More Fun with Definitions

[Knestis]

...that we have been reminded of the problems that arise from those pages of the GCR, how about this:

Anti-Roll Bar (Sway bar) - A torsion control device connected to a car’s
structure, and to moving portions of the suspension, which is intended to
control body roll. (Some types of ARB may also serve as a suspension
component.)

What I have always thought of as the ARB on the twist beam rear end of the Golf doesn't "connect to the cars's structure" so what is it? The stock beam has a bar that runs down its middle that is clearly in torsion, serving to resist roll. I added another one, from a popular commercial source, that does the same thing.

I'm illegal, based on the definition, sounds like...

K

[pfcs]

Kirk-I never thought of you as a troublemaker. Do you enjoy ad-nauseum arguments about nonsense? Or are you just bored? Please, don't drink the coola-aid.
(ps: the axle beam and it's mountings "connect" the bar-of course, that's just an opinion. Lets invest 10 pgs of reasoned discussion about it, protest someone, call Jeremy, etc, etc. Lets put this "discussion" into the status of the .040" piston and the spherical bearing! I've been around long enough to know that all 3 are non-issues. Doesn't anybody get it?)

[Bill Miller]

Geez Phil, lighten up a bit. Too many cups of coffee this morning? The beauty of this system, is that if you don't like what's being discussed, you neither have to read, or participate it in.

Kirk,

I've seen people use a similar arguement to justify making all sorts of modifications to the rear beam on a VW. Saying that the beam itself was actually the ARB (of the suspension component type).

[Knestis]

It's just that I've had a couple of surprises in the past few months, in terms of changing what I thought I knew about the IT rules (see the piston strand). I'm honestly trying to reconcile some things in my head, based on (1) a suspension of belief that I really know what's going on, and (2) revisiting the LETTER of the rules, rather than presuming that they say what I want them to say. Or what I have thought that they say for a long damn time.

If the result is that we make some proposals to clarify the wording of not only the rules but of the definitions as well, then so be it. If it means that we discover that we are in violation of WHAT THE RULE SAYS, then something has to be done. It is a recipe for ongoing confusion if we pick and choose which rules we are going to follow to the letter, and which we are going to fudge.

Know what, Phil? Sometimes there just isn't a "right" answer to a question and the only reason to ask them is because we just get smarter by thinking about them. I like that.

K

Interesting idea, Bil. The rear axle beam of a VW indeed IS a big ARB. (And I DID notice that "suspension component" bit.) Since they may be "added or subsituted" it sounds like I can take it completely out, build a new one, and substitute away.

[pfcs]

Kirk-sorry if you felt discounted. What you say is true. What is also true is that these 3 "issues" are not issues. I'll guarantee you that a Golf sway bar mounted entirely to the axlebeam is legal and would pass due process, as well as spherical bearing cartridges as suspension bushings, and +040 pistons for all. Sometimes the club is more reasonable than it's membership. And don't forget what you've said about the risks of making ostensibly simple changes. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. (psst! don't say a WORD to anyone about the resonable part-I'll deny it)