Matt Murray wrote:
> So if we tear down Scotty's "OEM" shocks (sorry Scotty, but
> you'll be the target for this post), and they are found to be the
> Quad adjustables with the Extra-Groovy -. Huch & CHuck oil (is
> that stuff smokable?) Scotty is tossed. He loses the extra bucks
> he spent for the Extra-Groovy . shock. If it is OEM, then all the
> protestor has to pay for (bond fee) is the cost of an OEM shock.
> Almost takes care of itself. If one knows the possibliltiy of a
> shock being hacked, staying with OEM might be workable.
Sorry Matt, but that isn't exactly the case. If Scotty's shocks are legal
OEM shocks, who pays for the analysis of the oil to decide if its the H&C
Extra-Groovy stuff or the OEM oil? And the tests won't be cheap or quick.
You would also have to tear apart an OE shock for a sample of OE oil and to
compare the internal components to. And what if Scotty sends a sample of
his oil off to another lab and gets back other results for his appeal?
Which lab do you use?
And anyone who has done shock revalving knows that there are all kinds of
little things in there to play with that would be almost impossible to
detect. Ever tried to check the spring rate of a wave spring? As a Protest
Committee member I would not want to have to deal with a shock teardown. It
would make a motor or transmission teardown look like a day at the beach.
Steve Hoelscher
#27 DSP
/// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or try
/// http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
/// Partial archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|