???? Did you read the proposal before replying? The current rules already
require all stock based class cars to have available the FSM in case of
protest. All this rule does is make them available for the competition to
check out in impound BEFORE filing a protest so they can decide IF their
protest has merit and if it will be settled by specs available in the FSM or
not, I don't see how that would exclude cars >any particular age or put any
great burden on the competitors? IMHO without any references available,
impound might as well take place with the cars all closed up, or not at all,
I sure don't know what I'm looking at in a different make car, so I don't
even bother looking.
There are a weath of stock class cars competing presently that are 5-20 yrs
old, I can only assume the owners have the required documentation.
In the previous FSM discussions I haven't read anyone complaining about the
availability of FSMs for older cars, only for the most recent ones.
Non mass produced cars do not fall into a class where a FSM is now required,
therefore would not be affected.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Salem" <eric@mail.brown911.com>
To: "'Chuck'" <golden1@britsys.net>; "'autox '" <autox@autox.team.net>
Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2004 4:59 PM
Subject: RE: A new spoon in the FSM pot
> <<
> I like to propose a new rule to be implemented as soon as possible:
> [proposal] For those classes where possessing the FSM is required, it
> must be presented with the car and available for all competitors to
> reference in impound. [end]
>
> This is a requirement that makes sense under the current rules. It give
> competitors a chance to see what specs are available and what the FSM
> shows any suspect part(s) should look like on a car they are not
> intimately familiar with. I can't recognize an suspicious part or
> assembly just by looking at it on a car I'm unfamiliar with. Someone
> could feasibly replace a strut suspension or some factory Mickey Mouse
> one with a fully independent system, and make it look factory. I
> couldn't tell the difference unless there was another identical MMY car
> available to check. IIRC some cars came from the factory with adjustable
> coilovers. I wouldn't know if a set on a stock class car was legal or
> not, or within the factory allowed range of adjustment. I have
> personally witnessed a new car presented in grid at a national tour in
> stock class with a complete aftermarket suspension under it. If it
> wasn't that there was another competitor in grid running the same car
> that recognized the discrepency and called him on it, he probably would
> not have been protested by anyone else in the class who was running a
> different make car.
> >>
>
> Why not just make a rule that any car more than five years old and isn't
> a MASS produced car can't autoX. As that, in effect, is what the above
> proposal would do. Heck -- why not solve half the problem by making
> stock classes for cars no more than five model-years old.
|