Howdy,
On Thu, 17 Jun 1999, Mark Sirota wrote:
> I continue to be befuddled about why there's such an uproar about this
> stuff. Those people driving cars like this have a solution -- get
> together and get the manufacturer to issue a TSB authorizing the
> modification.
>
> If subframe connectors are so commonplace on Mustangs and Camarobirds,
> start a letter writing campaign in those circles, and write to the
> manufacturer, not to the SEB.
>
> If there are such reliability problems, then it's a manufacturer
> problem, not an SCCA problem. Complain to the right people!
So in these situations, which typically won't show up on the street
because you're not at high rpm a lot, aren't handling at the limit, and
don't have sticky DOT racing tires, you contend that a manufacturer will
listen to a small number of people?
You're full of crap. I've spoken to the regional Chrysler rep about the
neon motor mounts. His response was that they only regularly fail when
the car is raced and said that supporting that use wasn't the point of
TSBs. They know the problem exists, and they know it only affects 1% or
whatever of their customers who are purposely using their product in a
manner it wasn't designed for.
So the obvious answer is to change something that ONLY APPLIES TO THE
AFFECTED PEOPLE. That's the SCCA rules, unless I'm missing something.
Yes, it means that we'd have to make an 'allowed modification list' with
entries on a per car basis. That list doesn't have to be big, doesn't
have to be difficult to manage, and could still satisfy 90% of the
problems out there.
Perhaps you could let those people who these problems affect and aren't
befuddled do something that's good for them and doesn't affect you one
way or another?
Mark
|