Part 3
Matt Murray
mattm@optonline.net
What about older stock cars that no longer have oem shocks
available? Shocks would be handled like any other parts
which are no longer available from the manufacturer--there
is specific wording in the rule book which allows the next
closest thing that can be found in the aftermarket that is
as near as possible to a direct replacement and not "high
performance" in nature. It works for all sorts of other
things right now. But again, I can't think of any cars so
old right now as to be in this need. In fact, most of the
cars competing these days would still be on their original
oem shocks if not for the current rules. So in most cases,
availability and cost just won't be factors since the shocks
won't be swapped out in the first place.
Finally, what about the sneaky competitor that takes apart
his oem shocks, sets them up to be wayyy tricky, then
rewelds them back together to look like new? Well, without
being too glib about it, that's cheating. And I really feel
that the vast, vast majority of our members won't cheat.
They'll use every inch of the rules that they have to, but
they won't cheat. And if they do, hey, the shock is
supposed to look like a factory shock, inside and out. If I
were going to protest someone I'd provide two new factory
shocks for comparison. One they cut in half to compare to
his shock which they cut in half. The other, they give to
him if his shock is found legal. The incentive for someone
to cheat knowing that his work can be cut in half and thrown
away if the protestor just hands you a brand new shock is
way lower. But mostly, this issue is like the stock engine
rules in 1993 or so. When 0.040 overbores and balancing
were removed from stock at that time, people predicted
rampant cheating. It didn't happen. I have faith in our
membership, and don't feel it will happen with shocks
either. But with shocks, it's much easier and cheaper to
enforce.
BTW, also like the stock engine allowances in the early
90's, this rule would need to be implemented on a two year
sunset. In other words, the rule would be debated this
year, and ideally passed this year. So 2002 goes by while
the rule is debated by the SEB, floated for member comment,
etc. At the end of 2002 the rule is passed, following the
"rule season" concept that the SEB tends to follow. But the
SEB would put a two year sunset provision in place, meaning
that for the next two seasons, 2003 and 2004 the new rule
wouldn't go into effect...yet. This gives the folks that
have already spent the big $$ on shocks a couple of years to
use them. It also decreases the incentive to escalate the
shock wars any further. Then in 2005, we all drive on oems
in stock. (SP would keep the current rules of course.)
So there you have it. I feel strongly that we have a
problem with "stock" category shocks that must be
addressed. And unfortunately, the genie can't be put
half-way back into the bottle. But we can smash the bottle
and banish him from driving up the cost of solo in stock any
further by reverting to oem shocks on a 2 year sunset, with
implementation starting in January 2005.
I hate to jump in with such a long missive, and jump back
out, but I'm really busy these days. Poke at my arguments,
either publicly or privately and I'll do my best to
respond. You see how my thought process has evolved.
Enlighten me!
--Byron
Dave Williamson wrote:
>
> >If you think this is fun, just wait until the shock rules
> >rewrite comes up soon for Stock
> >
> >.. oops, guess the cat is out of the bag ...
>
> I sincerely hope that the SAC looks at Club Racing's Showroom
Stock and
> Improved Touring shock rules if they are contemplating a
rewrite. The "free"
> shock rules in Stock are way too "free", IMHO. I'd like to see
a limitation
> to the number of adjustments, external resevoirs, etc.
>
> I'd also like to see more alignment between Showroom Stock and
Stock, and IT
> and SP. Remember (IIRC), we still allow SS cars to run in
Stock, and IT cars
> to compete in their appropriate SP classes. We should at least
make some
> token effort to keep the prep limits aligned.
>
> Dave W.
/// 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
|