Spec lines and variants of a car

[JeffYoung]

I have to agree with Greg.

The intent was for you to be able to take your 83 model whatever that came with carbs, and update it to the 84 model that was identical to the 83 except it had fuel injection.

Your 83 model then effectively became identical to the 84, and was no different than what was sold off the showroom floor in 84.

But if your 83 carb model also had a better gearbox that was discountinued in 84, what the rule was designed to prevent -- in my opinion -- was using the 83 gearbox with the 84 fuel injected motor.

That would create a car that you never could have bought off the showroom floor in 83, or in 84.

I don't know enough about the RX7s to say what exactly is going on with them. I've heard Andy say that essentially what every fast ITS RX7 is is a GTUs, and i have no reason to doubt him. If that is the case, then they are legal.

[dickita15]

While I respect there are limits on updating/backdating I have never thought they were anything like you are describing. Rereading the section the only thing I see you hanging your hat on in this argument is “it is not permitted to “create” a model or type of car by updating or backdating assemblies”
Words matter and I do not see it saying that you cannot combine the best attributes of the various years on the spec line to build the best car. It says you cannot create a model. The model in my example is a RX7. It says you cannot create a type. The type is a two seater coupe I guess. There is no definition in the GCR that refines the meaning.
Oh and Greg, I am jealous that you are able to divine the intent of this old rule, the rest of us have to read and interpret it.

[Greg Amy]

...the only thing I see you hanging your hat on in this argument is “it is not permitted to “create” a model or type of car by updating or backdating assemblies”

Correct.

Oh and Greg, I am jealous that you are able to divine the intent of this old rule, the rest of us have to read and interpret it.

Well, I do have the advantage of having been involved in Improved Touring since its inception...

But, again, I ask (rhetorically, if necessary): if you do not believe that sentence is to be interpreted as I describe, then what do you think it means? Because, honestly, I cannot "divine" any other intent...

If you think that sentence does nothing - or if we want it to do nothing - then simply send in a request to delete it.

GA

[Eagle7]

I have to agree with Greg.

The intent was for you to be able to take your 83 model whatever that came with carbs, and update it to the 84 model that was identical to the 83 except it had fuel injection.

Your 83 model then effectively became identical to the 84, and was no different than what was sold off the showroom floor in 84.

But if your 83 carb model also had a better gearbox that was discountinued in 84, what the rule was designed to prevent -- in my opinion -- was using the 83 gearbox with the 84 fuel injected motor.

That would create a car that you never could have bought off the showroom floor in 83, or in 84.

I don't know enough about the RX7s to say what exactly is going on with them. I've heard Andy say that essentially what every fast ITS RX7 is is a GTUs, and i have no reason to doubt him. If that is the case, then they are legal.

The 86-88 ITS RX-7 had 146 HP, while the 89-91 had 160 HP. The 89-91 also has some cosmetic differences in bumper covers and body panels. I think you're saying I can't run the 89-91 engine in my 86 without changing the body cosmetics.