Rules clarification: Dampers/shocks/struts

[JamesL]

How is labor of modified dampers figured in? ie: if 4 dampers costs $1200 total, but then you spend another $1201 having them revalved/shortened/etc, does this mean one would take +7 pts instead of +3?

 

What about having units custom fitted to your car? ie: A set of Advance Designs fitted to the strut housing of a new Honda Civic? The Advance Designs retail for roughly $499 a piece, putting them in +3 territory. But factor in the custom work/labor, and the "package" may end up costing more than $2400... but the dampers are still the same $499/pc units without any other modifcations to them.

 

And I guess I need a little bit of clarification when it comes to vehicles with McPherson strut suspension... Is the the static portion of the strut body(exclusive of the damper) subject to the dollar penalty as well? ie: if there is a damper bracket manufactured by company X that allows for additional camber to be had vs the stock bracket(but that is it, it provides no advantage in regards to the actual shock/damper portion... it is simply the piece in which the damper fits), should it be tallied into the total as well?

[jason]

Finally, something other than mustang questions.

[Greg G.]

How is labor of modified dampers figured in? ie: if 4 dampers costs $1200 total, but then you spend another $1201 having them revalved/shortened/etc, does this mean one would take +7 pts instead of +3?

 

What about having units custom fitted to your car? ie: A set of Advance Designs fitted to the strut housing of a new Honda Civic? The Advance Designs retail for roughly $499 a piece, putting them in +3 territory. But factor in the custom work/labor, and the "package" may end up costing more than $2400... but the dampers are still the same $499/pc units without any other modifcations to them.

 

And I guess I need a little bit of clarification when it comes to vehicles with McPherson strut suspension... Is the the static portion of the strut body(exclusive of the damper) subject to the dollar penalty as well? ie: if there is a damper bracket manufactured by company X that allows for additional camber to be had vs the stock bracket(but that is it, it provides no advantage in regards to the actual shock/damper portion... it is simply the piece in which the damper fits), should it be tallied into the total as well?

 

Interesting questions.

 

I would approach them this way. Yes, very difficult to police, but the point is that we don't want someone dropping Penske or Moton parts into a $100 Koni housing without taking the assessment. However, if one were to declare up front that the shocks have been re-valved, and include the receipts (and proof that the cost was a retail cost and not a "homeboy" deal), then the total cost of the shocks and re-valving will probably get one past a potential protest on this one.

 

I am not familiar with what type of "custom" work is needed to fit Advanced Designs onto a Civic, but you better be careful that it does not include "Relocation of suspension mounting points" for +6 points.

 

Yes, we would include the total cost of the "coilover", not just the damper insert.

 

Edited 5-15

[IGZOSTD]

Being I drive a Mustang I had to add a little. Just because they say Penske on the shock doesn't mean that they are expensive. Mine fall in the +3 line of points . I'm one to think that at this level of competition these shocks come well set up as is . You might be upset that 2500k shocks only gave you .500 of your lap time .

[JamesL]

How is labor of modified dampers figured in? ie: if 4 dampers costs $1200 total, but then you spend another $1201 having them revalved/shortened/etc, does this mean one would take +7 pts instead of +3?

 

What about having units custom fitted to your car? ie: A set of Advance Designs fitted to the strut housing of a new Honda Civic? The Advance Designs retail for roughly $499 a piece, putting them in +3 territory. But factor in the custom work/labor, and the "package" may end up costing more than $2400... but the dampers are still the same $499/pc units without any other modifcations to them.

 

And I guess I need a little bit of clarification when it comes to vehicles with McPherson strut suspension... Is the the static portion of the strut body(exclusive of the damper) subject to the dollar penalty as well? ie: if there is a damper bracket manufactured by company X that allows for additional camber to be had vs the stock bracket(but that is it, it provides no advantage in regards to the actual shock/damper portion... it is simply the piece in which the damper fits), should it be tallied into the total as well?

 

Interesting questions.

 

I would approach them this way. Yes, very difficult to police, but the point is that we don't want someone dropping Penske or Moton parts into a $100 Koni housing without taking the assessment. However, if one were to declare up front that the shocks have been re-valved, and include the receipts (and proof that the cost was a retail cost and not a "homeboy" deal), then the total cost of the shocks and re-valving will probably get one past a potential protest on this one.

 

I am not familiar with what type of "custom" work is needed to fit Advanced Designs onto a Civic, but you better be careful that it does not include "Relocation of suspension mounting points" for +6 points.

 

Yes, we would include the total cost of the "coilover", not just the damper insert.

 

 

I would find it very hard to believe that NASA would declare Koni yellows valved in a way other than the standard "off the shelf-700lb spring rate max" illegal. But you are saying that the receipts need to be included? And that the labor cost needs to be included in $2400 total?

 

To fit a set of Advance Designs into the front strut housing of the 02-05 Civic would not entail any relocation of suspension pickups... in any way, shape or form. So saying it did not, even remotely, press that issue, would the labor be an issue?

 

In regards to last question, I guess my confusion lies in the fact that these rules do not specify the entire "coilover assembly", just the damper.

[AZELISE]

In my opinion the NASA TT rules allow revalving of shocks. Somebody did a good job of writing the rule for shocks to consider many different posibilites. #3 under suspension:

 

3) Non-OEM or modified/re-valved shocks/struts/dampers +3 (all others)(springs not included)

 

FYI Bilstein only charges $65 per shock to rebuild and revalve shocks. I am not sure how much other shocks cost to revalve.

 

On a related note, I just picked up a second set of low mileage base OEM shocks for my car. Since I am running high spring rates on the base shocks I am using up the shocks pretty quick. The car comes standard with Bilsteins that are rebuildable. Could I send the shocks to Bilstein to get them rebuilt to OEM standards since it is going to get hard to find the stock shocks at a good price without taking points. They would technicaly be revalved, but to identical functional characteristics as OEM. Only Lotus sells replacement shocks at $300 each and I am trying to save money.

 

6.5 OEM Definition, Updating and Backdating Rules

For the purposes of NASA TT points assessments, the term OEM will be defined as follows:

Any part that is identical in size, shape, and functional characteristics compared to the part that

originally came on the vehicle, from the manufacturer, as a standard feature of the base model as

it is listed in section 6.3.2 Base Classifications (factory options and specialty model parts are

considered non-OEM) or is listed as a standard replacement part by the OEM manufacturer.

[jason]

Being I drive a Mustang...

I knew it was too good to be true.

[vpnwiz]

...Only Lotus sells replacement shocks at $300 each and I am trying to save money.

Save money and you drive a Lotus?

 

As long as they are built back exactly to OEM specs then by the rules they meet that definition. And they are the OEM dampers, too. But - they would also meet the "re-valved" definition you posted, right? Although taking the spirit of rule 3 into account, which is to take points for re-valving a damper to non-OEM specs I think you would be safe.

 

Slippery slope though... I don't really see a way to verify it unless someone brings their own shock testing machine! Don't see too many of those hanging around the paddock...

[IGZOSTD]

Now thats a smart way to do your shocks. Bilstein does a great job, and the service guys will build you a shock for anything .

The point is ,modified, revalved shocks springs dampers +3

Any spring rate you like +2

[Mrsideways]

Now thats a smart way to do your shocks. Bilstein does a great job, and the service guys will build you a shock for anything .

The point is ,modified, revalved shocks springs dampers +3

Any spring rate you like +2

 

Wait Wait wait, Post a couple up there talks about valving being specifically disallowed as it's not mentioned. When you buy bilstiens or koni's or monroes they come valved for your car. Bilsteins for a miata and bilsteins for a Silverado do not have the same valving (one would hope). So whats the difference between buying one of those that comes pre-valved vs ordering a set of Pensky's and saying, he these are my spring rates, and this is what I want. I fail to see a difference. As long as the total costs = what you need for your points your good. But how do you figure when you have one wear out and you send em back to get valving. do you need to modify your total price each time?

 

Edited the above post--revalving is listed as noted above--GG

[IGZOSTD]

Regardless , the rule says re-valved +3 so we can't just change the rule to fit each and every one's own suspicions on someones suspension. Weather it be a Vett, a Lotus , an Evo or the all mighty Mustang!

[TurboShortBus]

Finally, something other than mustang questions.

I'd still be asking my same questions, even if I drove a "Doctor's Wife" car like a Corvette.

 

Mark (drives a 1978 Fairmont...er, 2004 Mustang...same thing...)

[jason]

I'm a doctor's husband, actually.

[TurboShortBus]

I'm a doctor's husband, actually.

LOL! (yes, actually laughing)

 

Mark

[JamesL]

It seems to me that rule #3 specifically allows the revalving of shocks, be them OEM or otherwise.

 

The question remains, how to factor in the labor charges(ie: cost) of said revalving. And then... what about a DIYer who revalves the shocks himself, and doesn't pay a cent?

 

These damper rules leave a lot open-ended, IMO.

[vpnwiz]

These damper rules leave a lot open-ended, IMO.

Maybe, but to be fair, what's the point if there is no way to verify it at the track? Hell there's no way to even protest it. The honest people will be honest and if someone wants to try to slip by the rules, well... they're gonna try it anyway.

[IGZOSTD]

somethings are better left unsaid

I'm a doctors patient

medicated for your protection

[RodeoFlyer]

I just can't see many TT guys using the ultra ultra high dollar shocks. Anybody that can afford them likely has plenty of other high dollar pieces that make the price of the shocks irrelevant in the bigger picture. Anybody that wants to spend thousands upon thousands of dollars for cheap ribbon or trophy can have at it IMHO. Most of us are out there to have fun.

 

I have the same Penske shocks that Steve Kane does. I'd rather this thread never started, since nobody would believe how cheap our shocks really are, and I don't need any drama. But then, i'm a hack C- driver anyway so I don't see any protests in my future.

[JamesL]

These damper rules leave a lot open-ended, IMO.

Maybe, but to be fair, what's the point if there is no way to verify it at the track? Hell there's no way to even protest it. The honest people will be honest and if someone wants to try to slip by the rules, well... they're gonna try it anyway.

 

Which is why, I assume, the deciding factor was "retail price". But I would just like a clarification as to how the "modifications" are ruled on, as their isn't a set "retail price". Honestly, if the modifications just entail revalving for different spring rates, I don't think they should even be included in the $2400 total.

[JamesL]

I just can't see many TT guys using the ultra ultra high dollar shocks. Anybody that can afford them likely has plenty of other high dollar pieces that make the price of the shocks irrelevant in the bigger picture. Anybody that wants to spend thousands upon thousands of dollars for cheap ribbon or trophy can have at it IMHO. Most of us are out there to have fun.

 

I have the same Penske shocks that Steve Kane does. I'd rather this thread never started, since nobody would believe how cheap our shocks really are, and I don't need any drama. But then, i'm a hack C- driver anyway so I don't see any protests in my future.

 

 

I see what you're saying. Regardless, price is only relevant(in this case) in regards to the $2400 limit on the +3 dampers. Taking +7 instead of +3 seems like it would be a class changing difference for lots of TTers.

[Greg G.]

Guys, I've edited my original post in this thread, because I had forgotten that we did add the re-valving wording at some point to the rules (yes, Doug, my own wording--broke my own rule and answered a question before re-reading the specific rule). Anyway, I think that the bottom line is that if you purchase shocks that cost $599 each, and then spend $400 to upgrade/modify them, and the end result is not available for $600 retail, you should be taking the 7 points. If you take any shock, and use the outer housing to put another type, model, brand of "inners" into it, you better declare it, and if you have made something that doesn't exist over the counter, you sure better think about taking the +7 points for it. If you are taking a model XY shock (less than $600 retail or $750 as a coilover), and having the OEM just re-valve it with model XY parts (and not parts from their $6000 model SXY shocks), then it should be a legal modification, even if it cost you a few hundred dollars in labor.

 

This rule has always been a tough one to deal with. If we loosen it up too much, we end up with $5000 Motons with the external reservoirs taken off getting the same three points that a $100 Koni shock gets. If we tighten it up too much, guys have to buy new shocks everytime one blows out, instead of having the OEM just refresh it.

 

From a broader view: Cheaters will cheat regardless of what the rules say. Shock dyno's do exist, and we actually had one at the Nationals in the past. If we end up having someone open up a Koni shock at Nationals, and it has undeclared Penske guts, I will do everything in my power to get that competitor D/Q'd.

[IGZOSTD]

I like that response Greg. How many times did you use the dyno at the Nationals

I have access to a shock dyno and its free, along with the guy's racing background. I will be learning how to use it and mainly to test my shocks delivered spec's and keep an eye on the performance .

From what I have witnessed at a NASA event, the mega buck shock gets beat more than it win's. But also I pay no attention to the Porsche classes or German touring so I haven't a clue. Olins makes some nice 30k forks for motorcycles but I dought it would turn a hog into a gsxr or make a squid a rocket.

Flyer , how do you like your shocks, I haven't tried mine as the car is all torn apart .

The girlfriends have taught me how to laugh at the drama, just don't let them see ya.

[JamesL]

If you are taking a model XY shock (less than $600 retail or $750 as a coilover), and having the OEM just re-valve it with model XY parts (and not parts from their $6000 model SXY shocks), then it should be a legal modification, even if it cost you a few hundred dollars in labor.

 

This was the exact scenario I was hoping to see clarified. Thank you.