25 replies to this topic

[davew]

In Cen-div and Northern Conference Majors it is a pretty normal thing for both track width and rim width to be checked. My guess is 50% of all events will get them checked at some point over the weekend.

[Ron Alan]

Out west I think i've seen track width checked twice. The 2nd time it was 2 guys with toe plates. When I asked what the were doing they said checking track width. I shrugged and said ok! I was legal and 1/8" toe out 

[Bench Racer]

Ron, if this was an SCCA track measurement, remind the tech to use the track measurement rule noted under Facts, Formulas And Measurement Standards.

[john mueller]

Technically I am still the NASA's SM Nat Dir but I was an advisor at best on the 2016 SM Rules.  Xavier needed to own the process since he'd be the one answering questions and dealing with the noise.  I like what he's done with the new rule set.  He's cleaned up the format to make it easier to read and find stuff.  Fixed some stuff to make tech easier and put in place a point where power is going to examined (please don't hijack this thread for that fire-fest).

 

Anyways, I've replied to the prevailing questions from my point-of-view and from my level of involvement.

 

 

For these the be legal it would seem other rules would need to be changed as well... Track width of the car is being altered here.

Why reinvent the wheel??? The uper bushings give far more then the 3degrees of camber advertised by this product.

I believe nasa okd the upper bushings when the scca did it, now you add this some people will have both but for what reason????

 

 

NASA (xavier) received a set about a month ago for measuring track width and there were no issues with exceeding the spec.

 

I'm assuming deep back in caveman evolution the wheel took more than 12months to develop...  Same here, the offset bushing rule is 11mos old.  This is a different way to get the same result for the owners who nave not installed offset bushings when it became an option.

 

NASA also has PT class, lots of SM's run PT too.  These extended Joints allows folks to have the flexibility to have the camber for SM but can easily remove the camber so they don't accumulate +2 points for PT.  

 

 

i don't think you have to have the extended ball joints to race with NASA.  A SCCA spec car should still be legal to run with NASA.

 

 

Spot on Keith.

 

 

.... Clearly it is easier to install or change out after a wreck.

 

Now there are 3 ways to get camber, bent spindles, offset bushings and now a ball joint. 

 

 

I know at track repair was part of my thinking what would be a good option for those who have not installed offset bushings.

 

Three legal ways now in NASA to get that camber: (1) OEM bushings,  (2) Offset Bushings, (3) Spec Extended Ball Joints.  I could be wrong but purposely bent spindles are illegal in both organizations.

 

 

 

[cordycord]

The shipment of Extended Lower Ball Joints has arrived, and has been sent to Flyin' Miata and 949 Racing.  There is another shipment due in at the end of the month (perhaps beginning Feb).  This is a new part, and while we've had very successful testing with Sammy Valafar, I look forward to hearing from Jim Drago regarding his thoughts on quality, ease of use, etceteras.  He's already made his thoughts known regarding the politics of the situation, which I respect.

 

Hopefully when more people are exposed to the parts there will be more of a consensus as to how they fit in (or not) with SCCA rules.  The intention was never to build a cheater part, but to build a safe part that kept racers from trying to "manipulate" their suspension in a manner that would cause a safety issue.  Either way, thanks for your consideration.

[Sean - MiataCage]

Sammy is definitely the guy to know about suspension "modifications".