autox
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Katie Kelly protest

To: "'Jeff Blankenship'" <jblanken@itds.com>, autox@autox.team.net
Subject: RE: Katie Kelly protest
From: Kevin McCormick <ktm@unify.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 13:41:58 -0700
I've cut some of Jeff's wording out here, and am responding to a few of the
specifics I left out in my response...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Blankenship [mailto:jblanken@itds.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 20, 1999 1:01 PM
> To: autox@autox.team.net
> Subject: Re: Katie Kelly protest
> 
> Kevin McCormick writes:
> 
> > Onwards to my side of the story...  (lynching line forms to 
> the right,
> > mugging to the left.)
> 
> (Joining the lynch mob in the heat of the moment)
> 
> > Background - As myself and others have seen on the three 
> groove rear Miata
> > Koni's, the middle groove for the Bilstein equiped cars is 
> low in many cases
> > (I have two sets of rears that measure over 1/8th too low 
> when NEW.)  I
> > won't implicate the others who have also seen this - might 
> as well only get
> > _one_ person blacklisted... 
> 
> I thought the rulebook already states that some dimensional 
> variance is 
> allowed for aftermarket shocks/struts, which may be "generic" 
> to several 
> applications.  Without the book handy, I have to ask, is the 
> allowance for 
> travel only, excluding ride height?  I'd have to say a 
> reasonable person 
> would EXPECT some difference in ride height when you are 
> talking gas-charged
> struts, or changing between gas and hydraulic.  I remember 
> that adjustable
> spring perches have to be welded at the stock height, but 
> even with fixed 
> spring perches, some reasonable variance can be expected.  
> What's needed is a
> tolerance spec, otherwise its a judgement call what's okay.  
> Basing the 
> tolerance on actual production examples, that is, large 
> enough to include
> 90 - 100% of the replacements on the market as legal, would 
> make sense.
> If it's really important to have a tolerance, then it has to 
> meet the spirit 
> of the rule, which is that wear items can be replaced with 
> whatever the
> aftermarket offers as a "stock" replacement part.

The rule (Appendix G) says that the spring perch height can be 'no lower
than' the factory piece.  That is pretty clear - it can be any amount
higher, but no lower.  And, adjustable perchs do not need to be welded
anymore, but spacers used to achive a legal height need to be permanently
affixed to the shock body.  I use a machined spacer that extends higher than
the Koni middle grove.

Remember, that the perch height does not affect a 1 to 1 relationship to
ride height - I'm sure someone here on the net can give the wheel rate for a
miata (1.5:1 or so?).


> <snip>
> > I am happy with the
> > clarification that they provided - they 'got' my reasoning 
> (I think).  Oh,
> > yeah, the perches were .050 low - in the noise of the 
> measurement technique
> > used.
> 
> So your aim is to clarify that some range of variance in ride 
> height caused
> by aftermarket struts/shocks is allowable if the strut manufacturer's 
> installation instructions are followed, but you chose a car 
> that didn't have
> a non-stock ride height as the object of the protest?

Not quite - the ride hight was not the part in question, but the (potential)
means of achieving that.  Note that I did protest under the belief that Ms.
Kelly's perch height was low.  To do so otherwise would indeed have been
rude.
  
> 
> I think that was the first mistake.  You might have succeeded 
> in getting a 
> useful clarification if you'd installed one of your own sets 
> of rears which
> you measured as >1/8" too low, and got someone to protest 
> YOU.  Then you'd
> have a case where there IS a "legal" change of ride height, 
> you would have
> had your defense prepared in advance, and you would have put 
> nobody else at
> risk.

See above.  

> 
> This brings me to the second mistake, which was to lodge this
> "clarification" protest against someone who had no idea it 
> was coming.  It
> is despicable to put anyone who you know has a legal car through the
>  psychological torment of a protest unless they are a willing 
> confederate.

Again, please see above - I did believe (based on my own and other's
measurments) that the middle groove was incorrect.  And for some Koni's
(mine and others) it is.  For Ms. Kelly's, it is ok (compared to the ones
used for comparison.)  There is a reason that factory Bilsteins are quite
easy to find in Topeka :-)  It had been brought up on this forum and locally
so I was looking to get my 'question' answered.    

> 
> <snip>
> > To close with, I know that many are disappointed in my 
> actions - and I
> > understand that.  What disappoints me are those that I 
> considered friends
> > who did not ask for my side and made assumptions.  
> 
> I agree 100%.  Unfortunately, your explanation has given me 
> enough rope to 
> make a noose.  I wonder if the loss of your protest fee is 
> any consolation 
> to Katie.  I hope that the adage "what does not kill you 
> makes you stronger"
> applies to Katie, and she gets a bit of personal growth out of the 
> experience, and I guess the same applies to Kevin.  Let me be clear, 
> holding a grudge serves no purpose, and the pain was for 
> nothing if the 
> larger question is not answered.


Points taken Jeff, and understood - don't take offense if I try to get my
last words in before the noose is lowered - perhaps the hangers can work
with the lynchers?

> 
> Wow, I didn't realize how high this horse is, I'd better get 
> down now before
> I hurt myself.

Gravity - it's no fun, but it's the law.

Kevin McCormick

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>