How can these things (as defined in the glossary, BTW) possibly make a car faster?[/b]
Spoken like a man that has never raced a transverse mounted FWD where the rubber tears and allows axle snapping wheel hop or at least uncomfortable on/off throttle engine movement that can upset the car mid corner.

However, it is minor difference in lap time and really is more of a cost benefit. I don't see this making as much of a difference on the RWD crowd, but the FWD guys (such as myself) typically have more mount issues. The AWD guys are on their own.

Oh, and stay rods are great, but they still don't prevent mounts from tearing apart. In a caged mount design you trade one axis of rotation for another and still have translation at the mount.

In general I don't think this is the highest priority we have in IT, but it is something relatively easy to handle. As for Greg's fear I think we can learn something from the Solo community they have had this rule for years and mounts are even more of an issue in Solo due to the low speed, high torque, rapid transition issues they face. If the rule has stood up to a decade or more of dedicated grey area experts I think it will stand up to IT's best. Has anyone asked Solo if they have issues with this rule?