Quote:
My eyebrows raised on that one, too.
Andy, what I think Marty's asking is the same thing I immediately thought of when I read that post of yours: I can only assume you added a MAP sensor to your car that didn't exist before - clearly outside the original intent of the rules - and you routed a non-standard vacuum line to your ECU, also clearly against the intent of the rules. From Chris' post above, I infer he agrees with that as well, that adding a MAP sensor and a vacuum line to a car that didn't have one before is outside the original intent of the rules. I'm further assuming you routed that vacuum line into the ECU without making additional holes in the housing (maybe using an existing screw hole or something like that), thereby meeting the "letter".
Now, in reading the words ("letter") of the rules, I can certainly "justify" what you did, but only in the same way I can "justify" spherical bearings (original rule), modified VW CIS (current new "engine management computer" rule), Motec-in-a-box, and a host of other controversial items. But I also believe that in doing so you've violated the spirit of the rules.
On the other hand, given MoTec-in-a-box...tit-for-tat?
If my inference is incorrect, I apologize. But if my inference is correct I suggest you've lost any basis for chiding others for twisting the words contrary to the original intent and towards your own...just 'cause others have done it doesn't make it right... - GA [/b]
All good questions.