Howdy,
On Thu, 18 Jan 2001 dg50@daimlerchrysler.com wrote:
> 1) As Dave (and a few others) have pointed out, SM inherits all the SP
> rules, less the handbrake rule (which we take from Prepared - in fact, the
> SM brake rules *are* the Prepared brake rules, less the allowance to remove
> the park brake) SP does NOT require cats, and explicitly states that
> emissions equipment may be removed.
>
> 2) The SM requirement for street legality is that the car have current
> plates. Period. It makes no requirement for how those plates were obtained,
> nor does it require that the car, is it sits, be capable of passing
> inspection in the state or province of record. If it has current plates,
> it's legal.
By "the car has current plates" I assume you mean that the car is
registered for street use, correct? In fact, with the verbage that
someone posted a while back (which I haven't verified), you state "the car
must be legally registered for street use", right?
If that's the case, you can't delete the cat. Because if you delete the
cat, you're no longer allowed by federal law to register the vehicle for
street use.
Whether or not your state actually _checks_ for the cat it immaterial.
> That is it. Cut and dried. Any other interpretation of the rules is
> flat-out WRONG.
Glad to see you're keeping an open mind.
On a completely different note, that the SCCA supports a class explicitly
designed for road-going cars, and that the SCCA is allowing (and by
implication encouraging) those cars to run without cats is silly both from
a legal standpoint as well as a PR standpoint. Given the focus on "street
legal" why don't you require a cat on those vehicles originally equipped
with one, just like the fed?
Mark
|