The GGR forum has reached it's end, but posts are still available read-only for posterity. We invite you to make posts and discussions on the GGR Facebook page.

2008 Proposal (AJF-3) Car Numbers

Use this forum to discuss rule proposals, other than the points proposal, which has its's own forum

Moderators: David Leong, Andrew Forrest

Post Reply
Andrew Forrest
Site Admin
Posts: 115
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 5:27 pm

2008 Proposal (AJF-3) Car Numbers

Post by Andrew Forrest » Sun Jul 01, 2007 11:07 am

Proposal:
This proposal is in three parts (which may be independently adopted or rejected):

Part A: Move the many constraints on car numbers from rule 2.6T (a) to 2.6T (c) and make them subordinate to the idea that the tech inspector has final say on whether a car's numbers are adequate (i.e. describe them as guidelines). Change 2.6T (a) from
a. Car numbers (both) and competition class letters (TT-only) must be on the car and correct for the driver at all times in order for course personnel, event officials and your fellow competitors to identify cars and their drivers. Numbers must be a contrasting color, and distinct from a distance. Reflecting numbers are discouraged and shoe polish is not allowed. No numbers on windows. Numbers must be from 8 to 10 inches high and 1-1/2 to 2 inches wide and must be securely attached. The number on the rear may be only half the regular size but still legible. The car classification letters should be half the size of the competition number and placed after the number on both sides of the car.
to
a. Car numbers (both) and competition class letters (TT-only) must be on the car and correct for the driver at all times in order for course personnel, event officials and your fellow competitors to identify cars and their drivers.
AND change 2.6T (c) from
c. Location, style, legibility and mounting of all car numbers are subject to approval of the Tech Inspector.
to
c. Location, style, legibility and mounting of all car numbers are subject to approval of the Tech Inspector. Examples of considerations the Tech Inspector may employ in approving a car's numbers include (but are not limited to): Numbers must be a contrasting color, and distinct from a distance. Reflecting numbers are discouraged and shoe polish is not allowed. No numbers on windows. Numbers must be from 8 to 10 inches high and 1-1/2 to 2 inches wide and must be securely attached. The number on the rear need be only half the regular size but still legible. The car classification letters should be half the size of the competition number and placed after the number on both sides of the car.
Part B: Change 2.6T (b) (Car Numbers) from
b. Numbers shall be placed on both sides of the car, on the front and the rear of the car.
to
b. Numbers shall be placed on both sides of the car (required), and on the front and the rear of the car (recommended).
Part C: Change 2.6T (d) (Car Number Suffix) from
d. The driver number is your GGR Certification Number. Drivers sharing a car may use the same car number but with the suffix 'L' attached to the number in one case to distinguish the drivers.
to
d. The driver number is your GGR Certification Number. Drivers sharing a car may use the same car number but with an alphabetic suffix (e.g. 'L') attached to the numbers on both sides of the car to distinguish the drivers.
Rationale:
Part A: Having a huge, undifferentiated list of constraints on car numbers obscures the main goals of car numbers: legibility and identity. Should GGR really have a rule about stroke width for car numbers if these main goals are otherwise satisfied? (No). Making these constraints explicitly subordinate to the Tech Inspector's approval and re-casting them as guidelines gives GGR the flexibility to approve car numbers that meet our goals while still providing members with good advice about how to achieve the objectives. Persons with questions about car number suitability should be encouraged to view online photos of cars with numbers acceptable to GGR.

Part B: Having numbers on all four sides of a car is an unusual requirement for Driver's Education events. This change would make GGR's rules more aligned with those of other regions. Given the increasing frequency with which GGR hosts events that are adjacent or in conjunction with other regions, alignment of rules and elimination of gratuitous differences is a worthwhile goal.

Part C: Changing from 'L' to any alphabetic suffix generalizes this technique and updates an otherwise anachronistic rule.
Andrew Forrest
2009-2017 GGR PCA Club Race Registrar GGRRaceReg@gmail.com
2015 GGR Vice President GGRVicePresident@gmail.com
2010-2014 GGR Webmaster webmaster@pca-ggr.org
Past GGR Driver's Ed/Time Trial Chair (2006 - 2008)

User avatar
Dan Thompson
Posts: 746
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 5:18 pm
Location: Auburn, CA

Post by Dan Thompson » Sun Jul 01, 2007 11:22 am

sounds good to me :D
Dan Thompson
GGR DE/TT/CR Racecontrol

User avatar
Jim McClelland
Posts: 89
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:49 am
Location: Walnut Creek

Post by Jim McClelland » Mon Jul 02, 2007 6:15 pm

Andrew -

Your recommended text, in my opinion, needs a wee bit of clarification.

When the text reads that numbers must be "1-1/2 to 2 inches wide", such a dimension is too narrow for a numeral to be legible, and such a dimension quoted is referring to a stroke width, which, if I understand your intent, is to delete the stroke width requirement, which I would agree with. Perhaps drop any width requirement from the text, deferring to "legibility."

In the same vein, the car classification letters do not necessarily need to be "half the size of the competition number" to be legible.

Last thought: Would it make sense to include text that such identification be legible to "all positioned track safety personnel" (corner workers)?
2002 996
#15

Andrew Forrest
Site Admin
Posts: 115
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 5:27 pm

Post by Andrew Forrest » Mon Jul 02, 2007 7:39 pm

Jim McClelland wrote:Your recommended text, in my opinion, needs a wee bit of clarification.
Agreed -- I should have taken the opportunity to clarify it while I was demoting it.
Jim McClelland wrote:When the text reads that numbers must be "1-1/2 to 2 inches wide", such a dimension is too narrow for a numeral to be legible, ...
Agreed -- I interpret this as the "stroke width".
Jim McClelland wrote:...Perhaps drop any width requirement from the text, deferring to "legibility."
Why stop with only the width requirements?
Jim McClelland wrote:In the same vein, the car classification letters do not necessarily need to be "half the size of the competition number" to be legible.
Right again.
Jim McClelland wrote:Last thought: Would it make sense to include text that such identification be legible to "all positioned track safety personnel" (corner workers)?
Good thought. I'd like another phrase for "all positioned track safety personnel" though. Maybe we can do better than that.
Andrew Forrest
2009-2017 GGR PCA Club Race Registrar GGRRaceReg@gmail.com
2015 GGR Vice President GGRVicePresident@gmail.com
2010-2014 GGR Webmaster webmaster@pca-ggr.org
Past GGR Driver's Ed/Time Trial Chair (2006 - 2008)

Zone7Rep(Larry Sharp)
Posts: 389
Joined: Thu May 12, 2005 7:49 am
Location: Livermore Ca

Post by Zone7Rep(Larry Sharp) » Sat Jul 07, 2007 9:03 am

if we rely on the tech crew to say the number size is ok what critirea do we give them and with this rule it can change from year to year with no consistantcy on size and contrast.. I think you need to have a size requirement and to have numbers contrasting.. I have worked as a chief steward and this is important .. Very important.. the size and contrast gives the Corner workers a chance to read the number as the car drives by at speed. sooo I would hate to eliminate that requirement to just make it easier for the drivers to put numbers on ..
1993 RS America
Grand Prix White
Car #6

1974 911 Carrera (resides in Australia)
Light Yellow

1974 914-6 GT (resides in San Luis obispo)

1987 944 turbo (location unknown)

1979 911SC(Hummers have it)

1972 911T (location unknown)

User avatar
Dan Thompson
Posts: 746
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 5:18 pm
Location: Auburn, CA

Post by Dan Thompson » Sat Jul 07, 2007 9:22 am

My agreement with this proposal has more to do with just requiring the numbers on the sides of the car and being optional on the front and rear.
Lots of rear numbers are almost useless anyway...even with our current language concerning number size and placement.
I agree with Larry, after working as Communicator and chief steward, the size, contrast and width of the numbers is important for the corner workers and grid crew. Even currently there are numbers on certified drivers cars that totally suck with reguard to size and contrast.
Dan Thompson
GGR DE/TT/CR Racecontrol

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest