Well, using a part other than OEM is indeed a modificaton isn't it? Where do you draw the line? And remember, this must apply to 100% of the myriad of cases that may come up.Originally posted by erlrich:
Now, if you choose to interpret the use of non-OEM parts as a modification, then you're perfectly correct in that part D prohibits their use.
Perhaps you're right. You've piqued my curiosity.Originally posted by erlrich:
However, I would rather defer to the authors of the GCR whenever possible, and since they define "modify" as "to change a component by reworking, but not by replacing" it seems to me the first paragraph of part D is much more limited in its restrictions than what has been widely held in this an previous posts.
Well, I wouldn't expect every rule to be spelled out in sufficient detail.... As rules are written, they are written for the present as well as the future, and who knows what nuances may arise. The rules makers should strive to be as clear as possible, but most rules makers don't want to constrict themselves either, and this even applies to F1. Don't forget there are over 300 lines (car classifications) in the ITCS. Try to write rules that will cover all cases for all those lines in sufficient detail and you'll either never finish, or finish in the looney bin (IMHO).Originally posted by erlrich:
I do think that this only further illustrates Kirk's main point, that many of the rules are poorly worded and obtuse, and that steps should be taken to provide clarification in many areas. Maybe the SCCA should enlist the help of a professional editor in the writing of the GCR (please don't tell me they already do!).
A case book might help clear up some stuff though.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks