You guys can play word games all you want, but I guarandamntee you that 6, 12, 18, 24+ months from now the "intent" of the rules will be long forgotten. Don't believe me? Hey, Andy, show me proof of the original intent of the "alternate bushing materials" on the suspension. Darin, you take up the original intent of the port matching. George, you get the ECU rules.

Now, each of you present to the group, in a hundred words or less, how you're going to stop someone from installing spherical suspension bushings, a MoTec ECU, and/or hogging out their exhaust ports to match their custom-built header.

George, come on: when you use vernacular terms for rules and regulations, you get vernacular translations. "Up to" and "down to" refers to position and location, not size. Traditionally speaking, it can be - and will be - translated to either mean an increase in size *OR* simply 'a maximum value'. And, just as in the examples I gave above, both are correct. Are you going to attend all Regional events infinitum to make sure all local tech guys "interpret" the wording the way y'all meant it? If so, can we also recruit the guys that wrote the ECU, bushings, and port-matching rules to travel along with you? Now you know how *those* guys feel/felt.

Let's face it: it got blown. Either deal with it, or request a rule change pronto (yep, much further past this point and it's a rule "change".) No matter how carefully you write it, no matter how carefully you think you've got it covered, someone's gonna come around and flip the world upside down.

I'm pretty impressed, actually. Ingenuity and innovation at its best. Makes me smile.

Frankly, though, I'm just seriously pissed that my brakes are too large to run a 12" wheel, 'cause I'd be ordering them first thing tomorrow...

GregA