Amy
- Start date
Well here's my chance to win the Runoffs. Come in 23rd and protest everyone on front of me based on a poorly worded wheel dimension rule.
Strikes me that as worded somewhere between "all" and "half of all" wheels that are nominally at the max size for the class would be in violation of this, depending on interpretation, roundness, and production tolerances. I interpret "absolute maximum" to mean that 0.001" oversize is illegal.
Ironic that the next item adds a tolerance to throttle body ID.
Strikes me that as worded somewhere between "all" and "half of all" wheels that are nominally at the max size for the class would be in violation of this, depending on interpretation, roundness, and production tolerances. I interpret "absolute maximum" to mean that 0.001" oversize is illegal.
Ironic that the next item adds a tolerance to throttle body ID.
A little bit of language evolution regarding wheel regulations, is this perhaps some foreshadowing and structuring for a forthcoming wheel update? 2 years and going on that letter...
"Rim width and diameter are
This is an edit to GCR Appendix G, so not affecting Prod specifically. And since it was done mid-year it's clearly an "errors and omissions" to clarify intent, not a regs change (which requires BoD approval).
And do note that listed diameters were already "max" allowances; see column labels in the spec sheets.
If you're worried about adding these as diameter tolerances (which cannot be measured to .001") then why were you not worried about it when width was already in there as an absolute? Wouldn't it be a lot more useful to exceed width, and a lot harder to measure (because of the tapered walls)? Are you implying that competitors have been fabricating wheels that are larger than the allowed diameter (which must be one hell of a fun thing to deal with when installing standard-sized tires) and they'll now get dinged for exceeding that? I find that hard to believe, honestly.
I can't offer why the PAC proposed this (other than to remove the word "max" in the spec lines column label) but I see concern over this as "a tempest in a teapot". - GA