Senior Member
I also thought STL specifically only allowed complete box range swaps, AND that the difference between STU and STL language on the matter was the proof of that. Rules could have been merged, more and more I also have lost interest in the class, despite it being what I always wanted to see: limited prep rules allowing engine swaps in same make chassis.Originally Posted by Knestis
Senior Member
People are only getting these changes because they're asking for them...
Houston Region
STU Nissan 240SX
EProd RX7
Administrator
Ding...and because rulesmakers are not willing to say "no"...
Senior Member
They're sure saying "no" to a normal sized TIR on the SR20DET!
Houston Region
STU Nissan 240SX
EProd RX7
Administrator
Hard to say "no" to something that doesn't exist...They're sure saying "no" to a normal sized TIR on the SR20DET!
Senior Member
It's not going to exist until you take the handcuffs off. not going to spend money to build something that's hobbled from day 1. I'll never have the cash to build a 'full-tilt' engine to prove it can't make equivalent power, and until that's done the old stodgies that hate JDM are going to continue to keep the handcuffs on a 20 yr old engine. can't win that one, so not going to try.
Houston Region
STU Nissan 240SX
EProd RX7
Administrator
Senior Member
this is the part of "The Process" in IT that drove a number of people off, unhapily. there has to be some noise cancelation, the rulesmakers can't be jumping at every request by moving specs up and down, but there also needs to be a reasonable threshold to being taken seriously. when ONLY full tilt builds will be accepted for review (or when the perception is that this is the case), those who simply can't afford that effort are left out to dry with what are often reaosnable requests for adjustment or review. The difference between a good build and a great build is not a huge amount of peak hp in most cases, just a lot of reliability, driveability (area under the curve), etc... and it adds up to lower lap times more than winning the race on the dyno.
the ST non USDM market rules adding weight or reducing TIR size "just because foreign" is not good practice. Yes, there are specific cases (i.e. powerplants or chassis) where such penalties ARE warranted and I think any reasonable person would agree to them. but not blanket application to all items sharing a non technical detail. have your cake and eat it, too. Matt has every right to feel that way, IMHO. no one should be asked to prove a negative, and anyone who is has good reason to feel slighted.
Last edited by Chip42; 08-19-2014 at 02:37 PM.
Administrator
December 2012 GCR:
Either the OEM transmission or an alternate transmission must be
used; the alternate transmission must be from the same manufacturer
as the vehicle (e.g., an Acura transmission may be installed
in a Honda car). Alternate transmissions must be used in their
entirety. Retrofitting OEM complete gear sets in an alternate transmission
case is permitted.
August 2014 GCR:
Either the original transmission or an alternate transmission must
be used; the alternate transmission must be from the same manufacturer
as the vehicle (i.e., an Acura transmission may be installed
in a Honda car). Alternate transmissions must be used in their
entirety; any OEM gear sets that fit w/o any modifications to gears,
shafts, and/or case are permitted.
The change came as a request from the CRB.
I think the verbiage change clearly implies gear pairs can be mixed and matched. We'll see what the STAC/CRB says.
GA
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks