September 2011 Fastrack

[Andy Bettencourt]

In the interim, deal with the point about the pulley that essentially spins on a bearing -- all legal since pulleys are legal -- and doesn't drive the pump. Since that is free, why make folks go through that effort?

I disagree that pulleys are free also. It says you can change diameter and material. That's it. You can't change the way they 'work' or in your example, 'don't work'.

The rules in IT tell you what you are allowed to do, nothing more.

[Gary L]

I disagree that pulleys are free also. It says you can change diameter and material. That's it. You can't change the way they 'work' or in your example, 'don't work'.

The rules in IT tell you what you are allowed to do, nothing more.

I agree. IMO, a free-wheeling pulley would be a perfect example of an allowed modification performing an illegal function... you've changed function from that of a drive pulley to an idler pulley, for which there is no allowance. I would argue the same logic applies to a "restricted" hose.

And one of my pet peeves - we really need to stop using the word "free" - it does not exist in the ITCS and so far as I can tell, never has.

[Chip42]

I disagree that pulleys are free also. It says you can change diameter and material. That's it. You can't change the way they 'work' or in your example, 'don't work'.

The rules in IT tell you what you are allowed to do, nothing more.

I agree completely.

but I also tend toward agreeing with those that want to be rid of power steering. however, it is certainly creep, and it's got to have unbalancing effects somewhere along the line. important ones? I don't know. but someone, somewhere, stands to make far more than the expected modest power bump with a PS delete. I'm not sure if that's simply lost in the noise though.

[lawtonglenn]

My personal thinking on the power steering rule:

1. You can already depower the rack with a "trick" pulley that spins without turning the pump, so this can be done.

2. Arguably -- arguably -- you can depower the rack since the lines are "free" and ... use your imagination.

So this change is just to "mirror reality" that already exists under the rules.

But my feeling is that we all have some trepidation because it sure does look like rules creep.

Thoughts/discussion appreciated.

I am not liking the non working pulley, or the non working lines,
they are just like snipping the existing lines...not kosher

when I bought the 14 car years ago, it had been racing in ITS for
many years, but had the lines snipped illegally....

we replaced the PS rack with a manual rack to get back inside the ruleset

.

[JS154]

Of interest - under "What do you think?"

• "Member input is requested on whether an allowance should be made to permit disabling power steering assistance on IT cars, including allowing the fluid lines to be looped if desired."

This makes sense to me. Having had a power steering belt go on the track, and in the process take out the alt/water pump belt at the same time, this is worthwhile for reliability. (E30 BMW) Also ditching the power steering is one less thing to leak fluids on the track.