fot
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: SCCA and rear suspensions

To: Catpusher@aol.com, spirals@ESINET.NET
Subject: Re: SCCA and rear suspensions
From: R John Lye <rjl6n@uva.pcmail.virginia.edu>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 97 07:17:01 EST
On Mar 26,  7:24pm, Catpusher@aol.com wrote:
> To avoid massive mods within the narrow confines of
> the TR3 frame/body we used a rod and rocker between the TR3
> axle housing and the "CO" unit. 

That sounds like a really nice solution to a tough problem.

> The results zip.  So the Miatas keep their sequential gearboxes
> & I get the (input) shaft.

We went through a similar problem a couple years ago when the
autocross Prepared class rules (analagous to Prod car rules)
were re-written.  There was a very fast, very well prepared
Ford Escort Mexico, out of San Francisco, that had a rocker
arm rear suspension with a solid axle.  It got outlawed, too.
It's a good thing that I didn't have enough money to do anything
at the time, as I'd looked that car over pretty thoroughly in
impound at Salina.  That sounds like a very expensive change to
undo all that work.

> BTW the comp Board wrote the rule change so poorly that it
> might prohibit standard rear TR2/6 dampers. ( SR ) 97 PCS ,
> page 17,  #3 "Rockers, rocker arms, push and/or pull rods
> are prohibited"     
>    The link between the lever on the  origional rear damper (shock) 
> and the rear spring plate/ axle looks like a "push and/or pull
> rod"  to me!!!!!   

Shhhh, don't tell them....

John Lye

rjl6n@virginia.EDU
http://avery.med.virginia.edu/~rjl6n/homepage.htm

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