I need some history - what's up with these rules?

#1

I guess if I had been around since 2005, I would know the history of these rules, but since I don’t…

9.3.1.1.2. The stock unmodified intake airbox assembly shall be retained, and in it’s original
mounting. The stock airbox front rubber hose shall be removed.
9.3.1.1.3. Both left and right side plastic panels behind the headlights shall be removed.

Question 1: What’s up with the "keep the stock airbox, but remove the inlet hose rule? And why remove the plastic panels behind the headlights? I found a post about some cars getting protested at VIR for note having the panels - but it looks like they were easy to replace… I’ve been using the GRM article to build my car - and they removed the airbox & used a K&N - but now it looks like I’ll just keep the box.

9.3.13.3.1. Vehicles with integrated bumper assemblies, 1989 to 1991 models, may use
aftermarket front one-piece bumper/spoiler unit, provided the original crash bar is
maintained.

Question 2: One of the reasons I bought a later car was to get the integrated front bumper with the air dam and fog lights - so I was just going to add the brake air ducts and be good to go… but now it looks like everyone? lots of guys? the really fast guys? run some type of aftermarket (and UGLY) front air dam… Why do people do this? Was it an equalizer to the earlier 86-88 cars - and now the newer cars need it to be competitive?

So… impart to me the SE30 Tribal knowledge

#2

I have no idea about the plastic headlight back covers…someone told me last year they had to be removed, I thought they were joking… On the front, there are people that like to experiment with different airdams, I think that most of the front runners do not run anything other than stock, otherwise you risk leaving it on the track somewhere. You will discover that the suspension on a spec e30 will allow you to go about anywhere, over curbs, thru the grass, etc without upsetting the car. I do not even run the bottom lip on mine, I put it on for photo ops…

Al

#3

I didnt know that you Have to remove them. The old rule was that you had to HAVE them in. The issues was that they were hard to find for alot of people and served no real performance improvement, so I thought the rule was changed to allow you run them or not,but i guess not.

#4

I may be wrong, but I think the reason for removing the headlight backing panels was to make all model years more uniform, plus they are getting harder to find.

#5

The reason for the stock air box with no hose is to make all the intakes the same. I believe the reason for the no hose rule is because a lot of cars were missing them and sometimes it is difficult to get the hose to attach even if you do have the parts they don’t always line up just right.

#6

some of the rules changed last year (since the GRM article). There is a post in the Clarifications/Announcements thread that shows the changes in the 2009 rules vs. 2008 (and also a new one for 2010 vs. 2009).
The “must do” rules are just to maintain consistency amongst cars so people don’t spend time searching for the 2hp you can get by modifying them.

I also doubt that the front air dams do much given the aero of the rest of the car. The one-piece bumper allowance is for cost reasons.
thanks
bruce

#7

Bruce, Take a look at 9.3.13.16 “may be modified” which means according to 3.6 they can be removed. The very next sentence says the outside mirror housings should remain stock. I would suggest this needs to be cleaned up to avoid misunderstandings.

#8

Gasman wrote:

:huh: First, you’ll need to clear up the misunderstanding?

Understand the Vocabulary and it should be self explanitory.

  1. Definitions and Application of the Regulations
    3.1. “Shall” is mandatory,
    “may not” is prohibitive,
    and “may” is permissive.

3.3. “Original” and “stock” mean “as originally fitted for the chassis, model and year of the car.”
[color=#A7A7A7]IMO: this should read “Shall be originally fitted for…”[/color]

3.4. “Substituted” means that original OEM equivalent items may be used.
3.5. “Replaced” means that the item may be replaced with items meeting or exceeding OEM
specifications.
3.6. “Modified” means that the item may be replaced, machined, welded, or removed.

If it says “may”, then it’s not a MUST

#9

Gasman wrote:

[quote]Bruce, Take a look at 9.3.13.16 “may be modified” which means according to 3.6 they can be removed. The very next sentence says the outside mirror housings should remain stock. I would suggest this needs to be cleaned up to avoid misunderstandings.[/quote]Steve, I really am curious about your thinking; what interpretation can there be other than the housings must remain, but the glass is essentially ‘free’?

For example, I have a small stick-on convex mirrorlet applied to the edge of my drivers side mirror. I did this to eliminate a blind spot off my LR quarter.

I would say my ‘modification’ is an appropriate interpretation of the rule you cite.

#10

Scott, I’m going to ignore the comment on understanding the vocabulary until we see each other. “Modified” according to the rules means it can be removed. All I am saying is that we have a contradiction in the rules. If we are going to try and clean them up, let’s do it the right way.

ctbimmer, I agree with your comment.

#11

Gasman wrote:

[quote] All I am saying is that we have a contradiction in the rules. [/quote]What contradiction do you see? What I see is that the glass can be removed, but the housings must remain.

I personally wouldn’t choose to race w/o functioning side mirrors, but the meaning of the rule is not unclear.

#12

Chuck, I didn’t think we had a contradiction when the GRM folks welded 85 pounds of balast to a rim and called it a spare, but the rules committee deemed it legal until the rules addressed it for the following year.

Why would anyone choose to remove the glass from a mirror and leave the housing? I think we agree, they wouldn’t. 9.3.13.16 has two sentences. The second sentence contradicts the first when you consider the meaning of 3.6.

#13

9.3.13.16 says you can modify the glass (and, I suppose, remove it if you’d like), but the housing has to stay stock and in the stock location (so aero isn’t changed). The purpose of the rule is to allow convex glass so people can have a wider angle view. I don’t see a problem with the way the rule is structured.
thanks,
bruce
p.s. I never agreed with what GRM did with the spare tire either.

Gasman wrote:

[quote]Chuck, I didn’t think we had a contradiction when the GRM folks welded 85 pounds of balast to a rim and called it a spare, but the rules committee deemed it legal until the rules addressed it for the following year.

Why would anyone choose to remove the glass from a mirror and leave the housing? I think we agree, they wouldn’t. 9.3.13.16 has two sentences. The second sentence contradicts the first when you consider the meaning of 3.6.[/quote]

#14

Gasman wrote:

[quote]Scott, I’m going to ignore the comment on understanding the vocabulary until we see each other. “Modified” according to the rules means it can be removed. All I am saying is that we have a contradiction in the rules. If we are going to try and clean them up, let’s do it the right way.

ctbimmer, I agree with your comment.[/quote]

Dang it. As if I wasn’t dieing for May to already get here… You sure I can’t goat you into a little forum fight? :wink:

I’m just mess’n with ya…

#15

Gasman wrote:

:S Really?

3.6 is the definition of “modified.” 9.3.13.16 says the mirror glass may be modified. It doesn’t say the mirror housing can be modified. To clear up any unlikely confusion, the second sentence in 9.3.13.16 states that the housings must remain. Shame on them for clarifying an issue that was clear. It only led to confusion. :laugh:

#16

scottmc wrote:

[quote]You sure I can’t goat you into a little forum fight? :wink:
[/quote]
I know you are in North Carolina and all, but I think you meant “goad”… :laugh: :laugh: :blink:

#17

Steve, Trust me, I understand what it says. I understood what it said in previous years when “balast” could only be added to the “passenger compartment”. Somehow balast welded to a spare tire’s rim and bolted in the trunk was determined to be okay. I suppose you could put a passenger in the trunk to make it legal :wink:

Shit, I’m sorry I said anything.

#18

Gasman wrote:

I believe that is only deemed legal at New Jersey Motorsports Park.

#19

Steve D wrote:

[quote]Gasman wrote:

I believe that is only deemed legal at New Jersey Motorsports Park.[/quote]

youse guys are still planning to come up in Nov right? :evil:

#20

Only if you agree to ride in my trunk. :wink: