> << So some cars which cannot adjust camber should be allowed to slot their
> strut mounting holes, because other cars in the same class come with
> adjustable camber? >>
>
> No, all cars should be allowed to get 2 degrees negative by slotting,
etc.,
> and all cars should be limited to that as a maximum... Another of my
> brilliant ideas that got shot down in committee...
I think for stock classes, the alignments should have to be within the
manufacturer's specs. Every manufacturer uses alignment settings that they
deem appropriate for that car, and it's usually not optimal for autox. So,
using crash bolts should be legal, but only to keep the car within the
manufacturer's specs.
However, for street prepared, street touring and above, I think alignment
should be free. Whether it means using crash bolts, eccentric bolts,
slotting, grooving, grinding, etc. There is usually an optimal alignment,
and I think a SP/ST car should be able to get it.
>
> << Some cars with narrower rims should be allowed the same width as the
> widest in the class?
>
> These "leveling the playing field" arguments rarely hold water under
> close scrutiny. >>
I think to keep prices of stock classes down, only stock wheels should be
used, not lightweight derivatives of the same measurements. I assume wheels
are considered a replaceable item like shocks and exhausts in stock class?
Brian
--
Brian Berryhill
http://www.angelfire.com/ms/brianberryhill/
________________________________________________________
1stUp.com - Free the Web
Get your free Internet access at http://www.1stUp.com
|