2005 Rules- Suspensions

[gr42ai]

I am putting this up because I don’t want it to get buried.

 

It was my understanding that this series is a showcase for the AFTERMARKET. So why not allow any suspension in both AI/AIX that is available to everyone, meaning its a mass produced part and is in a catalog, this also applies to home built copies since some people insist they can build it cheaper themselves. This will prevent the guy/gal that works at Roush from building a unibody Trans-Am car with the spare parts sitting around the shop

[mwilson7]

I guess I'm kind of confused. How is Roush building a uni-body trans-am car any different from someone building one in their garage if they are both hand built? I was just over at the Roush garage today looking at their collection of old Trans-Am Mustangs, Cougars and XR4TI's and can say that almost everything on those cars can be bought from a Coleman catalog.

[swhiteh3]

And you didn't invite me?

 

Mark is right, of course. And also, how much exactly can you change the part when you're building your own. Does it need to be an exact copy? Do we all need to run spec cages as well?

 

I think the aftermarket should GUIDE the rules for AI/X, but the rules should be outlaw other approaches.

[trackboss]

GR42ai makes a great point that I think would help simplify things. If everyone has access and can buy all the approved suspensions from their chosen manufacturer then there is less of a worry about interpreting the rules. I do think that the suspensions should be AI approved beforehand however. This should be easy.

 

If the KB IRS along with its frame notching is determined to be legal and not significantly faster than the approved stick axle suspensions currently popular then that suspension should not be questioned. Done deal. However, when you simply say it is ok to notch the frame then someone with a stick axle will do it for whatever reason and some may even use that rule to do other modifications and it all becomes a mess again. Furthermore someone else may really hack up a car and build some super high dollar IRS.

 

For those that want to home build, I think they should be required to either follow some sort of guidelines (pickup points can be moved no more than 1”, etc.) or they can only do what has already been done with the aftermarket. Otherwise, if they want to build something super trick they should have it available to all competitors at any time. It is almost easier to simply say that you must use either stock or approved aftermarket suspension. If everyone built their own custom deal the manufacturers would definitely not back this series. There is enough work to be done building the cage, prepping the car, and installing the parts, that the creativity is still there for those who want to design their own race car.

 

The less specific the rules are the more room there is for interpretation. It all becomes that much more difficult for everyone. Let’s keep it as simple as possible.

[pederb]

Well we had the rule that suspension parts had to be available over the counter. But we got a lot of complains over this by racers wanting to build their own 3 links and so

[Jim P.]

Homebuilt vs Over the Counter

 

Maximum, Griggs, Kenny Brown, et al - basically started as homebuilt remedies to a poor suspension design.

 

I don't see why you should penalize someone for creating a better mousetrap if it's within the ruleset.

 

 

 

I am posting as a racer and not a regional director

[trackboss]

I would bet the complaint was a pretty small percentage relative to the entire AI group. Sometimes rules just have to be made and stuck to. Out west I have yet to see much in the way of homebuilt suspensions and those that are definitely have no advantage over the other cars so far, but that doesn’t mean in the future it won’t become a problem. Drier’s vintage AIX car has some homebuilt stuff, but doesn’t handle any better than the other front running cars. Neil’s car has tubs and custom rear lower control arms, but with griggs offering something similar there is no advantage there.

I know we all want greater car count, but if the rules keep changing it may end up being for every one new guy two will leave because of this. The fields out west are slim as it is this season.

[swhiteh3]

Creating a rule like this would instantly make a large number of cars, at least in the OH/IN region, illegal overnight.

[Chris C.]

I don't understand why you would not want to allow aftermarket suppliers build a product that provide great potential instead of limiting them to meet a rule. I think that mentality is what is wrong with the SCCA. They decided at one point not to allow new technology and design. To limit the individuals to one set form to assist the tech inspectors is nuts. But I think you are hurting the whole reason NASA has became a success. I believe if everyone can obtain the same items than there should be no complaints. Yes more technology adds for more tech inspectors to be more up to date. But they have a decision to be tech inspectors or not be tech inspectors.

 

It looks like a lot of people keep forgetting one thing. You get to build, drive, and compete with your car the way you like it. Not by how others determine how they should like it. If you are not comfortable running against heavily modded cars you need to race in a SPEC class. If you want to play in the Wild West than let AI and the technology continue.

 

Personally all this bickering of the rules is really stopping me to even want to compete in this series. Pretty soon its going to be SPEC AI and you have to buy these expensive pieces from this vendor only built to this old world technology limited method. That’s going to be a very sad day and people will start looking for an organization that bases itself on new technology and welcomes it with open arms. You should be looking the SCCA and thinking lets not become that.