7/18/05

IT'S ALL ABOUT THE BENJAMINS?

Jok, nice article on the DOT. I had a 33-ft. coach and a 24-ft. trailer with the extended tongue and have towed east west and north and south and never a problem. I believe the DOT is targeting the traveling pro/sportsman racers with the "big" rigs.

Maybe the solution to this would be for racers in those types of transporters just buy a state permit for a year and the diesel ones have to buy a certain amount of fuel while in that particular state. After all, this subject is all about revenue for each state. Geez, why can't us racers just be left alone and do our thing with pride and promote our sport.

Mike Randall
San Diego, CA

THE 14-HOUR RULE

I just read with interest your column regarding the DOT standards. Your explanation is completely correct, but I must point out one clarification. As a small business owner, with commercial vehicles and a CDL holder, as well as a "hobby racer" I have had discussions with DOT officials about these issues. The 14 hour rule, is a clock based rule, and has NO exceptions, i.e., if a racer starts driving to the track at 5:00 am, he is "officially" on duty at 5:00 am, after 14 hours, he can no longer drive, regardless of the situation. So, if he is racing "for profit" all day, he better be parked by 7:00 pm, or have another driver.

The only, one time exception within a 7-day/8-day period is a 16-hour operating window, but only during an emergency. I don't think the DOT police will consider getting home after a long day at the track "an emergency." Just thought you might like to pass this along in your next column.

Steven Moyer

EDITOR'S NOTE: Jok will be taking a more in-depth look at the problem with some input from a DOT representative in his August "Dead-On" column. Stay tuned for more information you can use.

BETTER LATE THAN NEVER

A belated comment on tires, Goodyear and safety. When the NASCAR folks started going too fast for safety, they installed restrictor plates. The cars slowed down and stayed "slowed down." That was the intent and prevails.

NHRA, in the face of safety issues, backed off the nitro. The cars did NOT slow down. My point? NHRA's actions were/are toothless and transparent efforts to present what they deem to be a "fix" knowing full well that the fix did not achieve the goal. It was purely and simply a despicable PR game. The sanctioning body should have, through its resources, determined a maximum safe speed for the existing tires, then done what was necessary to ENSURE that these speeds were/are not exceeded. If 85% didn't work...make it 80%...if that doesn't work....make it 75%...All the moaning about destroying the goal of going faster and quicker pales when a life is lost...and needlessly so.

I feel that Julie Russell has a valid case against NHRA and Goodyear, since the evidence is abundant. NHRA's guilt is self evident...As for Goodyear, they could have, if they truly believed their tires couldn't support the speeds, simply advised NHRA that they would no longer supply tires until the speeds came down. They did not...Hence what happened...happened.

Phil Nedham
Toronto

WHEN YOU'RE RIGHT, YOU'RE RIGHT

Again thanks Jeff, Ian, and the whole crew at Drag Racing Online for what you all do for outlaw 10-5. A day doesn't go by that I don't check this site. You guys are the best!

Jack Curles
Bainbrdge,GA