On or about 11:37 AM 1/8/1999 -0600, Jay Mitchell did say:
>Now, that's a stretch. The car, as manufactured, is apparently
>prone to blowing off a turbo hose, and adding a clamp or gluing
>the hose prevents this from happening. Exactly what IS an
>"enhancement" if this isn't?
Ok, we've gone into anal mode...how bout we move toward "performance
enhancement" as a buzz word...a little more descriptive of what shouldn't
>> Like retorquing bolts. There are clamps
>>on some of these hoses already.
>Technically speaking, adding a clamp to ANY hose where none was
>originally placed by the manufacturer is illegal. For example, my
>street car has a non-clamped PCV hose. If it had a habit of
>blowing off, and I clamped it to prevent that, I would be
>protestable in Stock. and rightfully so, IMHO. I'd certainly want
>a way to fix the problem, but I'd also like 20-30 more lb/ft of
>torque, 2" lower ride height, wider rims, etc. The Stock Category
>rules won't let me have those things, either.
Those other things also gain you a performance advantage. Let's get real
here, folks. I can understand where "maintenance" fixes consisting of
replacing weak stock parts with sturdier ones (neon motor mounts, 911
tensioners) aren't allowed because they become something that everyone HAS
to to do stay competitive, and that raises the cost of of racing in the
class. But, we're talking about the price of GLUE here. No parts are being
replaced. The analogy to retorquing bolts is very fitting here.
>IMHO, no such ruling is required. This is clearly illegal as the
Frankly this makes me glad you're not on any of the boards that make these
Karl, damn happy to have decided on ESP at the moment