Club Class Rules

[darinz]

Good points DB but you do have to be careful as if you maake it a production class then cheque book size becomes a huge factor. Like Didymo (Bruce) said 'simplicity' is the key so the club class should be kept as open as possible but with a few restrictions that keep it accessable and fair. Things like only factory fitted traction aids, off the shelf suspension, standard winches etc are the sort of ideas that seem to be favoured. Tyre size is a tricky one as so many now run 35 or bigger anyway so I wonder whether that really achieves anything anyway?

The other thing that comes up is having an Outlaw class. Anything road legal with a tyre restriction only! Imagine what you can build then!!!! 1000kg, 500hp, just drive the bogs and light enough that a basic winch would be enough! But that is another topic for after the current round of discussion!

DB are you coming to the meeting next weekend?

[monstr]

Hi Darin.These are the basic Vehical requirements that we are looking at running at Norwest club class
1/ Truck does Not have to have wof/reg but must be up to a safe standard I"E no sloppy steering joints good brakes etc.
2/ Seat belts must be up to wof standard re mounts and cond of belts
3/ Hard tops do not require a roll cage but all soft tops must have a min of 4 point plus a steel or Ali top fitted to protect driver/co driver
4/ Wire rope is allowed but will be checked at scruitenering (any damage and you cant use it )
5/ We are running 4x4 challenges rules re all other saftey gear ,first aid kit/gloves/etc etc
6/ all 4x4 challenges rules re scoreing penalties etc are being used
7/ you will not need a ground anchor
We have a winch challenge meeting next week and after that i will post if there are any changes ..Steve

[GQTROL]

Before you start laying down too many rules about what should be allowed in National Club Class you need to agree on the intention of the Class.

1) Is it a Novice Class that gives someone (who hasn't competed before) an opportunity to race against other similar people / vehicles in order to get a taste of winch challenges, or

2) Is it a Low Budget Class that places alot of restrictions on vehicle modifications in order to cap the costs and prevent "cheque-book racing".

If it is option 1), then at some point you need to draw the line on how many times a competitor can race before they are no longer a "novice". Maybe limit it to 1 season, then they have to go up a class. Tracks can be set accordingly for the "novices". Normal vehicle scrutineering racing penalties apply. Personally I couldn't care if the "novice" trucks is a full spec comp truck, provided the driver is actually a "novice".

If it is option 2), then the cheapest way ahead would be a "production" based set of rules. Look at what CCDA have developed and also Dave Metcalfe has developed aslo.

Until you agree which of the above options Club Class is actually intended for, you'll only go round in circles.

[DieselBoy]

Too true Mitch.

Well, if i could use my self as an example, and also i guess explain my "adgenda" this is the way I see things:

I have a non road legal club truck that has a 6 point cage, Harnesses, tin top, 35" tyres, and a low mount electric winch.

I use it for fun trials like the laurie sanson series, and other club events, and also the odd bush trip when i get the opportunity.

My truck is like a whole heap of other club trucks all over NZ, owned by 4x4 enthusiasts who have at one stage or another tried the path of having a road legal, but off road 4x4, and decided that it is not practical or sensible to have a vehicle that gets abused and modifed, and at the same time try and keep it road legal. It much easier and more cost effective to be able to throw it on the trailer and park it up untill time allows to fix it.

Anyway, i see a whole lot of potential competitors in this same situation. They have perfectly safe vehicles, they just aren't road legal.

So if club class was for novice drivers, there would be no point???

Unless the novice drivers were required to run a vehicle that met the current Challenge class requirements (specifically the road legal part), they would have to buy/build a new vehicle a the end of their first year/season in order to move up to the full challenge class. It is unlikely many people could afford that and so after the first seaon, those budding competitors would drop out??

If i entered my truck into the club class, and the club class ran for a season, with a series of events, like a champion ship type thing, i would probably want to come back the next year and compete to better my results, or just because i had a blast. I personally wouldn't bother moving to the full challenge class because the club class was more affordable, and supplied enough excitment and entertainment.

I most certainly wouldn't be in a position to sell my current truck and buy/build a new road legal truck so i could come back and compete in the challenge class.

I would hazard a guess that's how alot of others would see it aswell.

So on that basis, my opinion is that the Club Class should not be soley for novice drivers, as a stepping stone to a compulsary move to the challenge class, but a seperate class in its own right that runs along side the challenge class as part of the series.

I would like to know that if i invest the $$$ into setting my truck up to run in the club class, i am going to be able to continue competeing for a couple of years as time and $$ allows.

My vote is with running the club class as part of the series along side the challenge class.

Do it by placing restrictions on vehicles. Don't make it to tight to rule out people with well set up club trucks, but find someway to even the playing field.

I think in terms of the club class, the single biggest ticket item is the winch, as you obviously need a good one. The person with the best winch has the best "chance" of the No.1 position. Restrict the winch capacity, and you might get a more even playing field??

[PeterVahry]

Part of the original concept of winch challenges was the ability to use public roads to form part of a competition stage or to move between them. Over the past 4 years there has been a pattern in NZ to use a single site for an event. That has encouraged competitors to question why their vehicles need to be road legal.

If that legal status is removed then the competition will be committed to using single sites. The beauty of being able to use a variety of sites is that an organiser can create an event that might not favour one style of vehicle set up. There is a tendency to be able to say.. Oh that comp, that's clay etc. and maybe set a vehicle up to handle that. The early winch challenges had variety and that was part of their popularity but to achieve that, the vehicles needed to do some road work.

[toysuzi]

As I understand it, the law requires organisers to take "reasonable steps" to ensure safety. Of course, you have to be prepared to justify what you believed was "reasonable" AFTER there has been an accident.... However, I don't think it would be considered "reasonable" to run novice drivers in less capable trucks over the same course that is being used by experienced drivers in competition trucks. Merely having a rule requiring roll cages probably wouldn't keep you out of court!

Conversely, even without requiring roll cages for Club trucks, I think you could argue pretty convincingly that you had taken "reasonable steps" if you could show that you had planned the course specifically to minimise any risk of rollovers, reduce speeds, and avoid routes where a mis-jusdgement had the potential for serious injury. This isn't that hard - compulsory winch obstacles, short banks rather than long hill-climbs, no night stages, and no off-camber obstacles. We reckon we set it up pretty well for the "Top of the South" Winch Challenge. It wasn't too hard to keep the obstacles appropriate to the class, as well as keeping stage times about the same. We shortened some stages for the Clubman class, set different lines at some obstacles, and used short-cuts avoiding others. All the marshals had to do was move a couple of strips of bunting. Running some stages on the same route, but in reverse direction is also a simple way to make some stages easier.

Making routes easier, and having compulsory winch sections may also deter the more capable trucks/drivers from wanting to compete in the Club Class (or "novice" class, or whatever), as they wouldn't be allowed to "drive" all the obstacles. I also think each event should stand alone for this class, with no points carried through a series. And, while there shouldbe placings awarded, any prizes should be based on votes from marshalls so they are given for the best driving and teamwork, rather than going to the most capable truck.

As an aside - planning has already started for a 3-day event in 2010 which will hopefully bring competitors from both Islands. At this stage we are planning to include a Clubman Class, with the same requirements we used last time - roll cages not required, 33in tyres, steel cable allowed, road legal trucks. If necessary, we'll call it a "Marlborough Class" so we can set our own rules...

sounds like what we might have to do in nelson
may have to be a "Top Of The South Class" not just a Marlborough class
there are a lot of club vehicles in nelson with no cages,have steel cable, ect
and will not spend the money to do one event and not like it.
it is hard as it is to get people to enter with out the extra rules
i have to congratulate Marlborough for getting so many club class vehicles

for the club class it could be what ever suits the club that is running the event to decide the rules
eg chch have a lot of club vehicles with 35" tyres and may get a lot more people entering the club class
in nelson with the 33" tyre rule we would have a 33" tyre limit

[Ralfie]

Simply put you are all talking about two types of events.
The various winch challenges events around the country and the 'club events' that some clubs have run in recent times.

Don't confuse the two events and expect to be able to have both types of vehicles, Club and Challenge, competing together. They are two separate events and need to stay that way.

Use the base rules for safety etc but allow the clubs to relax rules to suit their individual events, IE no roll cage in full bodied vehicles, use steel winch cable, only production type vehicles with wof and reg etc. I like the idea of the production class event in Aust that is on outerlimits. Worth looking into further.

[monstr]

Hi Peter i hear where your coming from re road legal trucks ,Its just that in the last club class we ran we decided to allow non road legal trucks as our intension was to include as many as possible and as we were running it all on one property it wasnt going to be a problem with transport stages ,As we are on one property again next year we are intending doing the same ,If there is a set of National rules and vehical specs bought in for club class i take it the governing body would allow the club running the comp to set some ASRs on the day to allow the comp to run to requirements of that particular event ? and still be covered by NZ4wd insurance..Steve

[PeterVahry]

Steve, there will continue to be single location events because they are easy to manage, which is fine. To put in place supplementary rules for an event has been acceptable in the past and of course even the major Challenges have needed some additional rules around specific things. The area's I get sensitive about are those where safety might be compromised because that's where the insurers get twitchy too. As with any insurance cover we need to be open about the risks that we are posing to the underwriters.
When an overall risk management evaluation of each event is done, the ideal is that any identified risks are addressed and if that means creating a rule to do so, then the competitors just have to accept it. My whole emphasis is that the competitors are quite welcome to maim or kill themselves trying to win, but I don't see why they should be allowed to drag others lives into a shambles because they wanted to maybe save some money by not following the best practice.

If I was to organise another Challenge event I'd only accept the safety levels that would let me sleep at night, knowing that if there was a problem that the rules put in place would be able to be presented in Court and that they showed a process of applying that best practice philosophy. Anything less in this day and age and you are leaving yourself wide open for the lawyers.

As you know, the whole theory behind creating 4x4 Challenges NZ was to provide a pool of experienced people to assist the managing of events by providing evaluation of stage layouts, rules development, risk management and scoring etc. Outside assistance to event organisers to make life easier for them.

[darinz]

The concensus that club class is not a novice class was achieved quite early on! Also a production based class has been suggested and was not supported. It is about guys taking their 'club truck' doing a winch comp.
I and others have been talking to the guys that have competed in club class events and they have all said the same thing. They want to compete and some will step up but alot won't. It isn't about compromising safety or stands, it is about having a cheaper way of being involved. It is like guys who run A or B class compared to those running C or D class in the trails. It is a budget decision, it isn't about their comittment to the sport or desire to achieve. With this in mind, the desire by some to stop people racing in the club class due to winning all the time, is going to be a tough one and will have to be dealt with later. What Nor-West are running appears o be a very good starting point and that is about what Manukau ran as well.

I agree with Peter to a point. I also believe there is a place for non road legal trucks but it would be in a club class and an outlaw class. Dropping the requirement for a WOF is not lowering the required safety standard. Not requiring indicators etc does not compromise safety as long as the mechanical integrity is maintained.
No one is suggesting that mechanical standards be lowered!
The closest comparison and they also use the same insurance is trails and they do not have WOF requirements. I see no reason why we can't use the same regulation model as trails to allow non road legal trucks to compete. We are after all part of the same overall body (NZFWDA).

When you follow the various threads going at present, there seems to be a tread emerging. People want more classes to allow more people to compete BUT they want the challenge class to stay pretty much the same as it is.
The club class is not a novice class but is for less modified trucks.
An outlaw class needs to be created as well.

[PeterVahry]

Darin, a strong reason for working to a wof standard is that it has meant that the culpability of those approving the mechanical safety of a vehicle is moved to the wof person. Again it has been a means of reducing the liability aspects of the organisers.
Certainly there have been some scrutineers at events who have done the equivalent of a wof check but that was never the intention of the rules. The principle is that the wof and if needed, a LVVTA certificate, should minimise the need to inspect competing vehicles except to identify that they are complying with the rules.
The adoption of log books should simplify that even further by shifting the 'scrutineer' role to one of an 'audit'.

Without the benefit of the wof system, it will mean a greater dependence on the scrutineer system again and people making the call that a vehicle is 'safe', without the protection of liability insurance.
A couple of years ago the Police altered the rules and they can now treat any vehicle incident involving an injury as if that occurred on a public road, even if it was on private land.
I realise that I may sound very negative but it's just a part of the process that must be used to decide if it is worth trying to be generous and make it easy for some people to compete.

[meatc]

A couple of years ago the Police altered the rules and they can now treat any vehicle incident involving an injury as if that occurred on a public road, even if it was on private land.

Not quite. The definition of a road in the Land Transport Act 1998 has not been altered, and is essentually the same as it was in the previous Act.

copied from the interpertation of the LTA

Road includes
(a) a street; and
(b) A Motorway; and
(c) A beach; and
(d) A place the public have access to, whether as of right or not; and
(e) All bridges, culverts, ferries and fords forming part of a road or street or motorway or a place as refered to in paragraph (d)
(f) all sites at which vehicles may be weighed for the purpose of this Act or any other enactment

Case Law has futher defined this list.

Basically (d) is what you where refering to. The definition has been further refined down by the courts and public access is the key. The courts have found that it must not just be open to the public but open to the public in a vehicle. A specific refered to case is one of a motor camp where the campers can bring their vehicles in but the general public can only enter on foot, this makes the camp roads NOT a road under the act.

That would be the same at a Comp venue. The public can access (maybe) on foot but the vehicles (comp and support) are invited by way of entry therefore the area is not a road.

An open drive way could be a road, but a private drive you have to ask someone to open a gate (or punch in a code) is not a road.

OSH however is different. The event is comercial so OSH applies. You cannot contract out of your responsibilities. A liability wavier is not worth the peice of paper it is written on. What you need is a notice of hazards and what has been done to minimize the danger (roll cages for roll over, safety requirements for winching) A notice which says the compeditor is aware of the general rules and any specific hazards to the site. (emergency contact, procedures, radio channels etc) but the organiser is still liable which is why any direction given by a marshal must be obeyed.

Police will investigate any DEATH on behalf of the Coroner but OSH will deal with the liability side death or injury.

The WOF side is debateable as well. Just because your family wagon has a WOF does not mean it is up to WOF standard. It is when passed but who knows next week. A vehicle doesnt suddenly develop faults in the mechanics drive and fail the next check. It is drivers responsibility to make sure they maintain the level required.

Hope that makes sense.

[DieselBoy]

Darin, a strong reason for working to a wof standard is that it has meant that the culpability of those approving the mechanical safety of a vehicle is moved to the wof person. Again it has been a means of reducing the liability aspects of the organisers.
Certainly there have been some scrutineers at events who have done the equivalent of a wof check but that was never the intention of the rules. The principle is that the wof and if needed, a LVVTA certificate, should minimise the need to inspect competing vehicles except to identify that they are complying with the rules.
The adoption of log books should simplify that even further by shifting the 'scrutineer' role to one of an 'audit'.

Without the benefit of the wof system, it will mean a greater dependence on the scrutineer system again and people making the call that a vehicle is 'safe', without the protection of liability insurance.
A couple of years ago the Police altered the rules and they can now treat any vehicle incident involving an injury as if that occurred on a public road, even if it was on private land.
I realise that I may sound very negative but it's just a part of the process that must be used to decide if it is worth trying to be generous and make it easy for some people to compete.

Very true Peter, the rule change is a major head ache.

So how do the national trials guys do it?? They don't have a WOF requirement. So we just simply adopt their system for club class

Or are they treading dangerously???

I like the where this discussion is leading, its sounding very promising

[darinz]

It is very simple. Non WOF trucks are racing and will continue to race. We need to develop a system that allows this to happen in the safest way for competitors and organisers.
I have nothing to do with trials but they allow it and have a system that works with our insurance etc so what is so wrong with their system that we can't use the same thing? Same for Motorsport NZ, stock cars, dirt track, drag racing etc etc?
We can still require challenge class to have WOFs as it is plainly obvious that no one wants to change this and I don't think anyone has even suggested this, but there are now 2 other classes that need to be included into our rules. To ignore this is to ignore the future of the sport.
Winch challenges have been ignored by the NZFWDA competitions comittee so are we going to do the same thing and have another organisation set up to complicate matters even further? Logic says we should develop to include the other classes that people want to race. Will this be to the detriment of the current competitors/trucks? Who knows, but if it mean the sport gets a better base and greater participation and we can still do what we are currently doing (to a point) then where are the negatives?

One thing that people are overlooking is that an event organiser is not required to cater for all classes or even for more than one. It is likely that Rotorua wouldn't include more classes as it is already a very big event. But if they want to lets have a simple system so that all they need to do is say all classes with XYZ suplimentary rules ie no tree damage. There is facility within the rules or extra rules to cater for specific site requirements.

Some great ideas have come up here and I hope the guys with these ideas can come to the meeting or pass their individual comments to me and I will bring them up at the meeting.

[gimmemud]

Is there any way a wof man can give you a "offroad warrent"? Not a true warrent as such just a safety statement saying that the vehicle is fit to drive and isn't going to crumble apart when it hits a pot hole. Just another way to take the liability off the scrutineers and move it onto someone with liability insurance.
Been reading this topic with great interest as i am hoping to do most of the club class challenges now that i have my truck all sorted.

[coxsy]

there is nothing stopping someone taking their truck in to a garage so it can be checked over , know new drag cars are check over for complyance to rules before it can be taken to the track

[DieselBoy]

Is there any way a wof man can give you a "offroad warrent"? Not a true warrent as such just a safety statement saying that the vehicle is fit to drive and isn't going to crumble apart when it hits a pot hole. Just another way to take the liability off the scrutineers and move it onto someone with liability insurance.
Been reading this topic with great interest as i am hoping to do most of the club class challenges now that i have my truck all sorted.

Thats a good idea, but a big can of worms!!!!!

They would all need a whole new book on whats acceptable for off road before they would take any sort of liability by putting their names to it

[coxsy]

the inspector is nzhra appointed and charges too

[darinz]

For those that are wondering what happened, here's abreif over view.

4x4 Challenges has said outright that it supports the club class as it has currently developed. As an organisation we want to help this class grow and ensure a level playing feild. To this end the rules for next year will be as per the Nor-West, Whangarei and Manukua events from this year. We will just monitor them and devlop them as is needed. The concept is to include as many as possible and encourage the growth of the sport, it is not about having silly unneccassary rules to restrict things. Safety is at the forefront.
By 2010 we will have formal class rules added to the current 4x4 Challenges rules. Along with this we are also working with the Mainland committe to sort out a set of National rules ASAP as well. In theory will will have one set of rules to cover the whole country very soon.

So what does that mean. Club class continues next season as it has this season. We will continue to discuss rules with the guys out there doing it and set the class rules as soon as we can.
There will be provision for Club Class in the 2009 National final that is being planned. More on that will follow once it has been finalised.

For 2010 a rollbar WILL be required for club class. It will be able to be removable etc but you'll have to have something. Safety comes first! For 2009 we will set tracks accordingly to ensure safety but to enable fully intergrationed competitions we need the added safety of a rollbar.

To have a greater say I urge you to join 4x4 Challenges and get involved. We want this class to represent the competitors but for this to happen we need Club class competitors driving it.

[DieselBoy]

Hey guys, couple of quick q's re. vehicle spec's for club class

Is a windscreen necessary??

If so, why??

What materials are suitable for doors other than OEM doors??

Fiberglass?? Alloy?? Ply with 1mm steel over it??high impact plastic?? Composite alloy/plastic??

With the overhead cabin protection, would composite alloy/plastic sheet be ok?? All the trials guys seem to be using it.

Cheers

[monstr]

Hi Pete im proberly not the right one to answer this and your questions should really be put to the 4x4 challenges rules committe ,let me start by saying you can not compare the trials trucks and winch challenge trucks ,in general we weigh a lot more ,do completly different types of tracks and can reach some quite high speeds ,but as i understand it the trucks are supposed to look like road going vehicals ,the windscreen is a saftey reason ,we do a much wider range of tracks that can involve quite high speeds and while i know glass will break it it still offers some protection from being slapped in the face at 50kmph by a tree branch or a bit of scrub etc ,as far as the doors go i was led to believe that under the new rules as long as they were of the same strength or greater than factory that was ok ,the only problem you would have at present is some clubs require trucks to have a WOF and Reg so untill there is some form of get together and we all work under the same rules this sort of problem will exist ,Darin has been working hard with other clubs trying to get everyone running under the same rules which has to be better for everyone to have some consistancy in the sport .While your up at the Northland have a talk with Darin and Jack Talbot that way you can get it straight from the horses mouth so to speak ..Steve

[DieselBoy]

Cool. Will bring a list of ideas, and some sample materials and get some feed back

[wopass]

Cool. Will bring a list of ideas, and some sample materials and get some feed back

YOU WONT HAVE TIME FOR THOSE SHINANAGANS

did you try the boots??

got the brace done

[vvega]

Cool. Will bring a list of ideas, and some sample materials and get some feed back

YOU WONT HAVE TIME FOR THOSE SHINANAGANS

did you try the boots??

got the brace done

lol @ consider yourself told

[darinz]

Cool. Will bring a list of ideas, and some sample materials and get some feed back

YOU WONT HAVE TIME FOR THOSE SHINANAGANS

did you try the boots??

got the brace done

lol @ consider yourself told

If you don't have time for those shinanagans, then what the hell is the point of going!!!
And I'll tell you anything you want me to say with the right sort of persuasion! (may not be of any use later though)