Guibo - Proposed Motormount rule

[Chip42]

Howdy nailed it. Bearing solutions would allow a drivetrain to act as a chassis stiffener while not holding the driveline rigidly. Due to the use of the word rigid it was necessary to forbid them.

Necessary because some on the committee and aparently maybe the crb don't want to see stressed engines. That's also your why, so far as I know. Yes, I know/see kirk's web of mounts but we believe that to be intorturation so did not act to revise it.

I came to the party late, made what I saw as some necessary changes to the proposed wording, made some compromises, and voted on a rule that, while imperfect, I belived to be what was asked for in a package that would pass all levels of the approval process. The intent statement I was very happy about and think its inclusion (in its original wording and position) clarifies a lot of the wackiness being suggested here better than a specific allowance ever could while granting the desired allowance to all forms of mount past present and future.

Mark, your booger bushings aren't mounts. Neither is a quibo, or anything that is bolted to the block or trans or diff that is not itself the mounting device for same. If this neds clarification, I'll be the first to sponsor it.

[marka]

Howdy,

Mark, your booger bushings aren't mounts. Neither is a quibo, or anything that is bolted to the block or trans or diff that is not itself the mounting device for same. If this neds clarification, I'll be the first to sponsor it.

“To allow commonly available engine mount aftermarket inserts, replacement units, or “window weld” like solutions without allowing solid metal or rigid materials or bearings that could result in the driveline becoming a stressed member of the chassis, the following is permitted. Engine, transmission, differential or any other driveline mounts may be replaced. Mounts may use only stock mounting points, must maintain stock location and orientation of the mounted component, and must be non-rigid. Rubber or other inserts in stock mounts may be replaced with any other non-metallic material.”

"Drive Train – Those components in a car which produce and convey the driving power to the ground, and the housings containing these parts."

The transmission and its control mechanism certainly convey driving power to the ground.

The shifter linkage cables are clearly mounted to the shifter & the transmission, via rubber inserts.

If you didn't want stuff like this being considered, why would the "any other driveline mount" language be included?

Mark

[Chip42]

I'm having trouble figuring how any bushing attached to the driveline is being read as a mount. A mount locates and supports the driveline component. If your driveline is located by your shifter and its bushings, then fine. Otherwise, stop trying to find holes where there aren't. I know this rule has some open ends, but this ain't one.

This is, to me, the same as the arrc tech ruling on moser's intake. A factory hole in his intake intended for drainage of accumulated water etc.. was intortured to be a stock intake location outside of the engine room. He lost his appeal. I believe that your bugger bushings would, too, on the same grounds.

[marka]

Howdy,

I'm having trouble figuring how any bushing attached to the driveline is being read as a mount. A mount locates and supports the driveline component. If your driveline is located by your shifter and its bushings, then fine. Otherwise, stop trying to find holes where there aren't. I know this rule has some open ends, but this ain't one.

This is, to me, the same as the arrc tech ruling on moser's intake. A factory hole in his intake intended for drainage of accumulated water etc.. was intortured to be a stock intake location outside of the engine room. He lost his appeal. I believe that your bugger bushings would, too, on the same grounds.

I agree its a stretch. However, this is the same group that is apparently ok with a bearing in a drive pulley.

And "mount" is not defined in the rulebook that I can see. "Engine mount" is, but you're explicitly opening that up. A search for "mount" through the rulebook will show you about a million cases where its used in the sense of "the thing that connects two parts".

But it points out a place where you can improve the rule wording and still keep all the "not rigid" stuff that seems to be important to you... Remove the "or any other driveline mount" part. I can't see how that's ever going to do anything useful for you, in terms of rules creep.

Mark