new autox location in Burlington, NO GO for 2012

Donnie Barnes · **Posted:** Thu Oct 13, 2011 6:40 pm

Better to have the lake on the course side than on the paddock side...

--Donnie

Karl Shultz · **Posted:** Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:00 am

I have a proposal for something I think the club should consider, before setting up the first cone our first day at this site: a sound (noise) policy.

Clubs have lost excellent autocross sites for this reason, even recently. Racetracks are constantly under attack from residents over noise issues. Rightly or wrongly, it's something that bothers a lot of people. Especially people who have lived somewhere for a long time, and all of a sudden, there are a bunch of people driving around cones in unmuffled cars. It was a big issue our first time running Nationals at Lincoln. SCCA instituted a stricter sound policy for the following year.

You'd be surprised how far the noise can carry. And, previous noises of other types, even from the same place - even if it was noise from the missile factory itself- won't matter at all. Just like airplane noise didn't matter to the people in Lincoln, NE.

If local residents get upset enough, I doubt that it'll matter that the site owner knows the police chief. They don't have just the police to complain to - they've got the city council, town management, the local newspaper, and anyone else who will listen. Even if they don't have a legal case, the site owner might very well decide he doesn't want to be seen as "that guy" by his neighbors, and shut the whole thing down.

This is simply something I'd like us to consider. I'd hate to see us lose a great, new site because of something we can fairly easily control.

JohnByers · **Posted:** Mon Oct 17, 2011 8:43 am

wise advice

JamesShort · **Posted:** Mon Oct 17, 2011 9:04 am

So basically all eyes turn to Jeremy and Kendt

.

RodneyWright · **Posted:** Mon Oct 17, 2011 9:15 am

JamesShort wrote:

So basically all eyes turn to Jeremy and Kendt

.

lol.... I was thinking the same thing.

Agreed, we need to take the noise level issue very seriously at this site. Great point Karl.

DickRasmussen · **Posted:** Mon Oct 17, 2011 9:54 am

Does the club have any sound measurement equipment? If so it might be useful to collect preliminary "ball park" sound info at the Danville event. Even subjective input might be useful, especially from folks who have been to SCCA Tours and Nationals this year regarding how "loud" a car sounds. I think my small SuperTrapp is enough but don't really know.

Dick
Planning on prereg for Danville since the weather looks ok.

Ryan Holton · **Posted:** Mon Oct 17, 2011 10:23 am

DickRasmussen wrote:

Does the club have any sound measurement equipment? If so it might be useful to collect preliminary "ball park" sound info at the Danville event. Even subjective input might be useful, especially from folks who have been to SCCA Tours and Nationals this year regarding how "loud" a car sounds. I think my small SuperTrapp is enough but don't really know.

Dick
Planning on prereg for Danville since the weather looks ok.

There was a sound meter in the bus SOMEWHERE, years ago. I don't know if I have actually seen it in use at a THSCC event.

My CRX is proof that even a rice burner can be made quiet. I'm just too old to hear that shit driving to and from events now. :lol:

jeremy gast · **Posted:** Mon Oct 17, 2011 10:27 am

hey hey hey, leave "frank" alone. My car passed sound tech in Jersey with a 97 db, they had a 100db limit. I am working on a new exshaust that will be quieter so what ever i need to do let me know!! If we need to come up with a number, I would like to know earlier so that I can get it accounted for!

JamesShort wrote:

So basically all eyes turn to Jeremy and Kendt

.

JamesShort · **Posted:** Mon Oct 17, 2011 10:27 am

I'm pretty sure 400whp GNXes at WOT are not going to be quiet either

.

Cash Davidson · **Posted:** Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:31 pm

Remember, any sound criterial must include the distance measured and throttle position. Some clubs use 90db measured 10' behind the car, 30" above grade with the car at 75% of the redline RPM.

Sorry, engineers like specificity.

Ryan Holton · **Posted:** Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:49 pm

Cash Davidson wrote:

Sorry, engineers like specificity.

With sound, you have to be specific, its easy to "skirt the rules"

Les Davis · **Joined:** Fri Aug 29, 2003 2:04 pm **Posts:** 2059

Noise was definitely a concern of mine with this site as well. Those trailers being so close I'm sure they will complain, hopefully those complaints will fall on deaf ears due to Mr. Clark's connections. I agree that a noise ordinance is a good idea and we do have a such a rule defined, however, I'm also certain that even that will not be enough to stop complaints due to the proximity of those trailers to the track. I have muffler's and catalytic converters on my car and I'm sure it would pass our noise, yet it is still plenty loud to illicit complaints.

JamesShort · **Posted:** Mon Oct 17, 2011 4:17 pm

And then you have to specify the reference: are the 'decibels' SPL, SIL, SWL etc

.

Vincent Keene · **Posted:** Mon Oct 17, 2011 4:40 pm

Les Davis wrote:

I have muffler's and catalytic converters on my car and I'm sure it would pass our noise, yet it is still plenty loud to illicit complaints.

Les has nailed it. Even if we establish and enforce a very reserved strict db limit, noise complaints are inevitable with homes in such close proximity. My guess is some cars with 100% factory exhaust will still cause an issue because "noise" is subjective vs. "volume".

Donnie Barnes · **Posted:** Mon Oct 17, 2011 7:54 pm

A *lot* of the point of the sound regulations is to be able to show people that you HAVE sound regulations and that they are reasonable. Then you have SOMETHING to fall back on if/when the complaints do make it to someone who cares. That's not always enough, but often it is.

--Donnie

THSCC Forums

new autox location in Burlington, NO GO for 2012

Who is online