I agree with John in that not everyone has the same frame of reference. The
ambiguity of the rules and how each individual interprets them seems to be
an ongoing problem. I realize that the SCTA rules committee has the final
say in this matter, but something along the lines of the aluminum door panel
discussion brings this problem to light. If I were to paint the fabricated
aluminum door panels black to match my carpet, would they then be
acceptable? Again, everyone has a different way of interpreting the rules,
and for me, production classification refers more to body shape (including
spoilers, roll or step pans etc..) and engine placement.
But that's how I interpret that particular rule.
Darrell Ferguson
BLACK RADON ENGINEERING
# 939 BBFALT
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Beckett [SMTP:landspeedracer@email.msn.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2000 9:35 AM
> To: dferguso@ebmail.gdeb.com; land-speed@autox.team.net
> Subject: Re: rules
>
> Doug
>
> I actually think this is a good exercise. Not everybody interrupts the
> rules
> in the same way. What's absolutely clear to one is as thick as mud to
> another. This kind of discussion helps clarify things for the future. And
> maybe will lead to a wording change.
>
> John Beckett, LSR #79
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <dferguso@ebmail.gdeb.com>
> To: <landspeedracer@email.msn.com>; <land-speed@autox.team.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2000 12:10 PM
> Subject: Re: rules
>
>
> > i guess i would personally have a tough time in tech inspection if i
> rolled
> > in with a production entry with some nice, well crafted, polished or
> > anodized beadrolled aluminum doorpanels and i started getting flack
> about
> > them from the rules commitee, while another production entry with old ,
> > ratty, mildewed original cardboard factory doorpanels slipped right
> thru,
> > with the rulebook written as is. (like having original doorpanel
> upholstery
> > is necessary to classify a car in the production category - come on !)
> i
> > think we have beaten the rule interpretation issue to death on this
> forum.
> > obviously one cannot build a legal entry just by reading the scta/bni
> > rulebook, since i wouldnt even think that this doorpanel issue would be
> an
> > issue at all. rather , it appears that every aspect and detail of
> vehicle
> > construction must be approved another groups consensus or jury rule
> > committee on a case basis via their interpretation, and not what the
> > rulebook says verbatim . whatever ------------------
> > ill shut up now- i dont even have a production ride
> > POSITIVE regards, doug @ black radon engineering
> >
> >
>
>
|