richj50@bit-net.com wrote:
>
> I noticed in the new Sports Car that their is a suggestion that beginning
> in Y2K, SP turbo cars may no longer be able to modify their exhausts
> upstream of the last cat, as is now permissible under the rules as an
> "ostensibly" legal modification.
Well from what I've gathered, this was proposed because it will be
getting harder and harder to police turbo SP cars due to electronically
controlled everything. Boost limit, fuel cut and all that all being
controlled from the ECU.
> (1) "Ostensibly" legal? What is that supposed to mean? That turbo SP
> drivers are acting in bad faith under the rules by following the rules to
> the letter, just because they get more benefit than other
> normally-aspirated SP drivers? Seems like an undeserved slap in the face
> to turbo drivers to me.
I don't know where that "Ostensibly" came from. It is currently a legal
mod that turbo cars are capable of reaping greater benefits from than
N/A cars. However, I do see where the idea came from. As the ECU of an
SP car becomes harder and harder to police wrt boost limiting and
control, it creates the concern of overboosted SP cars that walk away
from the rest of the class and are still 'Ostensibly' legal. I think the
reasoning behind proposing Stock legal exhaust in SP is that regardless
of the tweaks and gains one might find in the ECU, the required stock
exhaust will mean that only minimal gains will be had from engine
goodies. I don't know if I agree with it or not, but it does seem to
create a safety blanket of sorts, ensuring that a turbo SP car can't
suddenly find class-killing power overnight.
> (2) One of the best ways to gain a noticeable power increase with a turbo
> car in SP is to remove the cat, which is legal in SP. My question:
> Why should removing the cat be legal in SP for any car, turbo or normally
> aspirated? This rule has always bothered me because street-prepared cars
> are "ostensibly" street cars, and the SCCA rules encourage a modification
> that is against federal law and that also needlessly hurts the
> environment.
First off, there is a conception today that "Street Prepared"
necessarily means "Street Car" and hence legality. This is not so. The
rules state that emissions devices may be modified or removed, and
furthermore in the Street Prepared preamble it states:
"While the rules of the Street Prepared Category have remained
essentially the same, the laws governing various aspects of
street-driven vehicles have changed over time. The original concept of
this as category as made up of predominantly street-driven vehicles has
been rendered inappropriate. The SCCA does not encourage or condone the
breaking of laws governing pollution control systems or the alteration
of street-driven vehicles contrary to state and federal laws regarding
their use. It continues to be the responsibility of the individual to
comply with state and federal laws."
Well there it is, in black and white. I made a request a while ago top
rename the Street Prepared category to something perhaps a little more
appropriate. My suggestion was to rename it to "Improved". It still gets
the point across, but the word "street" no longer applies, in name or in
function. Requiring 75% of the SP cars out there to radically alter
their setup by mandating cats for all SP cars is excessive. Does anyone
else here feel like writing a letter to the SEB? I'll send mine again if
there is more support.
-Josh2
--
Joshua Hadler '74 914 2.0 CSP/Bi - Hooligan Racing #29 - CONIVOR
'87 Quantum Syncro - aka stealth quattro
jhadler@rmi.net
http://rainbow.rmi.net/~jhadler/
|