I am sorry for any unintended commercial consequences but we ought to look
at the health of the sport and the average members interest first. Anyone
can make a conforming shock if they think the market is there. Finding out
people are running an Olin remote and a Hoosier R mounted on a forged eight
pound rim will hurt growth way more enforcing common sense.
Tony
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian Green" <iagreen@ucdavis.edu>
To: <ba-autox@autox.team.net>
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 11:07 AM
Subject: RE: Stock Shock Chalk Talk
> I really don't agree with the shock issues going around in stock lately.
> But I've never ran stock and don't plan on it so I guess its not really my
> buisness. But if you start limiting shocks to major companies aren't you
> just helping to shut down the newer, smaller companies? Especially if you
> start trying to spread those rules beyond stock. We aren't the only form
> of motorsports but I'm sure that we do make up a signifigant portion of
> the market that these companies build for. If you limited specialty shocks
> to prepared/modified you'd probably hurt alot of the upcoming technology
> and probably lose alot of potential new autocrossers. Running in STS
> (supposedly the next step from stock) we have alot of discussions about
> newcomers already exceeding the rules with their daily drivers. Not too
> many people own prep/mod cars but theres a pretty good number who own
> street driven cars in various classes with custom built shocks.
>
> Ian
> STS 99
> shocks $ = 1/2 current blue book $
>
> > Hi Anthony
> >
> > Your version is definitely much easier to read and understand. The
price
> > limit thing is questionable though. I hope that your kind of thinking
> could
> > be applied to the Street Prepared classes too. How can I compete with
> cars
> > that have $1500 a corner shocks and struts and have 350rwhp as well as
> have
> > 315 or 335 tires sticking out of the wheel wells. Those type of race
> parts
> > should be left in the Prepared and Modified classes really. People
might
> > complain that it really only makes a small difference in track time.
Add
> > all those small changes up and the rich guys have much faster cars. My
> two
> > cents.
> >
> > Kirk
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ba-autox@autox.team.net
> > [mailto:owner-ba-autox@autox.team.net]On Behalf Of Anthony Tabacco
> > Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 9:30 AM
> > To: ba-autox@autox.team.net
> > Subject: Stock Shock Chalk Talk
> >
> >
> > The SEB is all over the map on trying to write a revised rule for stock
> > shocks. You probably read the distilled draft of the rule in Fast-track
> last
> > issue. While I appreciate the effort, after mighty debate, it has
brought
> > forth a rule that says that shocks for stock class cars cannot have
> remote
> > reservoirs. This isn't even close to good enough. The debate for all
> > practical purposes is dominated and limited to those very few
> stakeholders
> > with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo, which means more
> money
> > than everyone else would even consider spending, or that they make their
> > living at servicing them. It is not healthy for the sport, but I think
> they
> > were surprised to hear from an "ordinary" member. The response was
> > interesting. Someone on the SEB asked me (I think sincerely) for
specific
> > language. I am proceeding on the premise that a Koni 2800 or a Penske on
> a
> > Stock car is as stupid as R Compounds and that a workable shock rule can
> be
> > centered around restrictions on cost. If you don't agree with that, you
> need
> > to write your own letter because thats where I'm coming from, and here
is
> > what I have:
> >
> > "It is the intent of this rule that Stock Class serve as the entry class
> to
> > the sport and that cost containment is of primary importance to that
> goal.
> > Shock absorbers costs are best controlled by limiting shocks to units
> > economical enough that outright replacement of a unit is the mandatory
> > alternative in lieu of rebuilding.
> >
> > 1) Shocks shall be limited to one external adjustment, except when OEM.
> > 2) Shocks are limited to "off the shelf" units available for general
> > distribution street use to the public typically including, but not
> limited
> > to: OEM, Koni single adjustable, Bilstein, Tokiko, KYB, or
> available "house
> > brands", or other such units that meet the criteria and intent of the
> rule.
> > 3) The use of Koni 2800, Olin, Penske, Fox, DMS, or other such units
> > specifically manufactured for the specialty racing market are
> specifically
> > disallowed.
> > 4) Shocks shall be installed "as manufactured" and shall not be
purchased
> > from a third party in a modified condition or opened up for any reason
> by an
> > entrant or a third party. Revalving, machining, or modifying a shock
> > absorber for any reason is specifically disallowed. Except as supplied
as
> > OEM, the use of remote reservoirs, alloy bodies, adjustable perches, or
> > welded off coil-overs is prohibited.
> > 5) Cost of each unit is limited to $250 per unit or 125% of OEM,
> whichever
> > is greater."
> >
> > So, how close did I came? This gets added to the usual other stuff
there.
> > Also, if anyone can tell me if the cost item #5 does not work for them
> (like
> > what does a 996 shock cost anyway?) or you can add to the list of
> > allowed/dis-allowed, I would appreciate it. The other smoke and mirror
> thing
> > you hear a lot of is enforceability (as though anyone who can get past a
> > dipstick couldn't find tons of legal horsepower and tons more of
> > undetectable horsepower) so they are worried that the guy in the next
> pit is
> > going to cheat. its just a screen to not change a situation that has
> evolved
> > to the ridiculous.
> >
> > Be good,
> > Tony
> >
>
> Ian Green
> 2003 Team Coleader
> UC Davis Formula SAE
> http://mae.ucdavis.edu/~fsae
> 97 Honda Civic CX
> http://www.geocities.com/stscxr
|