Front Spoilers

[JimLill]

This is surely been discussed before, but with the upcming of a new season and rule revisions I thought I would ask again.

I'll use my own current car as an example. It is an 86 VW A2 GTI. So as I understand it:

- I cannot use any improved aero pieces off susbsequent A2 models (big bumper type etc)
- I cannot add any aftermarket parts (eg: Kamei parts)
- I CAN design and fabricate my own dam/spoiler

That seems techinically contradictory to some degree, but if it is a correct interpretation, I guess me doing the work is the difference. I am not even thinking about the relative merit of them speed wise etc yet.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Jim,

I think you can ADD aftermarket stuff (provided it meets the structural and dimentional rules) so long as you don't SUBSTITUTE OEM stuff for said aftermarket stuff.

If the Kamei piece is in addition to all your OEM stuff, I think you are in the clear.

[HOOSER 99]

I cannot use any improved aero pieces off susbsequent A2 models (big bumper type etc)

Wouldn't this be OK if you changed the front bumper assembly?

[JimLill]

Wouldn't this be OK if you changed the front bumper assembly?
[/b]

I take that to be not OK via the use of post-dated parts, although maybe that is just engine (????)..

[Eric Parham]

The 85-89 and 89.5-92 bumper styles can be freely interchanged on an ITB Golf since they're all on the same spec line. Hint: the only difference between the bumper supports is one less tow hook, so delete the extra tow hook and all you'd need is the cheap aftermarket front bumper cover, which duplicates the 90 Golf GTI 8V cover.

An interesting question that might only apply to the ITA Golf 1.8L 16V is whether the later cover can be used there too (with hole cut for early extra tow hook, if required). I think it came on some German-built Jettas in 89.5, but I'm not sure if it came on the Pennsylvania or Mexican built GTI 1.8 16V. There was no GTI 16V in '90, and the '91-'92 were 2.0 16V. Assuming for the moment that it did not come on any 89 GTI 1.8 16V, would it be allowed since it's basically just adding the spoiler to the bumper cover? I believe that both the early and late covers would qualify as "integrated", since they cover the original support all the way back to the grille valance. Opinions?

ITCS 8. Body/Structure

b.A front spoiler/air dam is permitted.It shall not protrude
beyond the overall outline of the body when viewed from
above perpendicular to the ground,or aft of the forward
most part of the front fender opening.This body outline does
not include bumpers or bumper mounts.The spoiler/air dam
shall be mounted to the body,and may extend no higher than
four (4)inches above the horizontal centerline of the front
wheel hubs.It shall not cover the normal grille opening(s)at
the front of the car.Openings are permitted for the purposes
of ducting air to the brakes,cooler,and radiator.Dealer
installed or limited production front/rear spoilers/air dams/
wings are prohibited.The spoiler shall have no support or
reinforcement extending aft of the forward most part of the
front fender wheel opening.

NOTE:Integrated bumper assemblies are defined as those
designs where an external non-metallic bumper cover
completely encloses the primary energy-absorbing bumper
and where this cover could be installed in its normal position
with the underlying bumper removed.On cars with integrated
bumpers,the front spoiler or airdam may be attached to the
bumper cover.

[Eric Parham]

While we're at it, I'm wondering about front splitters and diffusers. Many IT folks seem to be running them this year. All I found in the ITCS was the above allowance for spoilers or air dams. Is a splitter allowed because it's just a feature of a spoiler or air dam, or did I miss a more specific allowance in a Fastrack along the way?

[lateapex911]

As long as your "splitter" is integral with the air dam, i think all is good. Just make sure it meets the dimensional requirements.

[JimLill]

The 85-89 and 89.5-92 bumper styles can be freely interchanged on an ITB Golf since they're all on the same spec line. [/b]

"on the same spec line".............. how far can that concept be carried?

[trhoppe]

"on the same spec line".............. how far can that concept be carried?
[/b]
Well as far as "when they are on the same spec line". I fail to see your question?

-Tom

[JimLill]

Well as far as "when they are on the same spec line". I fail to see your question?

-Tom
[/b]

Eric made the "same spec line" comment above.... that seems like it opens up a lot beyond spoilers

[JeffYoung]

Yes it does, and there is a lot of back dating and updating done in IT.

Some of it perhaps illegal as I understand that it must be done, per the rules, as a complete assembly.

So, define assembly? 2nd Gen RX7s mix and match intake manifolds from one year car with motors and other items from another. Most thing this is legal, I do too, but at some point, the definition of "assembly" would prevent some of this.

[trhoppe]

I was also under the impression that it was *supposed* to open up a lot, and allow updating and backdating of assemblies. It actually defines the longblock or something as an assembly does it not?

I would certainly consider a front bumper cover as an assembly.

-Tom

[JimLill]

"worst case example"....

so if FI System Type A is used in the first half of the range of years in the spec line and Type B in the second half of the same spec line, I can swap B for A as long as it is done in its entirety?????

[JeffYoung]

I believe that is correct. And, you are probably ok that an entire induction system is an assembly.

Where it gets dicey is when you try to use the manifold from Type A (because it flows better) and the AFM from Type B (because it flows better). At that point, are you breaking up an assembly? Hard to say.

[Gary L]

"worst case example"....

so if FI System Type A is used in the first half of the range of years in the spec line and Type B in the second half of the same spec line, I can swap B for A as long as it is done in its entirety?????

[/b] Since the "update/backdate" assembly rule specifically includes "induction system" as an example, that looks like an indisputable...."Yes"! :) To get specific, IMO the rule allows me to replace the D-Jetronic FI system on my '71 Volvo with the K-Jetronic system from a '74, since both cars are on the same spec line.

Now on the other hand, I might have a problem, at least in some cases, with a bumper cover being called an "assembly". I'm sure I've seen examples of these devices that are a single piece of molded plastic. How did it become an "assembly", if it wasn't assembled into it's final form from multiple parts? Going back to the update/backdate paragraph in the GCR, I certainly don't see any single-part items called out as examples of a "complete assembly". :unsure:

[trhoppe]

Since the "update/backdate" assembly rule specifically includes "induction system" as an example, that looks like an indisputable...."Yes"! :) To get specific, IMO the rule allows me to replace the D-Jetronic FI system on my '71 Volvo with the K-Jetronic system from a '74, since both cars are on the same spec line.

Now on the other hand, I might have a problem, at least in some cases, with a bumper cover being called an "assembly". I'm sure I've seen examples of these devices that are a single piece of molded plastic. How did it become an "assembly", if it wasn't assembled into it's final form from multiple parts? Going back to the update/backdate paragraph in the GCR, I certainly don't see any single-part items called out as examples of a "complete assembly". :unsure:
[/b]

Well then the front bumper cover, all the brackets/plastic crap that comes with it, the bumper beam, and the brackets that bolt that whole shebang onto the car are an assembly.

Since parts b - f are the same on the two cars and the *only* difference is part a, the cover, you can replace the cover only with a new model.

BUT, if for example, the bumper beam is all different, then I feel you should havea to replace that as well :)

-Tom