Teach me about ITR 325's

[JoshS]

I still say no one has answered my question. The deafening silence says to methat no one with these plates has any evidence to present in the event that they are protested.

Everyone has just repeated stuff they read on other forums (they came on with the option package, or BMW has stated that they were produced as a repair to this problem, or Turner says so ...) but no one has any DOCUMENTATION that proves any of it. Don't get me started on the topic of believing what the race part vendors tell you about parts legality. Turner explicitly states that metal brake caliper bushings are legal for SCCA racing. Yeah? Well, not for IT!

I'm a BMW guy and I can't find anything on this subframe mount issue. I'm not sure why Andy is willing to believe that people are "replacing per factory specs" without seeing a factory spec.

I guess I'm just a conservative rules reader. But based on what I know, I would NOT install those plates on my IT car, even as a reactive repair after a failure.

EDIT: one would expect such a document to be in the TIS, right alongside the instructions for repairing a failed shock tower on the 325i. That's a totally analogous situation. If this document isn't there, where would it be?

[Doc Bro]

metal brake caliper bushings are legal for SCCA racing. Yeah? Well, not for IT!

What part of 'bushings are free' am I misunderstanding?

R

[Greg Amy]

What part of 'bushings are free' am I misunderstanding?

The part about them being under the category rules for suspension...?

Of course, if we're agreeing that any bushing that suspends anything is free, let me know...'cause you ain't gonna like the results...just sayin'...

GA, who's really hoping our BMW friends are not replacing their rubber caliper bushings with anything non-rubber...

[Doc Bro]

The part about them being under the category rules for suspension...?

Of course, if we're agreeing that any bushing that suspends anything is free, let me know...'cause you ain't gonna like the results...just sayin'...

GA, who's really hoping our BMW friends are not replacing their rubber caliper bushings with anything non-rubber...

Mine are stock, but I thought this went back and forth several years ago...with the end interpretation being bushings are free. I could be mistaken. I thought it was around the whole spherical "bushings" and "air bushing" era.

From the GCR;
bushing- a sleeve or tubular insert, whose purpose is to reduce the dimension(s) of an existing hole. A protective liner that cushions noise, friction, or movement such as a rod end or spherical bearing.

The suspension section clearly states bushing material is unrestricted as we all know.

The brake section states that brake linings are unrestricted....what's the difference between a liner and a lining?:cool: Brake connectors are unrestricted. Isn't a connector something that "connects" the something to something else? As in the caliper to the car? Seeing how lining and connector aren't defined in the GCR I'm unsure.

I think this subject is pretty gray...as I stated before mine are stock so don't be a hater....just posing a counterpoint.

R

[JoshS]

Mine are stock, but I thought this went back and forth several years ago...with the end interpretation being bushings are free. I could be mistaken. I thought it was around the whole spherical "bushings" and "air bushing" era.

From the GCR;
bushing- a sleeve or tubular insert, whose purpose is to reduce the dimension(s) of an existing hole. A protective liner that cushions noise, friction, or movement such as a rod end or spherical bearing.

The suspension section clearly states bushing material is unrestricted as we all know.

The brake section states that brake linings are unrestricted....what's the difference between a liner and a lining?:cool: Brake connectors are unrestricted. Isn't a connector something that "connects" the something to something else? As in the caliper to the car? Seeing how lining and connector aren't defined in the GCR I'm unsure.

I think this subject is pretty gray...as I stated before mine are stock so don't be a hater....just posing a counterpoint.

R

I find that all to be a ridiculously tortured interpretation.

A brake lining is the actual brake pad/shoe material. The "connector" being referred to is the hydraulic connector. That entire paragraph is about hydraulics. Context matters.

Not even remotely gray in my opinion.

[Andy Bettencourt]

I find that all to be a ridiculously tortured interpretation.

A brake lining is the actual brake pad/shoe material. The "connector" being referred to is the hydraulic connector. That entire paragraph is about hydraulics. Context matters.

Not even remotely gray in my opinion.

+1.

[Greg Amy]

Not even remotely gray in my opinion.

But if it is, please do let me know ASAP.

GA

[Doc Bro]

I find that all to be a ridiculously tortured interpretation.

A brake lining is the actual brake pad/shoe material. The "connector" being referred to is the hydraulic connector. That entire paragraph is about hydraulics. Context matters.

Not even remotely gray in my opinion.

But Josh those are YOUR definitions not the GCR's, The GCR doesn't define these things so variability (creep) gets introduced.

SoI guess the ITAC guys get to decide what's rediculously tortured...
Let's go back to "air as a bushing" and truly talk about what's tortured.

R

[JoshS]

But Josh those are YOUR definitions not the GCR's, The GCR doesn't define these things so variability (creep) gets introduced.

SoI guess the ITAC guys get to decide what's rediculously tortured...

Of course these are all just my opinions. In my current role I don't get to decide this stuff. But in the past I have served on both protest and appeals committees, and I know how the committees that I have served on would have interpreted these situations. I think that 99 out of 100 appeals committees would agree with me. Unfortunately, too often, these things never get protested/appealed.

That past experience is part of why I have such a conservative read on the allowances.

[GKR_17]

I think this subject is pretty gray...

Ridiculous. Not even remotely legal, or gray.

[GKR_17]

Oh come on.. those bushings suspend the calipers right? Give me a break. Anyone remember when they tried to justify internal coatings because they were "lubricants"? That didn't fly either.

[mlytle]

some folk have trouble wih engish. suspend as a verb vs. the gcr use of suspension as a noun...

[Doc Bro]

Oh come on.. those bushings suspend the calipers right? Give me a break. Anyone remember when they tried to justify internal coatings because they were "lubricants"? That didn't fly either.

And air as a bushing is justifiable in your mind....give me a break. Is air then justifiable as a washer bottle or wiring harness in your mind?

R

[Z3_GoCar]

Josh,

Something completly analouguos, that I know about. Does the TIS for the Z3 have the factory proceedure for fixing a cracked differential mount? I know that I've seen several where the dealer will weld a second mount over the first. However, it seems the dealer has to bring in an rep to tell them how to perform the repair, thus avoiding the documentation and resulting liability if something goes wrong with the repair. Maybe it's a similar kind of situation... non-documented dealer/factory repairs.

James

[JoshS]

Josh,

Something completly analouguos, that I know about. Does the TIS for the Z3 have the factory proceedure for fixing a cracked differential mount? I know that I've seen several where the dealer will weld a second mount over the first. However, it seems the dealer has to bring in an rep to tell them how to perform the repair, thus avoiding the documentation and resulting liability if something goes wrong with the repair. Maybe it's a similar kind of situation... non-documented dealer/factory repairs.

James

I've never seen any acknowledgement by BMW for the diff mount/trunk floor problem, just like I've never seen anything for the E36 problem.

Therefore, such a dealer-installed repair would not be legal in IT, even if a verbal agreement with a BMWNA employee allowed BMWNA to pay for the repair.

[Z3_GoCar]

I've never seen any acknowledgement by BMW for the diff mount/trunk floor problem, just like I've never seen anything for the E36 problem.

Therefore, such a dealer-installed repair would not be legal in IT, even if a verbal agreement with a BMWNA employee allowed BMWNA to pay for the repair.

Just because the GCR mandates that the manufactures provide XYZ (in this case it's a document stating dealer repair methods) to a racer doesn't mean that the manufacturer will. In this case of drastice chassis repairs, there is probably legal liability reasons for the absense of such a document along with proprietary reasons. Just because the document doesn't exist doesn't means it strictly illegal either.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Just because the document doesn't exist doesn't means it strictly illegal either.

Then how do you know how to perform the repair?

[Greg Amy]

Just because the document doesn't exist doesn't means it strictly illegal either.

Actually, James, per the explicit rules it means exactly that....



GA

[lateapex911]

Wow...never knew THIS was where the rules and regs soap opera went!

For the record, Air bushings. It is said that RX-7s (early cars like mine), when lowered will bind the rear axle and destroy U joints. That's because the stock upper trailing arm pulls the axle forward at teh top at that point in it's travel. The rules allow the addition of traction bars, and with a properly designed traction bar, one can do what you wouldn't normally think of: use really soft bushings as opposed to the typical hard replacements, in the upper trailing arms. This allows the axle to rise and fall without twisting forward, and removes the binding.

Now, I haven't crawled under anyone's RX-7 in a long long time, but rumour has it that not only are the bushings just not replaced at all, but the upper trailing arms are just left off certain cars. Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me, but, at the front, my bet is all RX-7s are legal. Mine runs hard foam in the upper trailing arm bushing locations. (I can't imagine the racket air would create if used as a bushing!)

Air bushings? Silly boys!

[Knestis]

A bushing made of closed-cell foam would in fact be a composite of an elastic material and air. Not a problem under the current regime. Removing the [whatever] altogether would be OK if the rule allowed replacement or "removal." Remember some rules (e.g., the sway bar allowance) didn't actually allow that, although in this example the language was changed.

We should all - myself included - read Gary's really good point a few more times.

K