So, what is the thinking behind this rule change proposed by CSCC? IMO, 1504 is fundamentally problematic, as it does not assign proportional responsibility to the driver with the best view of the situation (overtaking driver).

But - to the specific change proposed this year, what is the thinking? As a car being overtaken, it's hard to imagine a more difficult situation to ascertain:

"A car is entitled to racing room (which is defined as one car width plus one foot of paved racing surface excluding curbing) if the overtaking car has their front bumper/wing at least up to the rear wheel of the car being passed."

Think about that for a moment - you're about to turn-in, did your mirror scan, and just at the instant before turn-in, the overtaking car dive-bombs with the front of his car at (typically) your inside **rear** wheel. So now you're responsible for leaving the dive-bomber some room, but don't see them in the blind-spot over your shoulder at turn-in. Come on.

There is plenty of prior-art and common sense on what the passing rule should be. The overtaking car always has the better vantage point, and therefore should shoulder more responsibility in completing a safe pass. The overTAKEN driver has a limited view, both through his mirrors and her eye-port. That is why it makes most sense to require that the passing car present the nose of their car to the A-pillar or FRONT wheel of the car being passed, BEFORE the passed car initiates their turn-in. If that happens, then both cars need to make room for each other. By the way, getting out the tape-measure mid-corner and coming up with a foot of daylight, exclusive of curbing is unenforceable. Both drivers need to leave enough room to stay on the racetrack (curbs are part of the racetrack) without contact.

My 2-cents.

Cheers,
-Bruce
#56