101 replies to this topic

[Johnny D]

[Johnny D]

So was he in this car for his win and reset of the the clock ?

[Spencer Rutherford]

So was he in this car for his win and reset of the the clock ?

yes, that's why the clock is still going it knew what we didn't. 

[Johnny D]

Oh, put under too much pressure to perform.

J~

[Craig Berry]

Very mixed emotions about what Danny did... being involved with 2014, where the top 7 or 8 were DQ'd, and they just ran out of time or the 21rst place guy may have won. All engine builders under the Excuse of "everyone is doing it"... and "doing it" was pushing slightly beyond the rules. I said after that race that some guys who thought they were legal were gonna get a surprise the next year, because I saw first hand the small tolerance we were dealing with. Sure enough first race in Florida caught Danny. I personally was upset with my team only because I do not think it mattered. This feels different. No other car tech'd had this issue, and this is not pushing slightly beyond the edge of the rules (which is cheating!) this is a deliberate modification. The stuff we all had to hear, from Drenan, who is amazing at that Laguna, to the guy with the last head checked, was upsetting. We all deserved it, but I do not see a similiar outrage.

My mixed emotions are the hypocrisy of those who always think anyone that beats them are cheating, instead of just realizing, this field is very tough and some days your just on it. I have had the advantage of being with Drago for years, and we are both amazed that one weekend I have him covered, and we load the cars, they do not leave the trailer, and the next weekend I can't stay with him on the out lap.

Lastly, and most importantly to me.... I like Danny. I know Danny is an Outstanding and Clean race car driver. I enjoy racing door to door with him. My first big race was the Sprints in 11 or 12 and I was leading on a drying track and Danny passed me on the last lap.... learned from him about having the guts to change to the dry line before your ready.

Danny, like I did from you after that Sprints race, learn and come back strong. We all know you can race.

[Johnny D]

IMO, everyone is looking for the edge to run up front but what makes this class great and fairly spec is everyone has a equal chance and knowledge. I'm for the rule change for the rear camber if that's what it take.

J~

[DrDomm]

Can someone explain exactly what was done...an illustration or photo would be wonderful.  

[David L]

IMO, everyone is looking for the edge to run up front but what makes this class great and fairly spec is everyone has a equal chance and knowledge. I'm for the rule change for the rear camber if that's what it take.

J~

But then we have to add a part when the next guy gets caught cheating, how about we build cars that are within the rules.

[David L]

I am under the impression they make tiny slices in the upper control arm then squeeze and weld to make it shorter/more camber.

 

This seems crazy for a top flight build, someone please clarify!!!!!!!  

 

And what happened after the race?

[Johnny D]

But then we have to add a part when the next guy gets caught cheating, how about we build cars that are within the rules.

IMO they whole part is get rid of the cheating. So there is no question. Everyone is raised to that level. If you followed the front bent spindle, well... I'd like everyone on the same page if possible. A drivers class.

Just sayin,

J~

[Jamz14]

other reason to cut the arm besides increasing camber

[FTodaro]

 I'm for the rule change for the rear camber if that's what it take.

J~

I am totally opposed to a rule change. The rules are clear. You cannot modify any suspension part. There is no ambiguity. I don't like limiting camber or ride height, it creates more problems. Swapping parts replacing bent ones to get camber is a part of the sport but we all know you cannot and should not modify them.

 

You will never make rules that stops people who want to cheat.

[Michael Novak]

I am totally opposed to a rule change. The rules are clear. You cannot modify any suspension part. There is no ambiguity. I don't like limiting camber or ride height, it creates more problems. Swapping parts replacing bent ones to get camber is a part of the sport but we all know you cannot and should not modify them.

 

You will never make rules that stops people who want to cheat.

Bushings in the back just like the front! No modified parts---It appears many are ok with the front but not the back?  

[Tom Sager]

If we're talking about modifying rear UCA's to get more camber I question why this would be done?  A stock NB car with suspension components that are straight (not bent) should be able to get 4+ degrees rear negative camber.  Maybe I'm the last to know but who is running that much in the rear or feels they need more than that?  Can't imagine settings like that making the car faster. 

[FTodaro]

Bushings in the back just like the front! No modified parts---It appears many are ok with the front but not the back? 

It will be easier to to just allow the slotting of the control arm rather than require bushings. I think it is a question of is it really needed. Most cars can get -3.3 to 3.6 if they do not have damage. With all the issues we have with stress and failures, is this really the direction we need to go????

[38bfast]

If we're talking about modifying rear UCA's to get more camber I question why this would be done?  A stock NB car with suspension components that are straight (not bent) should be able to get 4+ degrees rear negative camber.  Maybe I'm the last to know but who is running that much in the rear or feels they need more than that?  Can't imagine settings like that making the car faster.

If we're talking about modifying rear UCA's to get more camber I question why this would be done?  A stock NB car with suspension components that are straight (not bent) should be able to get 4+ degrees rear negative camber.  Maybe I'm the last to know but who is running that much in the rear or feels they need more than that?  Can't imagine settings like that making the car faster.

Tom not all cars can get there. Some have trouble to get -3.0. Same situation we went through on the front. Some cars can get the numbers some can't. Then offsets on the front made it so ALL could get front numbers.

[Michael Novak]

If we're talking about modifying rear UCA's to get more camber I question why this would be done?  A stock NB car with suspension components that are straight (not bent) should be able to get 4+ degrees rear negative camber.  Maybe I'm the last to know but who is running that much in the rear or feels they need more than that?  Can't imagine settings like that making the car faster. 

Tom,

 

You have a oddball then--there are a few cars that can get there, but like the front not many.  3.4-3.4 is more the normal--some less, some more. To get ride of the bent spindle problem, we got front bushings---As far as I know it got rid of the front camber problem, now the same is needed in the back.

[LarryKing]

How much rear chamber is enough? How much is too much? I thought 3.5 - 3.6 was correct. Is the point of the cheat to raise the ride height and still get "enough" chamber?

[Tom Sager]

Tom,

 

You have a oddball then--there are a few cars that can get there, but like the front not many.  3.4-3.4 is more the normal--some less, some more. To get ride of the bent spindle problem, we got front bushings---As far as I know it got rid of the front camber problem, now the same is needed in the back.

My '01 couldn't get more than -3.2 in the LR and slightly less than that in RR when I bought it.   Dave wheeler checked rear subframe and told me it was bent.  Bought a used one from Jim D, Dave and his crew installed it and now with nice symmetrical L & R cam positions, I can set it at -3.5+ with more adjustment still available.  My '95 same thing, can get all I want back there.  I don't know if I'm just "lucky" or if there are some cars around with bent stuff that's gone un-detected. 

[Jim Drago]

Can someone explain exactly what was done...an illustration or photo would be wonderful.  

this but to a stock control arm, but same idea

 

http://www.awrracing...arms-for-miata/