ST update/backdate

Richard Casto · **Posted:** Wed Aug 27, 2003 5:34 pm

So it looks like UD/BD is going away for ST (STS and STX only?). Thoughts? Opinions?

Scott Johnson · **Posted:** Thu Aug 28, 2003 12:07 pm

In all, I think it's a good idea to eliminate the update-backdate. It seems to benefit one model car almost exclusively, it just happens to be a very affordable Honda that benefits the most.

Street Prepared is the place to start doing engine swaps, they aren't that simple for the average competitor, so they shouldn't be in a class that emphasizes bolt on performance.

Here's a thought for you... A Civic driver can do an engine swap (seems like a big deal), but a Neon owner can't legally use the larger throttle body that came in the same year car with teh same engine, but the engine happened to be an automatic. If they want to use that throttle body, they have to use the automatic that comes with it...

I say that allowing update-backdate of non-engine parts would be a better rule, that means you can put the rear disk brakes of a higher level model on your car, etc. Seems like a good compromise.

In the end, the rule was there with good intentions, but people saw the loophole and have exploited it. They took it beyond the "spirit" of the rules (and I am a firm believer in the "spirit.")

Scott

Richard Casto · **Posted:** Thu Aug 28, 2003 12:50 pm

Well the problem is currently with the late 80's early 90's Civic, but I guess people are afraid other ud/bd combos could be built as well.

I am curious why they just didn't put the two cars (base civic and Si from those years) on two different lines in the SP list? If I understand correctly they were on two different lines at one point (which would have prevented ud/bd between the two) but then there was a change so that there were on the same line and that created this new combo that rules STS. Why not fix that on a case by case basis (like car classifications)?

My current Civic (1998 LX) is on a different line as the 1999-2000 Civic Si. So with current ud/bd rules for STS, I can't do an Si engine swap into my car even though the bodies are basically the same. I would love to be able to move from 107 HP to 160 HP and keep the lighter body (and more headroom) in my sedan than the EX/Si style (with headroom eating sunroof)

Which classes allow ud/bd? Can you do it in stock class?

Chuck Frank · **Posted:** Thu Aug 28, 2003 8:07 pm

No UD/BD allowed in stock unless you are doing a full model conversion as was available from the factory on that year's vehicle. The conversion must be complete, no picking and choosing of components unless it was an available stand alone option on that model.

Richard Casto · **Posted:** Fri Aug 29, 2003 9:30 am

So do we know if the new ST ud/bd rules are much like "stock class" or are they even more restrictive?

Aaron Buckley · **Posted:** Fri Aug 29, 2003 9:46 am

I have mixed feelings. Sure the Civic Hybrids are fast, but I don't believe that a Civic Si that may be 50-100 lbs heavier are going to be that much slower. STS was an offshoot of SP because it was easy to lay out the rules that way, but it obviously has outgrown that rule set. It appears to me that the SCCA is doing a trial by fire to make this function, and it appears they're doing a pretty good job of it. - AB

David Teague · **Posted:** Fri Aug 29, 2003 10:27 am

Personally I think it is silly to change to rule to exclude one car. They always talk about making rules that are more inclusive and this rule is just being made out of the fear of a car that has been built... but the guy who won nationals last year in sts... like the car is the big differnce.

Scott Johnson · **Posted:** Fri Aug 29, 2003 10:37 am

Richard Casto wrote:

So do we know if the new ST ud/bd rules are much like "stock class" or are they even more restrictive?

Hmm, not sure what happened to my last reply...

ST and SP rules are an extension of stock rules, ANYTHING legal in stock class is legal in ST class (except OEM non-viscous LSD's). So, ther eis no way that ST will ever be more restrictive.

Scott

Richard Casto · **Posted:** Fri Aug 29, 2003 10:40 am

scottjohnson wrote:

Richard Casto wrote:

So do we know if the new ST ud/bd rules are much like "stock class" or are they even more restrictive?

Hmm, not sure what happened to my last reply...

ST and SP rules are an extension of stock rules, ANYTHING legal in stock class is legal in ST class (except OEM non-viscous LSD's). So, ther eis no way that ST will ever be more restrictive.

Scott

I will admit I am not a rules expert, but if they write the rules to say something like....

1. Everything from stock is allowable
2. No ud/bd

How would that work? I need to dig and find the exact fasttrack wording on the ud/bd.

Should I move this topic into the "Knowing The Rules" since this is more Rule based discussion?

Scott Johnson · **Posted:** Fri Aug 29, 2003 11:50 am

Ther is NO (repeate NO) update-backdate allowed in stock classes. ud/bd means between model years, that is expressly prohibited in stock class.

In stock class you can convert trim levels of cars made in the SAME year. Many people have gone through the trouble of converting non-sport Miatas into sport models.

Another example... The Lexus IS300 has an availalbe limited slip differential. The car can be ordered with it. That LSD is a single option, (not tied to anything else), so I can order the factory unit for my IS300 and be good to go.

*If* Lexus bundled the the LSD with 20" wheels, I would HAVE to run the 20" wheels.

In street prepared, ud/bd would mean I could run the LSD with any wheels, not just the blinging ones.

Scott

Richard Casto · **Posted:** Fri Aug 29, 2003 5:06 pm

FYI...

Moved this Topic into the "Knowing the Rules" forum.

Rob Keehner · **Posted:** Fri Sep 12, 2003 12:36 am

Well as far as STS goes right now, it's a giant pissing contest between civic owners and everybody else. SCCA needs to make and publish a decision soon. I would like to see the move made too ud/bd within a model year. I.E. pick and choose options at your pleasure. This would eliminate the 'FrankenCivics', but Civics in general will still be very fast.

MikeWhitney · **Joined:** Wed Aug 20, 2003 9:15 pm **Posts:** 4724

Rob Keehner wrote:

Well as far as STS goes right now, it's a giant pissing contest between civic owners and everybody else. SCCA needs to make and publish a decision soon. I would like to see the move made too ud/bd within a model year. I.E. pick and choose options at your pleasure. This would eliminate the 'FrankenCivics', but Civics in general will still be very fast.

That would not eliminate the frankencivics. Those guys are just putting an Si engine in a std shell -- and the Si and std were available in 88 and in 89 at the same time.

Personally I agree that UD/BD should never have been in STS. Not fitting with the bolt-on intent of the class.

Richard Casto · **Posted:** Fri Sep 12, 2003 2:02 pm

So I wonder now if STS will eventually be broken up into multiple classes much like Stock, SP, etc. is today? Like Mike says the non-frankencivic Si is still very competitive and may continue to be the STS "car to have" once the frankencivic goes away.

I really don't want to keep something like the Frankencivic around. Since I am so tall (6'5"), the only thing that UD/BD would do for me would allow me to pick a car (shell) that I can fit into pretty well (headroom) and then use UD/BD to build something that is not super slow.

Even the existing UD/BD rules (due to the cars being on difference lines in the SP listings) would NOT allow what I really wanted to do which is... Use a Civic LX/DX like what I have now that does not have a sunroof (i.e. it has headroom) and then put in an 1999-2000 Si engine into it. Basically build an Si with more headroom and four doors.

Tom Hoppe · **Joined:** Wed Aug 20, 2003 10:16 am **Posts:** 387

The decision to eliminate ud/bd has not been fully made yet. The SEB has made a "suggestion" to the BOD, but the BOD has not made a final ruling for it.

The fact that a non-franken civic won STS this year may help keep it there. Also, the weight difference in real life isn't that much. Motinishi's civic weighed a reported 40lbs more them Mccormick's franken car on the SCCA scales. That aint that much.......

-Tom

THSCC Forums

ST update/backdate

Who is online