Results 1 to 20 of 60

Thread: Alternate 240Z rear brakes...?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Remember when Spock did the Vulkan mind meld with Uhura and he almost died. Kirk had to pull him away, when asked if he was ok he replied with “a mass of conflicting emotion”. I am having this same Spock moment trying to understand the logic behind these rules. By the way they don’t show this episode on TV anymore, I’m sure you can figure out why! Suppose this is why there are so many issues with the ITAC!

    Hi John Herman, good to know your still out there. If John is right about the SS changes that then became part of IT for the GM rear disks, then why would the SS rules carry over to IT in violation of base IT rules Specification section 9.1.3.c. Could it be that safety really was the reason as stated would be allowed in section 9.1.3.b to “construct a safe race car”. If so, then what are the rules for determining safety? Since dual purpose no longer applies and “we will give you a place to race your car and have fun” is still in play, I would argue that with the tire, shock brake compound and other technology improvements over the years allowing for overall faster lap times these days that constantly driving around the brake technology of the early Z cars is not fun! A Z driven at 10/10th will have brake issues at all the tracks in my area, Chicago, other than Nelson Ledges and only 7/10th at some tracks will cause problems. I have had rear shoes delaminate, wheel cylinders freeze and seal blow outs that caused fluid fires. What are the requirement to determine a safe race car? Not being able to get the aluminum drums that were stock on these (I called Courtesy Nissan in TX and they have no rear drums for the 240z iron or aluminum) and looking at using remanufacture replacements or an iron after market drum (Can't post the web link but go to the Courtesy Nissan Part site)
    I would also argue that if the GM exception was for rule 9.1.3.a, “opportunity to compete in low cost cars with limited modifications, suitable for racing competition” that this would apply to the Z (or maybe any other car with rear drums). Race cars with drum brakes! Boy let’s make that a rule in the pro ranks and then you will have a show!

    Bottom line for me: The GM exception has opened the door. It should not be the only set of cars allowed to enter that door. I, like Andy, don’t want to see any cars leave IT so requiring a retrofit to the GM cars does not seem fair. SM has done a good enough job of that already let alone the economy. I would like to continue to race my Z in the SCCA and running iron drums does not seem to be within the rules. Simple answer > apply the rules equally and allow the disk conversion of an alternate model Nissan as was done with the GM cars.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    7,381

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LLoughman View Post
    I would like to continue to race my Z in the SCCA and running iron drums does not seem to be within the rules. Simple answer > apply the rules equally and allow the disk conversion of an alternate model Nissan as was done with the GM cars.
    That's quite the gargantuan leap of logic there...

    Get a Nissan dealer to write you a note that steel/iron drums are the Nissan superceded parts for aluminum drums.

    Easy peasy...sans leaps.
    Last edited by Greg Amy; 01-28-2010 at 10:35 PM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    IT.com "First Loser" Greensboro, NC USA
    Posts
    8,607

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LLoughman View Post
    ... Simple answer > apply the rules equally and allow all cars to run the same GM rear brakes as the Oldsmobiles.
    Ta-da!



    K

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •