Welding my doors shut.

#1

Can I weld he rear doors on a 4 door shut?

#2

I’ve heard about eta to "i" car conversions, or automatics to 5-speeds, but this is the first proposal I’ve seen for a sedan to a coupe conversion!:laugh:

Sasha

#3

Why???

I don’t think the rule book says you can…so you can’t.

#4

I know I will sound like an ass for saying it but here goes. Everyone needs to read the rules thoroughly. If you have a question about the legality of something, read the rules again. There is no better way to learn the rules than to read them whenever you have a question.

The 3rd rule in the rules and regulations is:

1.3. Only modifications specifically authorized are allowed; and competitive adjustments are not allowed.

Its pretty cut and dry. Yes, it gets old hearing it but it never changes…if the rules don’t say you can do it then…

Ok, rant off.

#5

I would imagine it to be illegal seeing as it could be interpreted the same as seam welding the chassis.

JP

#6

screwynewy wrote:

[quote]I know I will sound like an ass for saying it but here goes. Everyone needs to read the rules thoroughly. If you have a question about the legality of something, read the rules again. There is no better way to learn the rules than to read them whenever you have a question.

The 3rd rule in the rules and regulations is:

1.3. Only modifications specifically authorized are allowed; and competitive adjustments are not allowed.

Its pretty cut and dry. Yes, it gets old hearing it but it never changes…if the rules don’t say you can do it then…

Ok, rant off.[/quote]

I’ve got a copy next to the bed and next to the crapper. (no, my bed isn’t next to the crapper.) I have read them OVER and OVER. I’ve practically memorized them. I ask a question becuase I don’t know the answer, not becuase I’m lazy.

9.3.13.24. Any door adjacent to a seat equipped with seat belts or harness must be capable of being opened from both inside and outside the car.

Does this imply that converse is true? "Any door NOT adjacent to a seat equipped with seat belts or harness don’t need to be capable of being opened from both inside and outside the car?"

Why is this rule here if nowhere in the rules it says you can make ANY door in-operable?

#7

that rule is there to ensure that you have door handles on the inside and outside on doors adjacent to people/seats, not to say that the doors are openable or not.

I concur that it is better to ask than assume.
cheers,
bruce

jensscott wrote:

[quote]I’ve got a copy next to the bed and next to the crapper. (no, my bed isn’t next to the crapper.) I have read them OVER and OVER. I’ve practically memorized them. I ask a question becuase I don’t know the answer, not becuase I’m lazy.

9.3.13.24. Any door adjacent to a seat equipped with seat belts or harness must be capable of being opened from both inside and outside the car.

Does this imply that converse is true? "Any door NOT adjacent to a seat equipped with seat belts or harness don’t need to be capable of being opened from both inside and outside the car?"

Why is this rule here if nowhere in the rules it says you can make ANY door in-operable?[/quote]

#8

jensscott wrote:

[quote]screwynewy wrote:

[quote]I know I will sound like an ass for saying it but here goes. Everyone needs to read the rules thoroughly. If you have a question about the legality of something, read the rules again. There is no better way to learn the rules than to read them whenever you have a question.

The 3rd rule in the rules and regulations is:

1.3. Only modifications specifically authorized are allowed; and competitive adjustments are not allowed.

Its pretty cut and dry. Yes, it gets old hearing it but it never changes…if the rules don’t say you can do it then…

Ok, rant off.[/quote]

I’ve got a copy next to the bed and next to the crapper. (no, my bed isn’t next to the crapper.) I have read them OVER and OVER. I’ve practically memorized them. I ask a question becuase I don’t know the answer, not becuase I’m lazy.

9.3.13.24. Any door adjacent to a seat equipped with seat belts or harness must be capable of being opened from both inside and outside the car.

Does this imply that converse is true? "Any door NOT adjacent to a seat equipped with seat belts or harness don’t need to be capable of being opened from both inside and outside the car?"

Why is this rule here if nowhere in the rules it says you can make ANY door in-operable?[/quote]

Your logic is flawed. The converse of that is that any door not adjacent to a seat equipped with seat belts or harnesses must be capable of being opened from EITHER inside or outside the car.

#9

traqrat wrote:

[quote]
Your logic is flawed. The converse of that is that any door not adjacent to a seat equipped with seat belts or harnesses must be capable of being opened from EITHER inside or outside the car.[/quote]

Good catch

Sorry, my egg shape head is getting more round the more I wear a helmet.

#10

Very good Bruce!

Carter

leggwork wrote:

[quote]that rule is there to ensure that you have door handles on the inside and outside on doors adjacent to people/seats, not to say that the doors are openable or not.

I concur that it is better to ask than assume.
cheers,
bruce

jensscott wrote:

[quote]I’ve got a copy next to the bed and next to the crapper. (no, my bed isn’t next to the crapper.) I have read them OVER and OVER. I’ve practically memorized them. I ask a question becuase I don’t know the answer, not becuase I’m lazy.

9.3.13.24. Any door adjacent to a seat equipped with seat belts or harness must be capable of being opened from both inside and outside the car.

Does this imply that converse is true? "Any door NOT adjacent to a seat equipped with seat belts or harness don’t need to be capable of being opened from both inside and outside the car?"

Why is this rule here if nowhere in the rules it says you can make ANY door in-operable?[/quote][/quote]

#11

I propose that Jens be granted an exemption, on the condition that he has to slide across the hood before getting into the car, and he has to jump the car over an alligator-filled creek at least once per weekend.

I can even supply the Waylon Jennings "Music Man" LP.

#12

sharkd wrote:

[quote]I propose that Jens be granted an exemption, on the condition that he has to slide across the hood before getting into the car, and he has to jump the car over an alligator-filled creek at least once per weekend.

I can even supply the Waylon Jennings "Music Man" LP.[/quote]

I’ll be happy to after I get finished fight’n the system like a two bit robin hood.

yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeehaaaaaaaaaa!

#13

Weldin’ the doors shut… I guess that’s just a little bit more than the law will allow… I don’t think Jens was ever meaning no harm by asking…

(I’ll stop now.)