>I requested allowance to put the entire cradle and rear suspension form
>a STOCK 1988 Fiero into an early chassis. The 1988 Fiero is on the same
>lines and in the same classes as the 1984-1987's. The other competitors
>in any class would be running nothing more complex than an 1988 Fiero
> - - which they are doing anyway, right now, today!
>
>The purpose of the request was to even the playing field in SP and SM2
>for 92% of the Fiero community so they can compete heads-up with the
>other 8%, the '88 model. I thought the purpose of update/backdate in
>the first place was to do just that, to even the playing field within
>the same car/model?
>
>Please explain how my request could even come close to being construed
>as cheating?
George, *IF* the '88 cradle & rear suspension was a straight bolt-in swap, it
would be covered under update/backdate in SP. HOWEVER, and you yourself
admitted this in the last week or so, the strut tower tops need to be
relocated, which involves cutting & welding. THAT is what takes it out of the
realm of update/backdate -- the resulting combination is not *identical* to an
'88 factory configuration *unless* you replace all the rear structural
sheetmetal with complete, unmolested, '88 stampings, which are attached to the
rest of the body structure in the factory manner (ie, spot-welded).
It's like a '94-'98 Mustang guy in ESP wanting to swap in the '99-up Cobra IRS.
Sure, they're on the same line in the rule book, so it would *theoretically*
be legal, but the '99-up rear rails and rear floorpan are slightly different
(incorporating weldnuts for the IRS subframe and more clearance for the pinion
yoke on the propshaft), so unless you *also* replace the rear structural
sheetmetal on that '94-'98 car with the changed '99-up parts, you have not
updated to a factory-available configuration.
On the other hand, I could take a lightweight '79 Mustang shell and swap in the
complete powertrain and suspension bits from a '93 Cobra R -- they're on the
same line in the rulebook, the hard points on the body are in the same spots on
both shells, and every thing (including the front K-member and the double-hump
transmission mount bracket) *bolts* on without drilling, cutting, or welding.
That is an SP-legal update.
There's this little tidbit in the rulebook that says you cannot perform an
illegal modification in the course of performing or to accommodate a legal
modification. I don't know about the rules in the other multi-marque
sanctioning bodies you've mentioned, but I wouldn't think they'd be terribly
keen on that concept, either. Marque clubs are a bit of a different animal --
they only have one type of car to class, so they *can* have countless
variations on the same basic theme (it wouldn't surprise me to learn that NCCC
has a class for C5 Corvettes with aftermarket lug nuts and valve stem caps. I
know they have one for C5 Corvettes whose owners have replaced the factory
Goodyear run-flats with alternate street tires, to name but one example of
fine-hair splitting that can fly in a marque club but can't in a broader club
like SCCA or NASA).
Jim Crider
not speaking for the SPAC, my opinion here is my own
autojim@despammed.com
___________________________________________________________
This email message is intended only for the addressee(s) and contains
information that may be confidential and/or copyright. If you are not the
intended recipient please notify the sender by reply email and immediately
delete this email. Use, disclosure or reproduction of this email by anyone
other than the intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited. No representation
is made that this email or any attachments are free of viruses. Virus scanning
is recommended and is the responsibility of the recipient. Thank you. Metaldyne
LLC
|