I see this approximate comment alot regarding rule changes or interpretations:

~ We don't want to creep towards becoming production. ~

And I have to say in the context it is frequently used in (sometimes for any change in the rules at all) I really think it is misused or I simply have no idea what they are saying.

I think my view is that the difference is production involves substantial internal engine development and substantial chasis modification.

So while I would agree that any rule allowing additional work on the long block or the attached carb/FI beyond the current rules and allowances (even though I requested an alternate distributer/oil pump gear) would be indicative of creeping towards production - I disagree that improving aspects outside the long block (such as wiring, MAF and ECU if allowed) would be improper for IT and moving towards Prod.

Regarding the chasis while I would agree that permitting alternate or modification to suspension arms, additional chasis reinforcement, seam welding, and other types of structural fabrications would be creeping towards production - I disagree that improving the connecting or wear components (such as short shifters including linkage, any type of suspension joint connection) would be improper for IT and moving towards Prod.

I'd would like this thread to focus on what makes IT, IT and Prod, Prod - so as to focus thoughts on when a rule is creeping toward Prod for real, rather than just being creepy in general.

I guess I am just tired of the "IT is not Prod" crowd throwing it out for any discussed rule or for interpretting a rule fairly but beneficially to the building of an IT car.