[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [evolution-disc.] Update Question

Subject: Re: [evolution-disc.] Update Question
From: Mark Andy <>
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 21:16:38 -0500 (EST)

On Fri, 26 Mar 2004, Dick Rasmussen wrote:
> >If the car is updated to _be_ a 2004 model year car, I believe its legal.
> >I don't believe that a VIN plate is required.  The shock allowance would
> >cover the different valving and I would think C&C would certainly cover
> >the decal kit and probably would cover embroidery on the seats.
> I believe it is against the rules to "present" a Stock class car as being 
> say a 2002 which has been "converted" to a 2004. I believe the "assumption" 
> in Stock is that the car year is defined by its VIN and/or registration 
> and/or manufacturing date/spec label. How else? If legal it would mean that 
> update/backdate is legal in Stock and we know that it is not. In addition, 
> it is probably against the law to claim an original 2002 car is "now" a 
> "2004" because you have updated some or many parts whether or not you 
> switch VIN tags, labels, etc. Beats me what to do about separate body/frame 
> cars where both are available as replacement parts either new or from junk 
> yards and the VIN is attached/stamped to/on one or both (such as Lotus).

Well, Update/Backdate is a pieces/parts thing, not exactly what I'm 
talking about above.

I'm talking about taking the 2002 car and doing enough work that it is 
indistinuguishable from a 2004 car.  I.e. tub matches, every bend in the 
body matches, suspension bushings match, etc. etc. etc.

While I'm sure that doesn't make it a 2004 car to the DMV, I thought that 
it would make it a 2004 car in terms of autox.  Seems like the only way it 
wouldn't would be if a matching year VIN sticker is required.  

Might be.

I'd thought though that I'd heard about this being done in the past.  
Could be wrong.


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