stretching the rules? hmm it was explained to me by a group of old scca
racers as creative interpertation of the rules. but that was back in the
days of dipping your coveralls in borax solution and wearing only lap belts
too (according to them).
btw , i have a old scca roll bar fron a lotus cortina in my posession that
was designed as a bolt in. it has 4 scca tech stickers on it from around
1965 -1966. if you saw this thing you would wonder if it would ever
protect anything at all! a bit embarassing but it came from my father's
car! he was throwing it out after storing it indoors all of these years and
i just could not see it going in the trash, so i rescued it.
now..........where to store it?....c. :)
----- Original Message -----
From: Hugh Barber <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: <email@example.com>; <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Saturday, August 05, 2000 5:03 PM
Subject: Re: GT6 suspension mods
> Group 44 did a lot of stuff to their cars that "stretched" the rules.
> Hugh Barber
> Gt6steve@aol.com wrote:
> > Greetings Amici,
> > I hope someone can help...While talking to Luke Stockdale today about
> > GT6's the question came up as to the validity of 240Z hubs in the rear
> > suspension. Because of the restrictiveness of some clubs to
> > Luke asked if I had any documentation to support that Group 44 actually
> > this mod and was it actually legal? We pondered the same question for
> > 510 diff in GT6's. We both have tons of hearsay to support the validity
> > as our sport becomes ever more "period authentic" can anyone help us
> > documentation? I've been complacent with the anecdotal evidence but
> > poorly prepared for a challenge. Is there any evidence out there?
> > Steve