Spec lines and variants of a car

[quadzjr]

A discusssion that I started having with Jeff at this weeks race got me thinking.. in the UP/BD rule are you allowed to use any combination of parts within the spec'ed class per UP/BD(heads cams/gear ratios/etc..)? or is it whole assemblies (long block/tranmissions/etc)? I.E. If you had a car classed from 1995-2000. Could you use the 2000 chassis, a 97 block, 95 intake and air monitoring controls, a 98' camshaft and crank, and the 96' cylinder head, gear raios 3-4-5 from the 99' and 1-2 from 98'?

your creation would of never existed on the street but would be legal according to UP/BD. I think I brought this up before, but I do not remember the answer, sorry for my ignorace.

[Greg Amy]

GCR 9.1.3.C, "Specifications"

To maintain the stock basis of Improved Touring, updating and/or backdating of components is only permitted within cars of the same make, model, body type (e.g., sedan, station wagon, convertible, etc.), and engine size as listed on a single Improved Touring Specification Line. Any updated/backdated components shall be substituted as a complete assembly (engine long block, transmission/transaxle, induction system, differential/axle housing). No interchange of parts between assemblies is permitted, and all parts of an assembly shall be as originally produced for that assembly (such parts may, however, be coated, painted or plated). Additionally, it is not permitted to “create” a model or type of car by updating or backdating assemblies.

[Gary L]

...which answers the question. But in some cases, you can certainly still legally create a combination that never existed from the factory. My Volvo would be an example, being listed as 1969-1974 on one spec line. This means I can put the SU or Stromberg carb induction assembly (from 1969-72) on a fuel injected long block assembly (from 1971-74). The compression ratio of the US-spec carb engines was 9.3:1, but the 1971 FI engine was 10.5:1 with bigger intake valves. I'm not saying this is necessarily the thing to do, just that there is a fair amount of latitude in this area.

[JeffYoung]

See, I wonder about that based on that last sentence Greg quoted. I agree with you that is the common perception amongst the membership, but I think the last sentence was designed to prevent you from assembling something that never came off the factory floor.

...which answers the question. But in some cases, you can certainly still legally create a combination that never existed from the factory. My Volvo would be an example, being listed as 1969-1974 on one spec line. This means I can put the SU or Stromberg carb induction assembly (from 1969-72) on a fuel injected long block assembly (from 1971-74). The compression ratio of the US-spec carb engines was 9.3:1, but the 1971 FI engine was 10.5:1 with bigger intake valves. I'm not saying this is necessarily the thing to do, just that there is a fair amount of latitude in this area.

[Greg Amy]

But in some cases, you can certainly still legally create a combination that never existed from the factory.

No, you absolutely cannot; it's specifically disallowed. Just because the culture of IT has tolerated it does not make it legal.

Yes, I've been aware of this for some time. No, I have not protested it, I've simply brought it to the attention of the competitors (a.k.a., the preferred ITS RX-7 variants/Frankensteins), who've responded with "but we're all doing it!"

GA

[Gary L]

No, you absolutely cannot; it's specifically disallowed. Just because the culture of IT has tolerated it does not make it legal.
GA

IT culture is not part of it, or at least not in my mind. It can certainly be argued that it is specifically allowed, by everything in that paragraph that precedes the last sentence. Maybe we need a re-write.

[quadzjr]

that answers my question.. so if the spec'ed specline had two chassis variants with two different engine variations. So to run one engine variation you would have to also run that variation of the chassis to prevent from creating a model.

[Z3_GoCar]

Let's use the ITR Z3 2.8 liter as an example, where the '97-'98 version was only avalible as a roadster, while the coupe was introduced late '98 as a '99 model year. The roadster then can use either of the 2.8 liter motors, while the coupe can only use the later motor.

Now here's a new wrinkle, what about sourcing parts from different models? Say the my head shares the same part number as out of a M3, or better yet an 525 sedan? Say I call up factory part number:

Part 11121703637 (Cylinder Head With Bearing Ledges)

I get:


E34: Details on E34
E34 525i Sedan
E34 525i Touring

E36: Details on E36
E36 323i Coupe
E36 323i Convertible
E36 328i Coupe
E36 328i Convertible
E36 328i Sedan
E36 M3 Sedan
E36 M3 Coupe
E36 M3 Convertible

E39: Details on E39
E39 528i Sedan
Z3: Details on Z3
Z3 Z3 2.8 Roadster
Z3 Z3 M Coupe
Z3 Z3 M Roadster

Then to further complicate matters, the first listing is from a different motor, which is not only smaller it's also a previous generation. So if I follow the part numbers I could also wind up with a frakenstein from two different generations.

[Gary L]

But you can't swap heads... just long blocks.

[JoshS]

Then to further complicate matters, the first listing is from a different motor, which is not only smaller it's also a previous generation. So if I follow the part numbers I could also wind up with a frakenstein from two different generations.

You made this argument a few weeks ago. It made no sense then and it still makes no sense now.

If you take a head from an E34 525i for your Z3 2.8, you'll still have something IDENTICAL to the one that you started with. You aren't making anything a frankenstein at all.

The bottom end of the engine that's in my Z3 came out of a 328i So what? It's exactly the same thing. There's no frankenstein involved.

[seckerich]

No, you absolutely cannot; it's specifically disallowed. Just because the culture of IT has tolerated it does not make it legal.

Yes, I've been aware of this for some time. No, I have not protested it, I've simply brought it to the attention of the competitors (a.k.a., the preferred ITS RX-7 variants/Frankensteins), who've responded with "but we're all doing it!"

GA

Not sure what "Frankensteins" you are talking about Geg, we use the entire longblock and induction off the later car that is the same body style as all cars listed on the spec line. I would call that SPECIFICALLY ALLOWED by the paragraph quoted. Cue George now. Even more so now that the vin rule is gone. Now if we mix in some turbo parts it crosses the line but there is no model we create that did not exist from the factory.

[Greg Amy]

Not sure what "Frankensteins" you are talking about...

So there's no mix of S4/S5 parts in any RX-7? No advantageous combo of parts that was not otherwise available from Mazda off the factory line?

So someone can actually find, on a used car lot somewhere, that exact combination of long"block", intake, induction, fuel injection, and engine management (except as allowed otherwise by the ITCS) as everyone is running in their ITS RX7s?

Remember:

...it is not permitted to “create” a model or type of car by updating or backdating assemblies.

Ergo, if Mazda did not deliver that combo, it's not legal.

GA

[dickita15]

Well what is the definition of model or type? If I have an intake that was only made in 1979 and rear brakes that only came on 83-85 did I create a model? I do not think so.

[seckerich]

So there's no mix of S4/S5 parts in any RX-7? No advantageous combo of parts that was not otherwise available from Mazda off the factory line?

So someone can actually find, on a used car lot somewhere, that exact combination of long"block", intake, induction, fuel injection, and engine management (except as allowed otherwise by the ITCS) as everyone is running in their ITS RX7s?

Remember:



Ergo, if Mazda did not deliver that combo, it's not legal.

GA

In a word, yes. My car and all the ones I have worked on are 89-91 spec all the way and it is the fastest setup and the process weight was set for the high side of the power of that car.

Now I will play your word game. If the rule states that the motor, trans, induction must be updated as a complete assembly then they are different from the later/earlier original so were never delivered from the factory that way. They are specifically different because they may not interchange parts, but were allowed to be changed as entire assemblies. Until the vin rule all of these parts were illegal if we use your assumption because the XYZ motor does not match the vin. But the rules say we can install that longblock. I call that cut and dry that the assemblies could be matched. How do you explain it?