>> ... adjustable shocks, coilovers, ecu mods. ...

To appropriate your term, "leadership my a$$."

"Leadership" does the easy thing, 9 out of 10 times - that being what will get them the least grief from membership. You've got nobody to blame but your fellow IT racers for everything you're complaining about.

All three of the allowances you list have similar histories: What was thought to be a simple modification was pushed to the limit by a few early adopters, gained popularity, became the accepted norm absent any early questions of compliance, and was subsequently codified because it was too painful to go backward on them - particularly when the new technologies became more affordable than the ones they replaced.

If you think coilovers are more expensive than having custom springs wound for stock-style struts, think again. If you think Megasquirt is more expensive than the shoehorn (whatevertheheck) into the stock box - wrong. If you for one minute believe that deep-pockets racers wouldn't have multiple sets of non-adjustable shocks rather than pimpy double-adjustable Konis, you need to come to a SE or NE IT race where people are pushing the envelope.

And would you have taken away the precursor technologies or just the current ones? Do you want anyone with FI to run stock parts and settings only? Are resistors OK to change input values? What about chip changes? Where do you draw the line?

At the end of the day, are you REALLY advocating for not having those allowances or are you using them as rationale for more? Just because some of the horses have gotten out of the barn, doesn't mean we shouldn't close the doors because those "easy, cheap" things are just the first step to the next round of things you'll be unhappy with.

K