autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Fiero upgrade, and autocross?

To: <autox@autox.team.net>
Subject: Re: Fiero upgrade, and autocross?
From: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchelltx@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 11:27:49 -0500
Stand0nIt@aol.com wrote:

> Mr. Andy Wrote...
>  NO. Hell no.
<snip>

No, that would be me, not Mark.

>However the only valid part of this particular statement is that
the STAC recommended the change.

So, you're saying that competitors did NOT whine about it? You
must not have been reading the Street Touring mailing list,
then...

>That having been said, the factors that went into the removal of
UD/BD from ST >centered around Street Touring's placement between
Stock and Street Prepared and >the interest in keeping engine
swaps out of ST.

That "interest" was apparently not present during the drafting of
the original STS rules. What could be the motivation for such an
interest to appear after the fact, if not competitor feedback?

>It is my understanding (an understanding mind you should not be
confused with a
>fact backed opinion) that the original vision of ST UD/BD was to
allow for
>swapping smaller components such as brakes.

Well, all anyone has to defend a position re: "intent" or
"vision" is what actually got put into the rules, and the rules
as written clearly allowed engine swaps. That is most definitely
_not_ a matter of conjecture: it's there in black and white.

>How the eventual extreme use of this allowance was over looked

I don't think anything was overlooked. On the contrary, I believe
the writers of the original STS rules knew perfectly well what
they were doing when they adopted the SP allowance for
update/backdate verbatim.

I believe what actually happened is that lots of new STS
competitors simply failed to examine and understand the rules
governing their class. Once it became aparent to them what was
very clearly allowed (and had already been allowed for several
years), they became righteously indignant and raised a big stink.

> -- Even within UD/BD you could not do final drive without doing
the entire drive >train per my limited understanding of such
things.

Uhh, no. "The updating and/or backdating of engines,
transmissions, OR transaxles (emphasis mine) must be done as a
unit...." This clearly does not require changing the entire
driveline as a unit. Furthermore, in a car with a separate
differential, the "as a unit" restriction does not apply. Under
U/B, you can exchange differential parts within the original
casing, consistent with the other U/B restrictions.

>As for junkyard motor swaps as long as your engine code is
correct you are
>welcome to do that now.

"Engine code" by itself may or may not be sufficient to establish
legality. That would depend on the manufacturer's part numbering
scheme.

If the replacement engine is identical to the original or is a
correct replacement unit per the manufacturer's published
specifications (e.g., parts fiche or CD), it's not really a
"swap," it's just a replacement part. That is legal in Stock.

>Bolt on Chassis bracing such as strut braces and stress bars is
allowed with the
>current rule set.

Within some _very_ stringent restrictions. If a part meets the
rulebook definition of a "strut bar," then it's legal. A part
that attaches at the firewall as well as at the strut towers, for
example, is clearly illegal.

Jay






<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>