I keep seeing messages such as the attached, and I can't figure out why.
How do either of the two turbo rule changes effect the Supra TT or the RX-7?
I had always thought that they were using stock turbos, right?
The DSM's are the only cars I know of where a turbo update/backdate is
legal. It's only legal because it bolts right up and uses the stock pre-95
oil and coolant lines...and these work because IT'S THE SAME MOTOR. There
was a slight compression ratio change, and the head is a little different.
That's it. Other possibilities that I've seen mentioned (SVO turbo on V8
Mustangs, Trans-Am turbo on LS1's, etc.) are not legal because they would
require illegal modifications to facilitate the update/backdate.
I completely agree with (and I haven't heard any objections to) the rule
change to prohibit "adding" turbochargers. This rule alone is enough. The
update/backdate does seem to be aimed at DSM's, and GH Sharp's post
supported this idea.
Why change a rule to hinder an unproven car? If it is proven to be an
overdog, reclass it!
Brian Fitzpatrick
'97 Eagle Talon AWD - 14B - ESP
> I think the common misconception here is that the ESP DSM's are
> the focal point
> of this proposed rule. They are not. The car that really kicked
> this off was
> the ESP Supra of JA at the 1998 Peru, IN Pro. That car was (is)
> visually faster
> in a straight line than other cars. JA also proclaimed in a National
> publication that his ESP Supra TT was making over 400HP at the
> rear wheels...
>
> The DSM's are just another turbo car that will be effected...like my RX-7.
>
> AB
|