would these be legal?

[Charles Perry]

Would these be legal tension rods? Same pick up points nothing else changes?

[Knestis]

Nope.

K

[Andy Bettencourt]

Would these be legal tension rods? Same pick up points nothing else changes?

So lets teach a man to fish instead of just giving him a fish.

Charles, what rule would you be citing that would make you think they were legal?

[Knestis]

Sorry there, Mr. Socrates.

K

[TomL]

Well, if Charles had a front wheel drive car, he might be able to sneak them in under the "traction bar" allowance. Seriously. Same way that three-link suspensions got to be "legal" on 1st gen RX-7s that were designed with 4-links.

If I recall correctly, Kirk, weren't you the one that made the case that heim-jointed rear suspension links could be links installed under that same loophole?

Not saying that I think this is the way it should be, but I think that under previous precedent, the tension rods could be deemed legal as "traction bars", at least for FWD cars. The problem is the poorly written definition of traction bars.

[CRallo]

Traction bars may be added... The rule reads something like that. It does not allow the removal of anything. On the rear drive cars, no links are removed. Some people don't even believe in air bushings so they use foam. lol

[TomL]

"...traction bar(s)... may be added, removed, or substituted". I'd say you can still drive a lot of stuff through that loophole. You're just substituting one "traction bar" (the OEM tension rod) for another (the aftermarket part).

[Knestis]

Well, if Charles had a front wheel drive car, he might be able to sneak them in under the "traction bar" allowance. Seriously. Same way that three-link suspensions got to be "legal" on 1st gen RX-7s that were designed with 4-links.

If I recall correctly, Kirk, weren't you the one that made the case that heim-jointed rear suspension links could be links installed under that same loophole?

Not saying that I think this is the way it should be, but I think that under previous precedent, the tension rods could be deemed legal as "traction bars", at least for FWD cars. The problem is the poorly written definition of traction bars.

Negative, Ghost Rider.

We can't just go making stuff up willy-nilly. It takes a helpful rules-writer to tee up the creep opportunities, and in most cases the goodies are all in the definitions. The RX7 gets its mojo from:

Traction Bar – A longitudinal link to an axle housing or hub carrier which
resists torque reaction from the driven wheel(s) by acting in compression
or tension (2011 GCR)

...helped in large measure by the gimme that suspension bushing material is free.

Does the link in the picture meet the requirements in the definition above...?

The trick I like is allowed by the same rule but again, requires a useful GCR definition of "anti-roll bar" - that and VW's use of one of those in lieu of real rear suspension.

K

[Andy Bettencourt]

Still waiting for Charles to speak up. Don't do his homework for him, yet.