> conclusion: If a Solo2 course is not save to run a shifter kart
> on, it is not
> safe for cars either. Certainly a kart driver, or anyone in an
> open vehicle
> for that matter, is more at risk when it comes to contact with a solid
> object. But isn't the emphasis supposed to be on "no unreasonable
> danger of contact with any object by any vehicle"?
Yes, the course should be designed so that vehicles are not likely to
contact solid objects. However in the cases where it does happen, the
karter is much more at risk than even the driver of an open car.
> I am also curious why the allowance was made for FJr. karts if the
> layout of the course could not made acceptable for F125. Shifter karts
> are faster, but primarily it is in acceleration/straight areas. Cornering
> speeds are closer to being equal for the two classes than many people
If a driver looses it going into a corner, might the shifter car be going
significantly faster than the Jr?
|