What is the majority opinion: is the drilling as a fundimental act the problem
or the "weight removal" of holes and the like. Here is my perspective:
If I could drill some sort of beveled hole in which I could securely fasten my
interior trim (cap, panel, whatever) back on in it's original spot, would anyone
consider that illegal? No illegal holes were drilled to facilitate
installation, just to get to the adjustment.
My RX-7 has two trim pieces that snap off to allow full access to the top of the
rear shocks. I submit that you could 'engineer' the same thing on any car.
Thoughts?
AB
"Kevin Stevens" <kevin_stevens@hotmail.com> on 08/18/2000 01:07:00 PM
Please respond to "Kevin Stevens" <kevin_stevens@hotmail.com>
To: ottocrosser@hotmail.com, autox@autox.team.net
cc: (bcc: Andrew Bettencourt/FIELD SALES/Kingston)
Subject: Why shock access is an issue.
Ok...
How about not wanting to cut holes in a new car that you intend to sell (or
have leased)?
More importantly, take the case of Driver A who is shopping for shocks. The
most wonderfullest shocks for the car cost only $10, but the adjustment
can't be reached with the shocks on the car. Since there's no provision for
cutting holes in the car in the rulebook, Driver A buys the next most
wonderful shocks, which don't work quite as well and cost $5000, but have
the adjustment knob where it can be reached.
Driver B comes along, says "to hell with this", buys the $10 shocks, and
cuts a "speaker hole" in the car to access them.
Now either Driver A is out $5000 and needs to cut up his car, or Driver B
has to buy a new panel and get a new mortgage.
**The preparation choices we make depend on the rulings of the SEB.**
THAT's why these discussions are important and relevant.
KeS
My position on this particular matter remains the same - just because you
can cut a hole for speakers shouldn't imply that hole can be used for other
purposes i.e. shock adjustment access port.
>From: "Otto Crosser" <ottocrosser@hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: "Otto Crosser" <ottocrosser@hotmail.com>
>To: autox@autox.team.net
>Subject: Re: (insert location) Shock Access for (insert car)
>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 09:44:09 EDT
>
>So can somebody please explain in great detail why these holes are such a
>performance advantage? Is it the 2 oz. of weight savings? The structural
>weakening of the car? I'm sick of hearing about all these protests over
>microscopic technicalities. Hasn't anyone heard of sportsmanship these
>days?
>
> Otto
>
>
> >From: Scott Meyers <solo2@uswest.net>
> >Reply-To: Scott Meyers <solo2@uswest.net>
> >To: Mark Sirota <msirota@isc.upenn.edu>
> >CC: Smokerbros@aol.com, autox@autox.team.net
> >Subject: Re: Rear Shock Access for Lotii
> >Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 17:39:19 -0700
> >
> >Mark Sirota wrote:
> >
> > > Smokerbros@aol.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > Can you spell "inconsistent?"
> > >
> > > No, it's not. It's not the same thing at all. The ASP issue was that
> > > the shocks poked the hole itself, due to being placed close to the
> > > fiberglass, and lots of Lotus flex. It's standard wear and tear, much
> > > unlike the holes drilled in interior panels.
> >
> >So, if MH had drilled some holes for access *before* the shocks poked the
> >holes it would be OK?
> >
> >Say, I think I saw him do just that :-)
> >
> >Scott Meyers
> >
> >
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________
|