Jump to content

Fox Mustang brake questions this time


MHISSTC

Recommended Posts

OH, that's nice Adam. Glad you cleared that all that up for me. So if I don't ask then I don't know, until I find out the hard way or run up against someone who happened to know the secret password to the group back when the rules were decided?

 

I'm still wondering how some of you knew the Cobra Booster was legal while I was out here reading the PDF files and didn't see that written anywhere. I must have missed the "secret decoder ring" day or something.

 

BTW, I thought I did "just ask" a series director, Al. I thought I just asked him if there were any other sections in the rules where this same logic applied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • MHISSTC

    9

  • Glenn

    6

  • rocketman

    6

  • Keith

    5

in the future please dont get protective of the rules when we ask alot of "why not's" and "how come's" as we are only trying to discover the unwritten "intent" of the rule

 

This has been my position all along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I'm off to a pissy start. Sorry for the rant, I don't know if a Cobra booster is an advantage or disadvantage. It could weigh 80lbs more than a stock booster for all I know. Or, it could give much better brake pedal feel and last 50 years more than a stock one?

 

What I do know is that I'm new to the series too and there's no way I can "ask ahead" on everything. I'm just not that smart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am just thinking out loud as to a solution regarding the rules surrounding the Cobra Mustangs...

 

Why not just make the Cobra Mustangs legal for the class as long as they meet all of the other rules, for example:

1. they must have the required 12" rotors

2. they must have 16x8 wheels

3. the GT40 heads and Cobra intake must be removed and replaced with E7 heads and the spec option carb intake or standard Ford "HO" intake

 

Not being familiar with Cobras there may be other components that would need to be replaced with standard GT or LX 5.0 hardware...

 

Or, simply state that Cobra brake booster, master cylinder are legal...

 

The rules set for this class are great and I don't think anyone wants to see it become a class in which he/she who spends the most money wins. I want to get involved in CMC mainly because of the cost containment and the fact that I love road racing. I have been involved in heads up drag racing for a couple of years in what is considered an "entry level" class. The cost of heads up drag racing goes way beyond the point of ridicule because the rules allow too many "loop holes". One thing drag racers do not understand is they utilize a component they feel will give them an advantage by pushing the envelop of the rules. That advantage is only seen for one or two events until everyone in the class then has that component. So what happens is it forces everyone to have said component to be competitive and as a result the cost of racing rises. After a couple of years this snowballs and what was once considered an "entry level" class is now something that takes an enormous budget to compete. Sorry to go off on a tangent but the rules regarding a class must be carefully considered and constantly evolve to maintain the true intent of the class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for the same type of scenario being legal in other sections of the rules - it's possible. If there is a particular section you have a question about, please contact a series director.

 

"It is what it is"

Adam Ginsberg, circa 2004 ... 2005 ... 2006 ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...or my personal favorite Ginsberg quote:

 

"Buck up, Buttercup."

 

"Cobra brakes" were called that in the early 90's because they were better than stock 87-93 brakes. Later in the 90's, those fox "Cobra" brakes pretty much became standard equipment on the newer stock Mustangs.

 

Old School "Cobra" brakes (not the 2002 Cobra Brembos of course) on the fox Mustang were the foundation of the CMC ruleset since day 1. The initial CMC cars were built using the Ford M-2300-K brake kit which came with everything you need from rear axles to spindles/rotors to...brake booster. So that's nothing new. (The Cobra booster is allowed.)

 

However, reading the posts, I can definately see the confusion and you guys are right. It isn't inherently obvious from the rules wording that the "Cobra" booster is allowed as it is a part of that original "Cobra" brake kit. (In fact, I always thought you HAD to run the Cobra booster with the Cobra brakes or else it wouldn't work. Isn't that the same for LT1 booster with LT1 calipers....and LS1 booster with LS1 brakes?)

 

Anyways, as Al mentioned, that wording probably needs to be spelled out clearer and we'll put that on our "to do" list. I don't think there are any other areas like this where the "intent" is unknown.

 

Great question and good find to further clarify the rules!

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To all of you who posted...thank you, thank you, thank you!

 

This is exactly the kind of exchange I was hoping for when I made my first post. This is my first attempt at putting together a viable CMC car out here in BFE without incurring any violations. Evidently I'm not the only one who is completely confused by the rules as they are currently written.

 

Concerning the SN95 upgrade and using "Cobra" brakes...

Cobra brakes, including the hydoboost brake booster, CAN be used with normal update and backdate rules because they are not used only on the Cobras.

"There are 3 different designs currently Ford Makes, which are all Cobra brake variants, just with different paint jobs. ...original Cobra black calipers, Bullitt red Calipers (found on Bullitt Mustangs), Mach1 Calipers (blank design, found on 03-04 Mach1) or the 10th Anniversary Cobra Red Calipers (found on 10th anniversary Cobra)."

 

However, when doing a 4 to 5-lug upgrade without using SN95 parts, the light begins to dim. Also using the list of accepted Models and exclusions and the update and backdate policy...I took the rules to mean anything that was on an SVO, Lincoln Mark VII, Crown Victoria, Thunderbird, Aerostar, or Ranger, that was never used on a Mustang, would be specifically excuded from use because they were not on the list of accepted models. Examples of this would be the 73mm Piston Calipers found on the SVOs, and Mark VIIs and Crown Vics, along with the large bore Master Cylinders found only on the SVOs and Mark VIIs. I also have a great 4-lug rear disc brake conversion in mind utilizing the TurboCoupe rear calipers (again never used on any Mustang), but according to how I read the rules, I can't use them. Another conversion that is not listed either, and I take to be illegal, is converting to 5-lug 10" rear drums as found on the pickups and in 4-lug version on the larger Fox bodies such as the Fairmont wagons.

 

What kind of door is this going to open if we are able to use ANY stock ford part from any line of ford vehicle...not just the Mustang/Capri line?

 

How open to interpretation is all of this in the different NASA regions? Will I go to one region and get one interpretation saying I'm legal, then go to another only to find that my car is no longer legal according to their interpretation?

 

My personal opinion here is the rules need to be more specific. I am perfectly O.K. with being able to run '87-'93 Mustang GT specific 11" front rotors, 60mm piston calipers, master cylinders, and 9" rear brake drums (4 or 5 lug variants)...or when the time and money comes...upgrading to the SN95 gear including the Cobra/Mach1/Bullitt master cylinder and calipers with turned down rotors and complete rear disc brake setup. I just expect everyone else to be following the same rules AND the same interpretations of the rules in order to keep the playing field well defined even if it may not end up exactly level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i dont think there is a difference between the 93-97 booster and the 98-02 booster for F-bodies. there is a difference between the master's though.

point is, its a part thats forbiden by the way the rule is written, but when pointed out, the intent is the loophole. i fail to see how a cobra booster is the deal braker for running the cobra calipers. all it is there for is pedal pressure assist. so the pedal is easier/harder to push, so.

 

sounds to me that its just another "the hot ticket to make a mustang fast" deal. there seems to be alot of those "hot ticket" deals for the mustangs. the GM cars are soooooo much more restricted to "the way it came from the factory" than the ford cars. its just strikes me as funny how my 93-97 car cant use the rear swaybar from a 92, but the mustangs can pick and choose any and every part ever put on a mustang from 79-04 excluding Cobra motors. there is even that lopey HO cam you guys can run thats like a 1 year only deal, but no way we are gonna let you run an LT4 cam.

you guys have the huge advantage of "parts bin blueprinting" where as we are limited to "the way it came +50lbs" for the 4th gens.

 

at least this time there was a general agreement that the rules were lacking and it will be addressed in for '07.

 

my input for the rewording of 8.35.3.

8.35.3. The brake master cylinder and brake booster must be from the same origin as the front caliper or remain OEM stock and unmodified. absolutely no aftermarket master cylinders or brake boosters allowed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this gives me a headache, but my $0.02 - adding (or defining OEM) as being MODEL specific. No Ranger or Crown Vic, Caprice or S10 parts, etc.

 

'Cause if OEM stock is manufacturer specific, we can then use the forbidden fruit Corvette brakes. OR, we could use the iron calipers off the HD trucks - THEY won't spread...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i fail to see how a cobra booster is the deal braker for running the cobra calipers.

 

As I read it, it isn't. It is the same booster/MC that is in the Mach 1 and Bullitt, and those aren't excluded and easily fall into the update/backdate rule, even though they are the same unit as the Cobra...that's the loophole in that one.

 

sounds to me that its just another "the hot ticket to make a mustang fast" deal. there seems to be alot of those "hot ticket" deals for the mustangs. the GM cars are soooooo much more restricted to "the way it came from the factory" than the ford cars. its just strikes me as funny how my 93-97 car cant use the rear swaybar from a 92, but the mustangs can pick and choose any and every part ever put on a mustang from 79-04 excluding Cobra motors. there is even that lopey HO cam you guys can run thats like a 1 year only deal, but no way we are gonna let you run an LT4 cam.

you guys have the huge advantage of "parts bin blueprinting" where as we are limited to "the way it came +50lbs" for the 4th gens.

 

I have no idea why there is an early/late F-body line that you cannot cross. Should I care as a Mustang driver? I don't know. There's another one for the rule makers to explain to me.

 

Was the LT4 ever found in a stock production F-body?

 

I can live with the "no Cobra specific parts" if the F-body crowd can live with the "no SLP specific parts" as found on the SS and Firehawks.

 

I'm not nearly as well versed on F-bodies as I am Fox-bodies, but I'll do my best to explain my opinion from a Fox point of view.

 

First, the HO cam was more than a one year deal.

 

In my opinion, a lot of the stock F-body parts are superior to and less numerous than Fox parts because of the origin of the platforms. The Fox platform originated from the economy car based '77 Fairmont and was adapted to the Mustang along with the Mercury Zepher, Capri, and Cougar, the Ford Thunderbird, and Lincoln Continental and Mark VII. I think I'm forgetting at least one more. How many cars are built on the F-body platform?

 

This is both a bonus and a liability. Yes, there are many, many, parts that can be swapped back and forth between all of those above mentioned cars, in addition to some Crown Vic parts also mentioned previously. Are all those parts good parts? Heck NO! A lot of them are designed for grandma driven economy cars, not sporty cars.

 

The problems for a Fox body owner are weeding through all the parts that are crap to use on the track, getting rid of them, and then trying to figure out which ones are acceptable from a racing and rule following standpoint. I'd love to see the rules stick to a "you can use it only if it was used on a V8 production Mustang" viewpoint, which according to current interpretations, isn't being done now.

 

at least this time there was a general agreement that the rules were lacking and it will be addressed in for '07.

 

AMEN! But what are we going to do for this year when I'm trying to follow the rules in acquiring parts for the car I'll be running next year for sure. I don't want to have to acquire them twice.

 

my input for the rewording of 8.35.3.

8.35.3. The brake master cylinder and brake booster must be from the same origin as the front caliper or remain OEM stock and unmodified. absolutely no aftermarket master cylinders or brake boosters allowed.

 

I think the "aftermarket" wording is one of the keys here along with the clarification of "OEM", and "stock". Is that OEM and/or stock to the manufacturer (Ford/GM), or to a V8 Mustang/Capri or Camaro/Firebird?

 

Did I mention I love stirring the pot?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this gives me a headache, but my $0.02 - adding (or defining OEM) as being MODEL specific. No Ranger or Crown Vic, Caprice or S10 parts, etc.

 

'Cause if OEM stock is manufacturer specific, we can then use the forbidden fruit Corvette brakes. OR, we could use the iron calipers off the HD trucks - THEY won't spread...

Exactly!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not nearly as well versed on F-bodies as I am Fox-bodies, but I'll do my best to explain my opinion from a Fox point of view.

 

Nor am I on the Mustang side. I guess that is why there was the "confusion" that Todd pointed out.

 

I was beaten, caned, dunked, tared and feathered with "if it ain't in the rules, then you can't" this time last year.

 

Mitch "pot stirring GM owner" Warren

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MHISSTC, rhanks for raking the time to explain some things. it helped.

 

i fail to see how a cobra booster is the deal braker for running the cobra calipers.

 

As I read it, it isn't. It is the same booster/MC that is in the Mach 1 and Bullitt, and those aren't excluded and easily fall into the update/backdate rule, even though they are the same unit as the Cobra...that's the loophole in that one.

 

i guess its the lable put on the part thats more the issue. Mach 1's and Bullitt's were produced up to '04?

 

sounds to me that its just another "the hot ticket to make a mustang fast" deal. there seems to be alot of those "hot ticket" deals for the mustangs. the GM cars are soooooo much more restricted to "the way it came from the factory" than the ford cars. its just strikes me as funny how my 93-97 car cant use the rear swaybar from a 92, but the mustangs can pick and choose any and every part ever put on a mustang from 79-04 excluding Cobra motors. there is even that lopey HO cam you guys can run thats like a 1 year only deal, but no way we are gonna let you run an LT4 cam.

you guys have the huge advantage of "parts bin blueprinting" where as we are limited to "the way it came +50lbs" for the 4th gens.

 

I have no idea why there is an early/late F-body line that you cannot cross. Should I care as a Mustang driver? I don't know. There's another one for the rule makers to explain to me.

 

Was the LT4 ever found in a stock production F-body?

 

well since the SS cars were produced by SLP and are considered "production" cars, and the 100 SS's produced w/ the LT4 were produced by SLP, why not? we are allowed to use the 35mm front swaybar found only on the '02 SS.

 

I can live with the "no Cobra specific parts" if the F-body crowd can live with the "no SLP specific parts" as found on the SS and Firehawks.

 

thats fine. as it stands now, all i have from the SS/WS6/Firehawk is the 32mm front swaybar. everything else is Z28 stock.

 

I'm not nearly as well versed on F-bodies as I am Fox-bodies, but I'll do my best to explain my opinion from a Fox point of view.

 

First, the HO cam was more than a one year deal.

 

In my opinion, a lot of the stock F-body parts are superior to and less numerous than Fox parts because of the origin of the platforms. The Fox platform originated from the economy car based '77 Fairmont and was adapted to the Mustang along with the Mercury Zepher, Capri, and Cougar, the Ford Thunderbird, and Lincoln Continental and Mark VII. I think I'm forgetting at least one more. How many cars are built on the F-body platform?

 

This is both a bonus and a liability. Yes, there are many, many, parts that can be swapped back and forth between all of those above mentioned cars, in addition to some Crown Vic parts also mentioned previously. Are all those parts good parts? Heck NO! A lot of them are designed for grandma driven economy cars, not sporty cars.

 

The problems for a Fox body owner are weeding through all the parts that are crap to use on the track, getting rid of them, and then trying to figure out which ones are acceptable from a racing and rule following standpoint. I'd love to see the rules stick to a "you can use it only if it was used on a V8 production Mustang" viewpoint, which according to current interpretations, isn't being done now.

 

at least this time there was a general agreement that the rules were lacking and it will be addressed in for '07.

 

AMEN! But what are we going to do for this year when I'm trying to follow the rules in acquiring parts for the car I'll be running next year for sure. I don't want to have to acquire them twice.

 

my input for the rewording of 8.35.3.

8.35.3. The brake master cylinder and brake booster must be from the same origin as the front caliper or remain OEM stock and unmodified. absolutely no aftermarket master cylinders or brake boosters allowed.

 

I think the "aftermarket" wording is one of the keys here along with the clarification of "OEM", and "stock". Is that OEM and/or stock to the manufacturer (Ford/GM), or to a V8 Mustang/Capri or Camaro/Firebird?

 

Did I mention I love stirring the pot?

 

didnt they add a section to the rules for '06 that describes "OEM" and "stock"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OEM vs stock clarification was spawned from the GM parts vs like for like replacement parts available from non-GM parts counters.

 

[bigger picture glasses]

 

I can see where a "rules clarification" can be a can of worms.

 

[/bigger picture glasses]

 

Allowing the Ford platform to significantly alter "stock" suspension, "restricting" the 4th gen F-car to competitive power levels, "opening" brake options, "limiting" shock expenditures ... all well intended rules massaging ... necessary, even.

 

I can also see and understand how creating these "allowances" by contacting your local/national directors generates surprises and even further rules massaging ... which in turn generates more "allowances" and further massaging.

 

It's either the cycle of life or an auger in, depending upon which side of the "allowance" fence you happen to be on at the time.

 

It's happened to owners of both platforms ... although, I don't see much of it affecting the 3rd gen GM folks ... interesting ...

 

The point?

 

Rules clarification, evolution and massaging really is a slippery slope. And it's obvious it really isn't what it is. It's what it is today, via e-mail and a handshake.

 

But how do we go back, in order to make CMC the production based OEM series spawned 10 years ago? Or even can we?

 

On a side note, while the directors might not like this kind of public scrutiny or the rules and the airing of the "allowances", it is the kind of debate that keeps the series healthy and honest.

 

No one was offended, no one was attacked, no one is dragging all their CMC gear to the curb for the trash truck to haul away.

 

Thanks, folks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're getting further away from the original topic, but here goes.

 

Bullitts were '01 model years and Mach Is were '03-'04 model years.

 

we are allowed to use the 35mm front swaybar found only on the '02 SS.

 

I view SLP like I view SVT. If you are able to use the swaybar only found on the '02 SS, why wouldn't you be able to use other SS or Firehawk specific hardware, like the LT4 for example? Why shouldn't the Mustang owners be able to do the same and use the Cobra specific haredware, including the DOHC 4.6L (neglecting the fact that the '03 & '04 Cobras had a supercharger too)? It just so happens the Mach I also uses the same DOHC 4.6L as the pre-'03/'04 Cobra...and just like being able to use the "Cobra" brakes...is this another loophole in the rules that would allow the use of a "Cobra" motor? I don't know the answer.

 

stir, stir, stir

 

And yes, thanks again for the healthy debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think the real answer is: regardless of the media in which a request for clarification or allowance is submitted (email, phone call, text message, whatever), that request should be posted here or on a mass email for all to see. sticky the post and add each subsequent request along w/ the answers.

not that i was planning any such thing, but had i lost a protest (read as loosing the money required to submit w/ a protest) i submitted due to the answer being "well it was intened that...bla bla...bla bla bla......" i would not be very happy.

seems like a rules clarification forum should be set-up. a place where the "managment" would be able to post such info for distribution to the general public. this would be a place to collect info for the entire year for the review of possible re-writing a rule for clarification purpose's for the following year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're getting further away from the original topic, but here goes.

 

Bullitts were '01 model years and Mach Is were '03-'04 model years.

 

we are allowed to use the 35mm front swaybar found only on the '02 SS.

 

I view SLP like I view SVT. If you are able to use the swaybar only found on the '02 SS, why wouldn't you be able to use other SS or Firehawk specific hardware, like the LT4 for example? Why shouldn't the Mustang owners be able to do the same and use the Cobra specific haredware, including the DOHC 4.6L (neglecting the fact that the '03 & '04 Cobras had a supercharger too)? It just so happens the Mach I also uses the same DOHC 4.6L as the pre-'03/'04 Cobra...and just like being able to use the "Cobra" brakes...is this another loophole in the rules that would allow the use of a "Cobra" motor? I don't know the answer.

 

stir, stir, stir

 

And yes, thanks again for the healthy debate.

 

i never thought i would see eye to eye w/ a blue oval.........

if you prohibit a modle (SS, WS6, Firehawk, Cobra, Bullitt, Mach 1) then every part that is specific to that modle should be prohibited too.

 

anyways, your right, enough w/ the thread hi-jacking.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think the real answer is: regardless of the media in which a request for clarification or allowance is submitted (email, phone call, text message, whatever), that request should be posted here or on a mass email for all to see. sticky the post and add each subsequent request along w/ the answers.

 

This has been my position all along. (Am I repeating myself?) I originally thought that this is what this forum was for but have learned otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aw c'mon - this forum has ALWAYS been a "can I do xxxxx..." forum.

 

What it's NOT meant to be is a place for arguments and/or getting the 'reasoning' behind a rule.

 

Seriously, what did your mom say when you asked "But why can't I have another cookie"? She should have said "Because I said so!", and you went off pissed that you didn't get a cookie. OR, she sat you down and explained that you're a lazy fat pig of a kid, and you're way overweight, and spend too much time playing with yourself instead of with friends. Then you went away without a cookie, but 'understood' that you're fat too. I guess that's better.

 

The rules, as they are, are fine in regards to allowances and intent. If you have a question (i.e. "can I run a Cobra booster"), you post it here and get a yes/no answer. Life for ALL of us would be MUCH easier if people took that answer and went on their merry way.

 

Look how much discussion came from the 4th gen brake 'issue'. What came of that? Nothing. The rules are still what they were, and nobody's 'happier' that we wasted so much time 'discussing' it, especially because my calipers still spread.

 

So, do I like the rule? Nope, but I still have to build by it. At the end of the day, whether you 'understand the reasoning' or not doesn't change the fact that someone's pissed that they can't do xxxx (or that someone else can).

 

We ALL know that the rules are evolving. However what's evolving is the WORDING of the rules, not the intent or restriction. What's allowed today in regards to Ford brakes will be allowed next year. What will be different is the attempt to write the rule so that there will be less 'question' in regards to what's legal and what's not.

 

If you don't like the wording of a rule, POST IT HERE. If you have a question, POST IT HERE. But don't whine when you can't acid dip your unibody (even though it would get your car closer to minimum, and you'd be more 'competitive').

 

In general, people try to negotiate deals, and have both sides happy, right? That works fine in deals, but rules aren't meant to be negotiable. That defeats the point of putting a line in the sand - it shouldn't be moveable. You might not like where it is, but it's there for you and everyone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brad,

 

Respectfully I have a different perspective. What if my brake booster went out in my Mustang? As the rules currently are stated I would have had NO IDEA that a Cobra brake booster was an allowable part for my car. Therefore I would not have asked. Since I didn't ask I was "left out" of the knowledge that there had been undocumented reasons why a Cobra booster was perfectly within the rules.

 

Now, to go a half-step futher, there are particular places in the current rules where Cobra parts are explicitely called out as being "allowed" and "not allowed". Given the mantra "if it doesn't say you can then you can't" I'm not likely to go asking each time I need a part if this version or that version is allowed unless I've seen a similar thread here or happen to know a fellow racer who was in a similar predicament.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's cool, but:

As the rules currently are stated I would have had NO IDEA that a Cobra brake booster was an allowable part for my car.
If you don't know, you don't know. Why is the Cobra booster 'better'? From reading this thread, it's not! It's just 'different'. So, your booster breaks, and you replace it with a GT booster. Does it stop? Yup. Done.

 

Someone else knows that Cobra booster are legal. They get one. Does the car stop? Yup. Done.

 

Is one better thane the other? Again, reading above, it doesn't appear so. So in this case, whether the rule was written differently, both cars stop. Again, as I said above, the rule may be rewritten in regads to clarity but not in allowance or intent.

 

As far as I know, there isn't an example of a 'shady' or 'unwritten' secret part glossed over in the rules that will make your car better than someone who doesn't know the 'secret'.

 

To paraphrase Jesse James - "If you guys keyboards were steering wheels, you'd all be Michael Schumaker by now."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What it's NOT meant to be is a place ... [for] getting the 'reasoning' behind a rule.

 

I agree that this is not a place to ask why and I think that this is what is missing from this forum. The reasoning behind a rule can go a long way to explaining things and yes this has value. ...and comparing the rules enforcement statements from my mom is illuminating - are we a bunch of children that can't handle/understand the real reasoning for stuff? I don't bother to tell my 3-year-old that he can't have a cookie because it's bad for his health because it is pointless. If we are similarly viewed as unworthy of an explanation, then OK. I kinda figured that this was the case anyway.

 

I am also sorry that you saw the brake discussion as a waste of time. I see it completely different. Everyone contributed their experience and opinion and a non-decision was made. It out there, it's over for now. I saw that discussion as a glimmer of hope for future open discussions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, I missed the info on the Cobra booster being better or not better. What if it lasts longer, what if I could have found one for $20 vs the $80 I paid for a GT booster. What if it is lighter? See, by not letting us know in advance by spelling it out in the rules then the racer may spend more or get a lesser performing part or, gulp, both.

 

At a minimum I feel the info should be laid out for all drivers, not just those "in the know".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I know, there isn't an example of a 'shady' or 'unwritten' secret part glossed over in the rules that will make your car better than someone who doesn't know the 'secret'. quote]

 

Wheel spacers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In general, people try to negotiate deals, and have both sides happy, right? That works fine in deals, but rules aren't meant to be negotiable. That defeats the point of putting a line in the sand - it shouldn't be moveable. You might not like where it is, but it's there for you and everyone else.

 

I'm just trying to find that line in the sand. Hopefully it's being drawn by someone that can walk a straight and press hard with the stick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...