RULE CHANGE/CLARIFICATION

4109 Views 9 Replies 5 Participants Last post by fireant, Mar 29, 2007

MX5RACER

Discussion Starter · Mar 14, 2007

Has anyone seen the March Fast Track yet? They "Clarified" the strut tower bar rule in SP. This also trickles down to ST. The changed the wording in such a way that most bars are now illegal. For example the Nuespeed K bar is now illegal! Any thoughts on this.

There is some talk that this does not clarify the rule but changes the original intent of the rule, making it a new rule... without opening it up for member comment.

Also, this very conveniently still allows the popular Miata bar to stay legal!

Save

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

tyson

· #2 · Mar 14, 2007

i just spent the last 20 minutes trying to figure out what youre talking about in the march 07 fastrack.

http://www.scca.com/_FileLibrary/File/0 ... strack.pdf

you talking about this?

22. Street Prepared: Add "..and may only provide stiffening along one axis…" to the second sentence of 15.2.C.

Save

MX5RACER

Discussion Starter · #3 · Mar 14, 2007

Yes, I am talking about that. It makes most strut tower bars illegal.

22. Street Prepared: Add "..and may only provide stiffening along one axis…" to the second sentence of 15.2.C.

The new rule will now read:

C. Strut bars are permitted with all types of suspension. Strut bars may be mounted only transversely across the car from upper right to upper left suspension mounting point and from lower right to lower left suspension mounting point. No other configuration is permitted and may only provide stiffening along one axis. Only bolt-on attachment is permitted. Additional holes may be drilled for mounting bolts. Interior trim panels may be modified to allow installation of strut bars. Holes or slots may be no larger than necessary and may serve no other purpose. This does not permit any modifications to the frame or unibody beyond the allowed mounting holes.

Save

tyson

· #4 · Mar 14, 2007

how?

my neuspeed bar attaches to each shock top hat mount. but it really only provides stiffening in one direction.

Save

downest

· #5 · Mar 14, 2007

I don't see how that changes anything other than 3-point front upper bars...

Save

MX5RACER

Discussion Starter · #6 · Mar 14, 2007

You can go to this link for more debate on this, but I will post a quote from Andy Hollis, a SEB member:

http://sccaforums.com/forums/thread/235596.aspx

Andy: "Here's how I would test it: First, disconnect one side. Now take hold of the bar and pull to the front/rear of the car to see if it resists significantly, or instead bends. If it bends easily, it could be argued that it provides no additional stiffness to the chassis (weaker than the chassis). If it doesn't, it probably does provide additional stiffness to the chassis in that dimension. "

Or here:

http://www.scca.com/GARAGE/FORUM/forum_ ... =4885&PN=1

So that makes this bar illegal:

http://www.eautoworks.com/ORD-1-1-1-2554.cfm

See less See more

Save

tyson

· #7 · Mar 14, 2007

alright then.

its not the RULE thats absurd. its the "testing" method thats absurd.

whats even more scary is that both are coming from the same person.

if thats his interpretation of the rule he created, or was a part of, then basically a legal strut bar MUST have a universal or spherical joint at each end.

lame.

Save

downest

· #8 · Mar 14, 2007

Agreed. Glad I'm already in SM2, looks like the NS bars are going to be popping up used for cheap now...

Save

imgoingforit

· #9 · Mar 29, 2007

Aw, man! You have *GOT* to be kidding me. ANY bar without pivots at the end? B.S.

-Chris

Save

fireant

· #10 · Mar 29, 2007

I had a Neuspeed bar on my crx and did back to back testing at an autocross practice event last year.

I found no consistent increase or decrease in my times with or without it.

Save

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.

Top Contributors this Month