Javelin track days

[agent006]

OP aside, this thread shows exactly why when I had the exhaust made for my track car they were under strict instructions that it should be no more than 88dB. Not much point having a track car that excludes your from many of the UK's circuits. Besides, the noise outside the car is of no relevance to me, I'm always inside it.

[red baron m3]

geeks said:

Went to an MSV day at Bedford a couple of months ago. They were very clear that if you were to trip it by 1DB then they would black flag you with no arguing end of. They did add an adenum onto this that if you could get your exhaust sorted you could get renoise tested and be allowed back on...

Track days are under threat at alot of circuits. Having a firm stance on this stuff will keep them going in the future. If you dont like it, sell up and find another hobby!

Geeks, I don't have a problem with the sound limits on tracks but I do have a problem with the way this matter was dealt with and the fact that motion sound testing should be fair and accurate and in this case it wasn't, I have put this thread up because I want to make fellow drivers and track day fanatics such as myself aware of this sort of thing.

[geeks]

red baron m3 said:

geeks said:

Went to an MSV day at Bedford a couple of months ago. They were very clear that if you were to trip it by 1DB then they would black flag you with no arguing end of. They did add an adenum onto this that if you could get your exhaust sorted you could get renoise tested and be allowed back on...

Track days are under threat at alot of circuits. Having a firm stance on this stuff will keep them going in the future. If you dont like it, sell up and find another hobby!

Geeks, I don't have a problem with the sound limits on tracks but I do have a problem with the way this matter was dealt with and the fact that motion sound testing should be fair and accurate and in this case it wasn't, I have put this thread up because I want to make fellow drivers and track day fanatics such as myself aware of this sort of thing.

In what way was it not fair or accurate?
How else could it have been dealt with exactly?
You were given the oppurtunity to get it sorted. It may not have been the way you would like it to have been offered to you but he was probably aware he was going to hear "Where are the noise testers and i promise to lift there" line. Trouble is as has been pointed out to you the circuits run their own noise tester not the TDO.

As has also been pointed out noise testers are there for a reason, lefiting past them but flooring it elsewhere doesnt really help and just puts the venue at risk.

Just get your car silenced properly and it wont happen in the future

[Herman Toothrot]

Don't know what the obsession with loud exhausts is really, mines 94db consistently at 5000rpm, it's more than loud enough would be happier with it at 90db or so, had an MR2 turbo once and had an apex I hayabusa on it, 109db stupid, it went on eBay, had Hayward and Scott build a replacement and told them I wanted quiet and they made one that registered 89db car still sounder great but none of the drone or generally antisocial noise. Far, far better and made absolutely no difference to power output.

[MNut]

GreigM said:

I genuinely wonder if this "sending you home" nonsense without a refund would hold up in court? After all the stuff on the track day claim thread about the legality of the signed waivers etc, is the sound check and subsequently denying you track time at all legal without some level of refund?

Disagree with this statement.

When booking a track day it's our responsibility to ensure our cars are fit for purpose and meet the required rules of the circuit. If your car is too loud then why should you receive a refund?!

I was at a track day a few months ago where I overheard a chap asking the TDO for a refund because his engine had failed after 5 minutes on track!

If you book tickets to a a bow tie event for example and you turn up in jeans and trainers and get refused entry then would you ask for your money back? I didn't think so.

[gruffalo]

MNut said:

GreigM said:

I genuinely wonder if this "sending you home" nonsense without a refund would hold up in court? After all the stuff on the track day claim thread about the legality of the signed waivers etc, is the sound check and subsequently denying you track time at all legal without some level of refund?

Disagree with this statement.

When booking a track day it's our responsibility to ensure our cars are fit for purpose and meet the required rules of the circuit. If your car is too loud then why should you receive a refund?!

I was at a track day a few months ago where I overheard a chap asking the TDO for a refund because his engine had failed after 5 minutes on track!

If you book tickets to a a bow tie event for example and you turn up in jeans and trainers and get refused entry then would you ask for your money back? I

You could have a claim if the equipment used to test your noise level was at fault.

[geeks]

gruffalo said:

You could have a claim if the equipment used to test your noise level was at fault.

I would imagine you would have a hard time proving that!

[QBee]

geeks said:

gruffalo said:

You could have a claim if the equipment used to test your noise level was at fault.

I would imagine you would have a hard time proving that!

Particularly as it was the fly by, not the static.

With the static, if you have a fairly loud car, ask for the readings each time and keep a log. Many of the tracks are MSV and 105db, but Bedford is 101 and I think Oulton is quieter too, and they are all quieter for summer evenings. I am sure MSV could be swayed by a list of previous readings. They know their kit is not precise. Mine has read between 98 and 106, same car, even the same track for the top and bottom ones. Three of us squeaked in at Bedford last time, by literally half a decibel.

The better answer is be prepared and invest in some bolt on pipes, so you can put them on if needed. The track noise testers' attitude is always noticeably better if they see you have bothered to do something about it. And aren't just taking the piss. They want you on track, but they also want a track to put you on.

What always amazes me when I have squeaked through by 0.2 dB is the number of other cars on track that sound 50% louder than mine.

Edited by QBee on Thursday 24th October 10:53

[Rovinghawk]

red baron m3 said:

I think personally that we were the only proper track car there

If by 'proper track car' you mean suitable for the track, I think you'll find you're wrong; it didn't pass the requirements for going on the track

red baron m3 said:

we were driving quicker than the rest of the cars that morning

So what? Does this allow you special dispensation?

[RossP]

I have always found Javelin great. Colin is a fair bloke.

[Woolfie]

ditto re javelin, decent lot. Colin is a fair chap. I want tracks to stay open, to enjoy my pastime - so reducing noise is crucial.

[gruffalo]

QBee said:

geeks said:

gruffalo said:

You could have a claim if the equipment used to test your noise level was at fault.

I would imagine you would have a hard time proving that!

Particularly as it was the fly by, not the static.

With the static, if you have a fairly loud car, ask for the readings each time and keep a log. Many of the tracks are MSV and 105db, but Bedford is 101 and I think Oulton is quieter too, and they are all quieter for summer evenings. I am sure MSV could be swayed by a list of previous readings. They know their kit is not precise. Mine has read between 98 and 106, same car, even the same track for the top and bottom ones. Three of us squeaked in at Bedford last time, by literally half a decibel.

The better answer is be prepared and invest in some bolt on pipes, so you can put them on if needed. The track noise testers' attitude is always noticeably better if they see you have bothered to do something about it. And aren't just taking the piss. They want you on track, but they also want a track to put you on.

What always amazes me when I have squeaked through by 0.2 dB is the number of other cars on track that sound 50% louder than mine.

Edited by QBee on Thursday 24th October 10:53

Once I had passed the static test I took all the extra wadding out of the exhaust and ran for two days without triggering the drive by once.

The meter being used was not calibrated and the TDO had no idea that it really should be if it is to be used in such a role as to decide whether or not someone ges to do what they have paid for.

[mad4amanda]

[quote=gruffaloOnce I had passed the static test I took all the extra wadding out of the exhaust and ran for two days without triggering the drive by once.

The meter being used was not calibrated and the TDO had no idea that it really should be if it is to be used in such a role as to decide whether or not someone ges to do what they have paid for.
[/quote]

And this is the problem All you are really saying is:

You didn't see the meter calibrated.
You put everyone else's enjoyment and employment at risk.
You don't ride or drive well enough to exploit the capability of your vehicle.

[gruffalo]

mad4amanda said:

[quote=gruffaloOnce I had passed the static test I took all the extra wadding out of the exhaust and ran for two days without triggering the drive by once.

The meter being used was not calibrated and the TDO had no idea that it really should be if it is to be used in such a role as to decide whether or not someone ges to do what they have paid for.

And this is the problem All you are really saying is:

You didn't see the meter calibrated.
You put everyone else's enjoyment and employment at risk.
You don't ride or drive well enough to exploit the capability of your vehicle.

No I did none of those, car tested before and since at below 105, car no louder on this day and certainly not more than 8 times the sound pressure that their meter was reading.

I asked about calibration, got blank faces, it was a cheap maplin meter, you do not know the circumstance you were not there you are of course entitled to your opinion but they are wrong as was proved by the lack of my getting a black flag and subsequent testing.

Edited by gruffalo on Thursday 31st October 07:55

[QBee]

And to return to a lighter note - several TVR owners, me included, are going to Snetterton on a Saturday in a couple of weeks time on a Javelin day, and are thoroughly looking forward to the experience and the craic.
Give us a fun day as usual please, Colin and team, and we will have smiles on our faces all day. No queueing to get out of the pit lane please.....

And just order us a dry one please.......

[gruffalo]

Love Cadwell, best UK circuit in my opinion:-)

[Engineer1]

GreigM said:

mrmr96 said:

GreigM said:

I genuinely wonder if this "sending you home" nonsense without a refund would hold up in court? After all the stuff on the track day claim thread about the legality of the signed waivers etc, is the sound check and subsequently denying you track time at all legal without some level of refund?

At Bedford you can call them up and arrange to go and have your car noise tested for free. The idea is that you should do this in advance of making a booking.

Yes, but its not part of the contract that you do so.

But if they give you the ability to check prior to booking that you will pass and there is a question as to whether you will pass then you are a fool, in the same way if you booked a holiday and decided not to check your passport was still valid it would be your problem.

[TrackMegane]

Ive never had an issue with them. They were very helpful when i crashed into the armco at Cadwell and I've used them multiple times.

[TrackMegane]

Ive never had an issue with them. They were very helpful when i crashed into the armco at Cadwell and I've used them multiple times.

[GreigM]

Engineer1 said:

But if they give you the ability to check prior to booking that you will pass and there is a question as to whether you will pass then you are a fool, in the same way if you booked a holiday and decided not to check your passport was still valid it would be your problem.

Do they let you test the drive-by? So you are allowed on circuit to do a few laps and get up to speed (in order to properly simulate quite how hard you will be pushing during an actual track day? I don't believe you are, so you cannot reasonably test if your car will pass in advance.

The point where your analogy doesn't hold up is the indefinite nature of the test. Having your passport or not is a definite result, there is no variable or grey-area, whereas with a noise test there is massive variability in the results.

I have been at Oulton several times this year, my db readings for the first 3 were 102db, 106db, 103db. Same car, absolutely no changes to it. On the 106db day I passed simply by going up to the noise test and putting the car at a slightly different angle and making sure no-one else was queued up behind me - 105db. So IMO the "do a static test in advance" theory is a waste of time and not a guarantee of a pass, especially if your car is registering in the early 100s.

The fact is you can pass one day and fail the next, with the reason being entirely outwith the driver's control. This is what I think may be somewhat legally questionable - the variability in the test. I'm not questioning the circuit's right to prevent you going on track, but I do question that they retain all your money when they do so.