Region only mod allowance: CDV delete

Jason Mauldin · **Posted:** Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:25 pm

jimpastorius wrote:

Jason Mauldin wrote:

Keith Vail wrote:

Everyone was telling me that I better get new springs because the ones I have, have probably sagged a little and thus given me an protestable car.

I hope none of your suspension bushings have lost any of the rubber material over time. Otherwise you would be changing the rubber to metal ratio.

You guys are both off base. Sagging springs are not protestable, especially if they are stock. Secondly, if they are the stock bushing and have worn you are okay.

Either way, if you have worn bushings and sagging springs you would want to replace those or no one will notice you...you will be at the bottom of the pack and no one pays any mind to those drivers

I was being sarcastic at how absurd it is, if someone expects you to replace old and sagging springs.

DickRasmussen · **Posted:** Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:29 pm

Dan,

A BMW is still a better performance sedan than just about anything else out there. Would your version run in the same class as Mike Whitney? If so, he is your official benchmark and he still has the valve.

If you want a "perfect" autocross car put a hitch on the BMW and buy a lightweight Mod car. :lol:

Of course there are still rules in those classes. Is there anything in life without rules?

Dick (who used to run Stock with his daily driver car when Stock cars were a whole lot "worse" than they are now)

Keith Vail · **Posted:** Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:31 pm

jimpastorius wrote:

Jason Mauldin wrote:

Keith Vail wrote:

Everyone was telling me that I better get new springs because the ones I have, have probably sagged a little and thus given me an protestable car.

I hope none of your suspension bushings have lost any of the rubber material over time. Otherwise you would be changing the rubber to metal ratio.

You guys are both off base. Sagging springs are not protestable, especially if they are stock. Secondly, if they are the stock bushing and have worn you are okay.

Either way, if you have worn bushings and sagging springs you would want to replace those or no one will notice you...you will be at the bottom of the pack and no one pays any mind to those drivers

Jim I was just referring to catching hell on the SCCA forums by everyone from Andy Hollis and several other big names. So I took it more seriously because it was people who I felt know what they are talking about.

Ryan Holton · **Posted:** Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:31 pm

I think some people get on their internet soapbox and like to create fear regarding rules. I agree with Jim, sagging springs would be a "stretch"

jimpastorius · **Posted:** Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:32 pm

Keith Vail wrote:

jimpastorius wrote:

Jason Mauldin wrote:

Keith Vail wrote:

Everyone was telling me that I better get new springs because the ones I have, have probably sagged a little and thus given me an protestable car.

I hope none of your suspension bushings have lost any of the rubber material over time. Otherwise you would be changing the rubber to metal ratio.

You guys are both off base. Sagging springs are not protestable, especially if they are stock. Secondly, if they are the stock bushing and have worn you are okay.

Either way, if you have worn bushings and sagging springs you would want to replace those or no one will notice you...you will be at the bottom of the pack and no one pays any mind to those drivers

Jim I was just referring to catching hell on the SCCA forums by everyone from Andy Hollis and several other big names. So I took it more seriously because it was people who I felt know what they are talking about.

Hmmm...would I trust Hollis with his reputation...nope :-)

DickRasmussen · **Posted:** Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:34 pm

Jason, et all:

Just remember that "old and sagging springs" are one thing but how do they differ from "purposely shortened" stock springs? Once you get outside of some sort of reasonable tolerance, "lower than Stock" is a performance advantage in some cases and cannot be allowed.

PJ Aspesi · **Posted:** Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:37 pm

OH SNAP!

page eleventy!!!!!!!1111

-i'll say it.....DAN none of this would have happened if you just kept your .:R32! :shock:

Brian Herring · **Posted:** Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:38 pm

PJ Aspesi wrote:

OH SNAP!

page eleventy!!!!!!!1111

-i'll say it.....DAN none of this would have happened if you just kept your .:R32! :shock:

Amen!

- dow

Jason Mauldin · **Posted:** Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:47 pm

PJ Aspesi wrote:

OH SNAP!

page eleventy!!!!!!!1111

-i'll say it.....DAN none of this would have happened if you just kept your .:R32! :shock:

You can't look at it like that. How much fun would we have missed out on if Ryan had just kept the reliable DSM?

Brian Herring · **Posted:** Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:53 pm

Diane Hall wrote:

Why do people think that it's OK not to run by the rules if you ask people about it first? *sigh* Either play by the rules, or keep it to yourself and HOPE you don't get caught.

Did you ask your 3rd grade teacher if it was OK to cheat on the times tables test as long as it was OK with the rest of the class? Somehow I doubt it.

I'm amazed people continue to ask these types of questions. I'd think the "THSCC runs SCCA rules. period." statement is pretty clear.

(happy vincent?

)

Diane

Eh.... I see it (on a case by case basis) as not being clear on what is and is not allowable. (locally or jsut rules interpretation -- read more before hitting reply). From the stories and facts I have already seen in this club, I would say his request is benign. Furthermore, there is always that myth of 'if you competitors think it is OK, then it is fine locally'"

You bring it up here to the whole club, and you WILL get shafted.

Now, if you just show up in STU.... I will leave the rest of that thought to you, Dan.

- dow

Kevin Allen · **Joined:** Thu Aug 28, 2003 6:42 pm **Posts:** 3479

Dan, there are some people who will talk down to you and try to make you feel like a loser for even the smallest things that aren't strictly by the rulebook. But when I tried to get a certain "D Stock" Type AARRRR with a JDM front end protested (as a joke, btw) at Danville, I couldn't find a single person who actually cared enough about the rules to do so. :roll:

(my car wasn't completely, technically, by-the-book legal either, so I wasn't about to do it myself! :lol:

)

In the future, remember not to ask everybody. :wink:

DanDurusky · **Joined:** Sun Apr 10, 2005 7:31 pm **Posts:** 686

i'm learning, i'm learning...

:oops:

Brian Herring · **Posted:** Tue Dec 06, 2005 4:09 pm

Kevin Allen wrote:

... In the future, remember not to ask everybody. :wink:

Words to live by, unless you like 15 page threads....

- dow

DanDurusky · **Joined:** Sun Apr 10, 2005 7:31 pm **Posts:** 686

word on the street is that this mod is allowd in SP due to update/backdate because '95s didnt have them.

does this make sense?

Aaron Buckley · **Posted:** Tue Dec 06, 2005 4:59 pm

DanDurusky wrote:

word on the street is that this mod is allowd in SP due to update/backdate because '95s didnt have them.

does this make sense?

It would make sense, as long at the it says,'e36 M3 All' listed on one line. - AB

THSCC Forums

Region only mod allowance: CDV delete

Who is online