That is an interesting thought. Now that the SEB is willing to start with a clean sheet of paper for all the stock classifications, maybe it is time to take away some of the "antique" stock allowance
Funny, I was thinking just the opposite. Stock competitiveness typically boils down to one thing; the "haves" and "have nots". Those that have race alignment capability and those that don't. How comp
I don't have an opinion on wheel allowance or crash bolts, but I think my mission in life might be to get rid of that front sway bar allowance. I've heard the historic precedents, but that rule is no
race be opinion pure priorities, should deemed panned but the I couldn't agree more with this thought. Stock class already isn't very stock and those who are competitive nationally and win nationally
Alignment "adjustability" is just another thing you have to consider if you're trying to pick a certain car for a certain class. It's one of the advantages or disadvantages that are part of the "pack
<lurk mode off> Well, how would you propose to handle the situation of someones shocks wearing out? Make them take it back to the dealer for stock replacements? Too expensive, and in my understanding
Big can o' worms there.... What do you do when the factory shop manual specifically designates the use of crash bolts to correct camber? Rick Cone (Mega Camber) Y2K Celica GT -- Original Message --
A and of the car competitive fit, necessary you're advantages of the allowed those higher A very good point. Are there any cases where you think this to be true? Not debating, just asking as I can't
Why? Why is it bad to allow aftermarket wheel flexibility? This would really upset the apple cart. The current proposal would have to be changed and mostly on speculation. Do we want or need this? W
An A1 VW could benefit from alignment allowances - and if the Rabbit GTI goes to HS, I'd bet it would be at least a decent car for the class. Shimming the rear axle would be a Good Thing. A really go
Integra Type R - no camber adjustment is possible, you get whatever the factory gives you... Annie Gill Y2K S2K Y2K Type R (for a few more days) ______________________________________________________
Suspension adjustability (or lack thereof) IS taken into consideration when classing a new car, because we understand how important it is in making some cars handle on a Solo II course. As to a cambe
Cost, I'd imagine. Don't all cars come with at least one set of stock wheels these days? My suggestion for implementing changes like this would be to grandfather them. Say that any post-2001 model c
Integra Type R - no camber adjustment is possible, you get whatever the factory gives you... == Yes Annie, but the Type R has an excellent camber curve from the factory due to its proper suspension g
now, moved classes? And Mike replied: I'm glad you asked that question! Let's take a look at AS: BMW M3 ~1.0deg neg for '95's, ~0.6-0.7deg neg for '96+ (like my '98) Porsche 968 over 2.0deg neg Porsc
degrees still camber Well, I did say a spec, not unlimited ;-). Something around 1 to 1.5 degree for all cars would make it interesting IMHO. I'd race against any M3 with 1.5 in AS :-). Camber gages
wheels these days? A lot of folks like to have more than one set of wheels for racing. How do you figure aftermarket wheels are more expensive than the stock ones? to be changed and mostly on specul
if the it true? be Okay, my next question would then be, is the suspension geometry of the M3 and Boxster better such that they don't benefit with more camber as much as the other cars do? Again, not
But it would work even better if you allowed it 2.0deg negative camber. After all, that's one of the first things you would do if you took the car to SP. GH