Street Touring rule change for 2011

[Flying Dutchman]

Rod, I checked the calendar and it shows the event on the Saturday the 13th which I thought was odd, since all of the other events are on Sundays. It occured to me that since this is a charity event the club wanted to hold it on Saturday to maybe get more people to come out for it. I am planning on being there whether it is on either day. I also picked up on the link for registration which is very helpful. Thx, Charlie

[engled]

Rod, I checked the calendar and it shows the event on the Saturday the 13th which I thought was odd, since all of the other events are on Sundays. It occured to me that since this is a charity event the club wanted to hold it on Saturday to maybe get more people to come out for it. I am planning on being there whether it is on either day. I also picked up on the link for registration which is very helpful. Thx, Charlie

The event is on Sunday, where did you see it listed for Saturday?

[rodhx]

We had our Saturdays pulled from us by BRC Charlie. I think it was originally going to be a saturday event, but it was rescheduled for Sunday the 14th.

[zukitek]

Too late for the STAC I believe. It was out for comment over the last few months. STAC/SEB have recommended the deletion for BOD approval.

It's not a big deal to me either, other than the fact that if I go to a tour event I may have to take something off my car that has been on there for 11 years and serves no real purpose . I just didn't want this to catch out some of our other ST(?) folks.

I appreciate that you brought this to everyones attention.... otherwise I would have missed it due to the fact that I am considering alot of other subjects right now .

Its important that all of us know that this is probably law for now nationally and divisionally in 2011 but regionally in ALSCCA I think we are still business as usual.

[mpcavana]

This was the car driven by Ken Motonishi who won STR this year.
Picture

This wing might have been a factor in the ruling even though Ken probably didn't need it. That car was PREPARED for Nationals!

[ZX3Focus]

I admit I was attached to the idea of ST* being where the Fast and Furious come to play, but if that just can't be, then life will go on.

There will always be those who will stretch any rule to the limit in their desire to win and many good ideas just don't survive practical application. I wish there were some middle ground to be found between unrestricted, over-the-top functional aero and forbidding appearance mods, but I, for one, can't name a rule that would fit in that middle ground and be readily enforceable in grid. I trust the STAC did their best.

[Cholewa]

This was the car driven by Ken Motonishi who won STR this year.
Picture

This wing might have been a factor in the ruling even though Ken probably didn't need it. That car was PREPARED for Nationals!

That doesn't look like a non-functional wing to me... I'm surprised it didn't get contested.

[JohnW8]

I think some of these guys go over the top to illustrate a point and to get protested just to get a rules clarification.

[slowautoxr]

Years ago there was a FSP VW that swiss cheesed the brake rotors. Now there is a rule in place that limits that sorta thing.

[engled]

Years ago there was a FSP VW that swiss cheesed the brake rotors. Now there is a rule in place that limits that sorta thing.

Not in SP there is not.

Schenker’s on off Swiss cheese brakes.

[slowautoxr]

There's no VW in SP or there's no rule limiting? I haven't read the rules lately but I thought that there was some wording added to the brake rules limiting the amount of voids that can be added.

[engled]

I know nothing of the VWs but the rules on brakes changed a couple of years ago. Below are the sections that make the brakes in the picture legal.

15.6 BRAKES
D. Alternate brake rotors are permitted, subject to the following restrictions:
1. Rotors must be ferrous metal except for standard parts. Aluminum
rotor hats are allowed. Rotor dimensions (diameter and thickness)
must be equal to or greater than standard parts. Cars originally
equipped with solid (non-vented) rotors may utilize vented rotors.
2. Cross-drilled and/or slotted brake rotors may be used. Slots/holes
are permitted only in the braking area of the rotor. Rotors featuring
a drum-type parking brake in the hat area of the rotor may not be
drilled or slotted in the parking brake area.

H. Brake calipers may be replaced, provided the number of pistons
is equal to or greater than the original number of pistons. Caliper
mounting brackets may be replaced to accommodate this change,
but may serve no other purpose. Alternate caliper brackets must bolt
to the original caliper bracket mounting location(s).

[slowautoxr]

Okay maybe they just talked about limiting the number of slot/holes/voids. For my RX-7 where the hubs are integral to the brake rotor, cracked rotors are a serious pain and can get expensive. Most cars these days the rotors are separate from the hubs and much easier to change.

[Cholewa]

the ones posted in the picture are considered "motorcycle" brakes..

[aMaff]

Okay maybe they just talked about limiting the number of slot/holes/voids. For my RX-7 where the hubs are integral to the brake rotor, cracked rotors are a serious pain and can get expensive. Most cars these days the rotors are separate from the hubs and much easier to change.

You're thinking of ST, where there is a limit to the amount of void on a rotor. There's nothing in SP.

And while the ST bumper allowance lead to that swiss cheesed rear bumper, it also lead to at least 1 $1,XXX carbon fiber civic front bumper with integrated splitter.





Talk about another stupid expensive must-have part....