autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Stock class rules was (Re: Sequential Stock Classes)

To: <Ghsharp@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Stock class rules was (Re: Sequential Stock Classes)
From: "JCGZ3" <jcgz3@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 13:14:30 -0700
> As to a camber spec and "equal playing field", you'd already have some
> classing issues with current cars....I seriously doubt an M3 with 2
degrees
> of negative camber up front would remain in AS.  It's competitive and
still
> a potential winner in AS now with much less than half that amount of
camber
> running against other AS cars with over 3 degrees negative 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 :-).

> As for being easy to check and enforce, who furnishes the equipment, who
> calibrates it, and what's your measurement tolerance?  Anyone here recall
> the thread on measuring the 1/2" track increase allowance??

Camber gages are not that expensive, and the nat office could have one for
checking at the NT's and Pro's.  Using a delta measure unit, calibration
isn't an issue.  .  Heck, we have scales, why is this different?.  If a car
is found to be out of spec, the looser could defend using another gauge,
like their own maybe.  In any event, it's not that much different than
measuring spring perch heights and the such that is done now.
---JCG

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