Ed,
My interpretation of the rules is, if it didn't come with them, or were
available as an option, you can't have them in GT Class (Rule book
quote, "The following are not permitted: streamlining, belly pans, air
ducts, air vents,... etc.") Sounds like adding the vents would move you
to Modified Sports.
Tom
Ed Van Scoy wrote:
>
> Tom, (or others)
> This subject has been rolling around in my brain (not much up there to
> stop it!)..... The Corvettes from 1968 thru 1977 had vent grills (2)
> just behind the rear glass, on the rear deck. Would "updating" a later
> body style with these stock grills be considered a modification or could
> the car remain in the Production Classification?
> Ed
> C/GT #128
>
> Thomas E. Bryant wrote:
> >
> > Rich,
> > According to my memory, in the early 60's we were losing the Studebakers
> > at about 180 MPH, spinning and some went upside down. One was caught on
> > a movie camera and it was evident that the rear was lifting causing it
> > to spin. The cars were wings! The ducts were installed to relieve the
> > low pressure area behind the rear window, thus making them stable to
> > well over 200 MPH.
> >
> > It's interesting to watch this discussion and I think that it is a good
> > and helpful exercise. I have served on the SCTA Rules Committee in the
> > past. It is very difficult to write rules that are fair, safe, and
> > easily understood. Much is left up to interpretation. Even our nation's
> > laws are not really defined until tried in court. The Ten Commandments
> > were ten verses of Scriptures, but it required chapters of Scripture to
> > define their application. One of "Murphy's Laws" says, "It is impossible
> > to make anything "foolproof", because fools are to ingenious!"
> >
> > Tom
> > V4GR@aol.com wrote:
> > >
> > > I know I have seen Studebakers with large ducts running from the
> > > floor forward of the rear end to openings just behind the rear window.
>This
> > > takes air from a high pressure area under the car and dumps it into a low
> > > pressure area behind the backlight. I guess that's legal. Rich Fox
|