Life without the VIN rule

[tom91ita]

what really grinds me about this whole thing is that i parted out a 86 crx si last summer and scrapped out the roof!

who knew it would be worth something to an ITC carguy?

[RexRacer19]

Let's see if this image will post. The is from an OEM Honda Parts supplier. (Majestic Honda) It shows the roof "panel" from both the STD/DX (no sunroof) and Si (sunroof) models. It does not show what bracing might be included underneath each one. There seems to be a separate header panel shown for the no sunroof model, but that may be the same header for both.

I know that if I buy a hood, it comes with the reinforcement structure already bonded in place. Maybe this is the same? This is just one car from one Mfg. so, you can't make a blanket statement out of it.

[JoshS]

For me, it's not what the MFG intended the piece to do. It's whether or not its part of the thing that can be removed, or part of the car.

If part A can be removed, and parts A's bracket is bolted on, I think it can be removed (provided it serves no other purpose). If it is welded on, it has to stay as it is part of the car and proabably has no individual part number.

Just curious ... what if it's welded on but DOES have an individual part number?

[Greg Amy]

I know that if I buy a hood, it comes with the reinforcement structure already bonded in place. Maybe this is the same?

Below is an example from VW, the 1984 Rabbit.

If your assumption is correct, then that particular part is only available retail as a sub-assembly (manufacturers do things differently). But trust me: having worked "in the biz", I know that the manufacturer has a part number for each individual part within that sub-assembly.

Ergo, if we accept that each part is treated as a separate one, then we're back to my original question of a couple hours ago: where in the ITCS is the method of attachment of the part a controlling or restricting authority?

If we were to find at least one example of something that can be removed, but it's welded on, does that suffice for evidence to that end?

I offer that the fact something is welded on is irrelevant: if it says you can, then you bloody well can...

GA

[Andy Bettencourt]

That's incorrect, Andy: EVERY part in the car, no matter how small a bracket it is, has a separate part number and line in the parts book.

No unibody chassis by any manufacturer has a view of the "body in white" with a single part number. Everything that makes up the unibody - from bracket, to nuts, to flanges, to whatever - has a separate and distinct part number...

GA

Not true for Mazda at least. There are parts that have 'names' but don't have individual replacement part numbers because they are part of a larger structure and come together as one unit.

[lateapex911]

Everything its all part of the A/C System.

Jake would you also debate that the wiring harness, brake lines, ABS modules, ABS computers, etc can not ALL be removed? Because like the A/C rule it says anything related to the A/C system can be removed.

e. Air conditioning systems may be removed in whole or in part.

So, Jeremy and others, you are all grinding off the 1 1/2" boss that is cast into the engine block? Because IT is part of the Airconditioning system?

What if the model below that doesn't come with AC uses that boss to bolt on some other part, like alternator bracket??

The seat example is a great one, because it shows precedence.

The GCR has called out a part of the unibody that CAN be removed, even though it's a separate part that's spot welded on.

I see NO such comment in this case.

[Knestis]

I'm tempted to search out the last couple versions of this same conversation but just don't have enough energy at this point.

I'll say it again - "the protest and appeal process." It is not possible to write self-enforcing rules.

Every case is different. We could write a "clarification" of the rule that accommodates the Rabbit and still not accommodate the Civic.

K

[Greg Amy]

Not true for Mazda at least.

Sooo....the rule is manufacturer-specific? As in, Rabbit drivers can do it but Mazda drivers can't? And the over-riding limitation here is the parts book (which I don't recall being listed in the ITCS as a limiting document)? Where in the GCR/ITCS is this written (as well as the "welding versus bolting" reference...?)

Andy, I'm not trying to beat up on you here, honest. If you truly believe this, then support it in the rules. Don't just offer why you believe something, support it with appropriate rules references.

I still believe what I believed before, but I'm kinda enjoying this discussion on multiple levels: first, it's a long overdue discussion; this has been one of those "skeletons in the closet" that most have ignored, but it's always been there. Second, it's yet another display of how rules can be uniquely read, interpreted, and applied. Third, it's yet another illustration that no matter how well you think you've written a rule, someone will find a hole; that the only way to avoid this is not through re-writing rules but through culture and lack of tolerance to such twisting.

We're WAAAY off the topic of the VIN rule, by the way...

[Jeremy Billiel]

OK I really hope to put this to bed. I have taken 2 pictures. One from the GSR and one from the RS chassis.

Comment #1 the side supports are simply bonded to the roof skin.
Comment #2 The Sunroof 1/16 steel frame is also bonded to the roof skin and only performs one function. To create a lip/"guide" for the sunroof glass to sit in. The sunroof itself is self contained and DOES NOT bolt to the sunroof bonded piece shown.
Comment #3 The steel sunroof "guide" when removed would be hard pressed to weigh one pound (if that).
Comment #4 Guides and sunroof harware are allowed to be removed.

Picture #1 Simple RS roof.


Picture #2 GSR Sunroof car - I wish that I did not paint the roof as the color black is not a seperate panel of any kind.

[Jeremy Billiel]

Not the best picture out there, but here is a picture of the sunroof assembly.

[Knestis]

OK I really hope to put this to bed. ...

With respect, Jeremy - you can't.

This forum won't answer the question - we just issue opinions that don't matter.

The ITAC can't answer the question - it writes rules and doesn't enforce them.

You can only do what you are OK with, and ultimately - if the question EVER gets asked - only the protest-appeal process can truly put it to bed.

That's just how it works.

K

[Jeremy Billiel]

With respect, Jeremy - you can't.

This forum won't answer the question - we just issue opinions that don't matter.

The ITAC can't answer the question - it writes rules and doesn't enforce them.

You can only do what you are OK with, and ultimately - if the question EVER gets asked - only the protest-appeal process can truly put it to bed.

That's just how it works.

K

Agreed 100% Kirk.

[Jeremy Billiel]

Oh and to be clear there is no mythical 50 lbs of crap up there. I will give you 1 lb. Just as a reminder for this thread, I am going to zip tie a windshild washer bottle to the center cross support. Now if its a zip tie how is it attached? Is that removable? LOL....

[RexRacer19]

Jeremy,

Are the side rails the same on the RS vs. the GSR. It looks like they are. As in...if there was a hole in the roof for it, could you bolt the sunroof assembly in place? If the answer is yes, then I feel fairly confident, in this case, that a protest would go in your favor. Having the smooth roof is just a nicer way of filling the hole. Again...just in this specific case. I was hoping that you would post those pictures.

[Greg Amy]

Stop encouraging the boy, "Rex"...

[iambhooper]

Jeremy,

Are the side rails the same on the RS vs. the GSR. It looks like they are. As in...if there was a hole in the roof for it, could you bolt the sunroof assembly in place? If the answer is yes, then I feel fairly confident, in this case, that a protest would go in your favor. Having the smooth roof is just a nicer way of filling the hole. Again...just in this specific case. I was hoping that you would post those pictures.

thats how I would try to handle the problem, if I were doing a conversion. i understand the rule, and respect the rule. however, there are times to apply the spirit and times to apply the letter of the law.

you guys are making me dizzy!

hoop

[RexRacer19]

Stop encouraging the boy, "Rex"...

So, what is it that you have been doing, tGA?

[Greg Amy]

So, what is it that you have been doing, tGA?

"Poking" and "encouraging" are two distinctly different functions...

[Jeremy Billiel]

Jeremy,

Are the side rails the same on the RS vs. the GSR. It looks like they are. As in...if there was a hole in the roof for it, could you bolt the sunroof assembly in place? If the answer is yes, then I feel fairly confident, in this case, that a protest would go in your favor. Having the smooth roof is just a nicer way of filling the hole. Again...just in this specific case. I was hoping that you would post those pictures.

Yes the side rails appear to the the same along with the rear and front sections.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Sooo....the rule is manufacturer-specific?

I am just telling you that what you stated as fact for all manufacturers isn't true.

My viewpoint is an interpretation of the rules. I don't believe you can remove something that is essentially part of the chassis even if it acts as a 'bracket'. If you can't order it, I think I could make the arguement it isn't really part of the assembly.

But, like you said, we are way off topic. I have said all along, those thoughts are what *I* use to determine what I can and can't remove.