And once again you guys are taking what is supposed to be a fun, entry-level class of racing, and turning it into IMSA Prototype cars - as in you will push the cost of being competitive to the point that you will eliminate the competition. Please don't try and argue this isn't one of those cases, because even above it is mentioned how to work around
your definition just by substituting aluminum welding for studs and nuts. Did it change anything? Nope, and it would even meet your definition of legal...
Writing the paper I'm sure would get the clarification in my favor. I might just do this if I get bored because I'm sick of this crap here. I've written in before for classifications of cars, so why not...oh yeah... because it's more fun to sit around and argue on the Internet...
AS to my calling it an adapter... I'm sorry for trying to make the discussion clear. I will flip it back to you Joe... please explain what is being "Adapted" by the spacer I have. The Ford Mustang has a FACTORY 15x7 4x4.25 B.C wheel with the proper offset, the Ford Escort and Focus both use a FACTORY 15x6 4x4.25 BC wheel with the INCORRECT offset. The piece I use does not change anything with regards to bolt circle, number of attaching points, bearing / hub arrangement, etc. It only spaces the wheel out to clear suspension components so that I don't run an ILLEGAL wheel that comes STOCK on my car. Nowhere in the definition of the spacer in the GCR does it state that it cannot have holes in it greater than the number of studs coming from the hub side of the vehicle. Those extra holes go right to rule:
7.5 specifically states, "
ANY (emphasis mine) wheel stud, bolt, and
OR nut is permitted."
Whatever. If it says ANY, it means ANY. ANY WHEEL (within the dimensions allowed), ANY stud(s), bolt(s), or nut(s). My car happens to carry an extra 16 studs and nuts of each on board in race trim, and my read is that I am legal to do so. Hell, you could BOLT or weld a cage into a car, but you're going to argue that bolting is not sufficiently safe when it comes to the wheel? care to expound on the clamping loads generated or the deflection forces that would be required to separate my wheel from my spadapter (I like that...) ?? I'm curious as to which you feel will fail first, my wheel, or my spadapter? BTW, if you care to do the math, I run 105 lb./ft. of torque on both sides, and the nominal diameter is 6". Center bore area missing is roughly 2", so you can eliminate that from your load calculations.
It's late, I'm tired, and I'm really not up for this little sparring match. It's obvious that I read the rules looking for ways to make an affordable, fun, safe race car, and that my read of the rules differs from some of yours in certain areas. While I can understand your position, I do not agree with it, and will leave it at that.
Feel free to protest my car for this, or any of the other interpretations of the rules you feel I am not in compliance with. I've been down that road before, and when the dust settles and you've done nothing but waste people's time with the meaning of the word "is", the car will still be legal, and you'll still be wondering how anyone with at least a sixth-grade education might read something and come away with a different conclusion than you did.
"Please check all your large baggage, and CREATIVITY at the door..."
My apologies go out to anyone who reads this thread and wonders when in the hell do we have any time to actually race our cars when we are so busy getting legal counsel ala F1 to resolve our lack of ability to agree on anything.
[/b]
Bookmarks