The way this sound to me is that the rule is designed to allow you to add
more methods of adjustment to get you back to a "Correct" (i.e. factory)
measurements, if those settings have been altered by some other allowed
method. (for example, if some cars are lowered, the camber will be WAY off,
but with the addition of those "shims or eccentric bushings" they can be
brought to the "correct" settings)
They just don't want these parts to be added for the sole purpose of going
away from or beyond "normal settings"
Just my guess, I'm not a rules lawyer.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-autox@autox.team.net [mailto:owner-autox@autox.team.net]On
Behalf Of Jay Mitchell
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2002 3:09 PM
To: Smokerbros@aol.com; GLaws@kscable.com; autox@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: Proposed SP suspension rule for 2003
Smokerbros@aol.com wrote:
>There are several racks available in Topeka, I'm sure. In the
event of a
>protest, part of the teardown bond would be the cost of the
alignment. As
>always, the specs in your factory shop manual (which you are
required to
>have) are the ones that would be used.
Given that no other Category requires alignment within the
factory-specified range of values, do you really think that this
will become a requirement for SP? The proposed addition to the
rules does not introduce such a requirement in general. Only if
you decide to take advantage of the use of shims or otherwise
non-allowed eccentrics will you be held to factory specs.
Any idea why the addition of such a rule is being contemplated?
Jay
/// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or try
/// http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
/// Partial archives at http://www.team.net/archive
/// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or try
/// http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
/// Partial archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|