Air Dams... the sequel

[Bildon]

"The spoiler shall have NO support or reinforcement extending aft of the forward most part of the front fender opening."

OK, so when I build my new splitter which also acts as an undertray....can it hang free in the air back past front wheel opening?? No "reinfocement" No "support"

I'm going to guess that the rules makers meant to say...no part of the air dam, splitter, undertray may extend back past the .....

but it does not say that.

thoughts?



------------------
Bill Sulouff - Bildon Motorsport
Volkswagen Racing Equipment
## 2003 ITB NYSRRC Champs ##

[ITSRX7]

Good catch. I am with you in your interpretation. When we designed our splitters, we went to the wheel opening and NO further - otherwise I would argue it served another purpose - underbody aero.

AB

------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region #188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com

[Knestis]

But aren't you ignoring "[The airdam] 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" (emphasis mine)?

The "thing" that extends backward as you describe has to be part of the "airdam" - what else would you call it that was allowed by the rules? If this is the case, it can only go back as far as Andy describes.

K

[Bildon]

Kirk,
How could you see an undertray when viewing the car from above? I knew it! You are Clark not Kirk!

... see this is why I posted this. You read it differently than I did.

I read it to say that it couldn't protrude beyond the outline viewed from above or from the fender opening...since my design still wasn't protruding beyond the *body* viewed from those 2 places....

Anyway, I know what they "meant" and my splitter/tray will stop at the wheel arch.

Thanks for clarifying.

- Bill

[ed325its]

Your interpretation is correct and the rule is quite clear. There is a comma in the sentance before the word "or". Therefore the last part of the senatnce refers to "protudes" and not "when viewed".

------------------

[joeg]

Bill--Are you thinking that any turnbuckles extending to the horizontal lip of the splitter/dam are a no no?

[grjones1]

Originally posted by ed325its:
Your interpretation is correct and the rule is quite clear. There is a comma in the sentance before the word "or". Therefore the last part of the senatnce refers to "protudes" and not "when viewed".

Very good Ed!! Where did you take your English degree? It's refreshing to hear from someone who knows the English language. And of course I mean no disrespect for others in the string.
GRJ

[Bildon]

>> Are you thinking that any turnbuckles extending to the horizontal lip of the splitter/dam are a no no?

Actually that part was an obvious no, no.

"NO support or reinforcement extending aft of..."

- Bill