|
Post by sprintman on Nov 3, 2009 17:06:57 GMT
Right another point of Clarification please: In Modified can i Run a Road legal Car without an MSA approved Roll Cage? And Modified are the Tyres Free? No, you need a rollcage and proper seatbelts - see the Blue Book Yes, Tyres are free - well you have to pay for them but you can use any tyres you like.
|
|
|
Post by ian on Nov 3, 2009 17:08:22 GMT
Now I'm confused - looking at the rules - for Classes 1A to 1E[/b] - that Pick-up Points & Method of operation must remain the same, then, later in the same paragraph that Springs & Dampers are free - then surely a coil-over is a direct & acceptable replacement for a McPherson strut as long as it uses the same mounting points?? Or have I missed something here??
This is what i thought, after all a Mcpherson Stru is a Coil over and mounts to the existing points.
|
|
|
Post by ian on Nov 3, 2009 17:10:14 GMT
Right another point of Clarification please: In Modified can i Run a Road legal Car without an MSA approved Roll Cage? And Modified are the Tyres Free? No, you need a rollcage and proper seatbelts - see the Blue Book Yes, Tyres are free - well you have to pay for them but you can use any tyres you like. ;D I have a Roll cage fitted but is a dash dodger so not MSA approved, this is my road every day car and i'm buggered if i'm cutting my dash
|
|
|
Post by sprintman on Nov 3, 2009 17:10:27 GMT
Now I'm confused - looking at the rules - for Classes 1A to 1E[/b] - that Pick-up Points & Method of operation must remain the same, then, later in the same paragraph that Springs & Dampers are free - then surely a coil-over is a direct & acceptable replacement for a McPherson strut as long as it uses the same mounting points?? Or have I missed something here??
I was under the impression that the suspension components must remain the same but that you could replace them with like for like and not different types.
|
|
|
Post by royodeboyo on Nov 3, 2009 17:29:16 GMT
Ahhh - I'm enjoying this lively debate after spending (obviously) too much time with the sheep (actually - some of them are very pretty). re Ian's question about roll-cages - my understanding is that a bolt-in one is acceptable to the MSA - without cutting the dash etc - but isn't FIA compliant - I ran the Uno in Mod Prod with one without any hassle. Right my next question is - purely hypothetical of course - what if I turn up to a meeting with my road legal car - taxed, MOTd & insured in my name with all the correct & relevant documentation to find that my car can't run in 1C but must go into 3C - I have a roll-cage, plumbed in fire system, race seat, 6 point harness BUT it has a glass sunroof (factory fitted) - which does NOT comply with 3C. Purely Hypothetical question of course.
|
|
|
Post by caterman on Nov 3, 2009 19:32:49 GMT
Just for clarification; if you change a MacPherson strut for a coil over shock absorber you are altering the method of operation and is therefore not a direct replacement. Also for a cage to be acceptable into road modified it must not accept any suspension loadings. To that end most people in road modified will use a bolt in cage, whether full or half, mainly on the grounds of cost and ease of fitting.
Royo: to answer your hypothetical question, to the best of my knowledge there is no specific regulation in the Blue Book that prohibits a glass sunroof in Mod Prod so your car would be OK.
Here's another hypothetical - you turn up to scrutineering with your car that is entered it to Mod Prod, it complies with all the requirements for the class but fails scrutineering because it has a perspex windscreen. Is the scrutineer correct?
|
|
|
Post by royodeboyo on Nov 4, 2009 7:04:42 GMT
In the case of my car - Sierra, I am going to disagree! I have removed the original McPherson strut (which surely is a 'coil over shock'), and replaced the 'strut part' with an adjustable (damping) one (to the same dimension & design but a different make) - allowed under the regs, surely, as dampers are free. I have also changed the coil spring for one of a different rate & diameter - allowed under the regs as, surely, springs are free. I have re-fitted the complete assembly using the same bearing, insulator mount & plates as the original - in the same location at the top; also fitted it to the original hub in the same manner using the same pinch bolt at the bottom - still using the same location! There has been no change to the method of operation - a coil spring 'over' a shock (properly called a damper) - other than the damper is now adjustable - as dampers are 'free' I believe this complies with 1C regs. The fact that the manufacturer calls it a 'coil over shock' doesn't mean that it is not still a McPherson strut. Choose your sheep and meet me outside the milking parlour at dawn!
|
|
|
Post by royodeboyo on Nov 4, 2009 7:37:47 GMT
Hypothetically then - although I suspect this is a trick question! p152 of the BlueBook 2009 - 'plastic' allowed if 4mm or thicker. p325 of the BlueBook 2009 - laminated screens not required unless SRs say so. You weren't referring to the rear window were you? - in which case I would refer you to p68 of said BlueBook - Terminology. OK - points out of 10 - or should I try harder??
|
|
|
Post by Ron on Nov 4, 2009 8:49:49 GMT
I have put the question of coil overs to a friendly scrutineer to get his take on this subject. The way you describe them makes me think that if you have not changed the mounting points and the configuration of the suspension then they would be legal. I will wait and see as to what his reply will be.
|
|
|
Post by ian on Nov 4, 2009 11:23:58 GMT
I have another question:
If I put a Fuel swirl pot in my boot with a second pump do i need a rear fire wall? I can't find any mention in the Blue Book.
|
|
|
Post by speedsport on Nov 5, 2009 10:40:47 GMT
Hang on everyone! The MSA has just responded to our “suggested” classes by saying that our interpretaion of what is allowed in 1A to 1E contravenes Blue Book (particularly reg I80). It looks as though they are saying “standard” means standard, with no mods at all, though their response itself is vague. We are going back to them to clarify what they actually mean by “suspension configuration to remain standard” for example, because it clearly means different things to different people, including us. Once we have their clarification, we shall try to make sense of it all….. In the meantime, by all means continue the discussion, but please be patient with us.
|
|
|
Post by royodeboyo on Nov 5, 2009 17:26:38 GMT
Ian - see Bluebook p.150 - 10 - re: fuel lines. Personally I would want anything like a swirlpot & other 'bits' with high pressure fuel in them to be isolated from the passenger compartment - wouldn't it be better to mount the pot in the engine compartment ?? Good luck!
|
|
|
Post by speedsport on Nov 5, 2009 23:23:48 GMT
Ron (Carmad) has spoken to the MSA today to clarify exactly what rules our proposals contravene. We now have the definitive answer and know how it affects our classes.
Quite simply, the MSA has decided to clarify the rules regarding suspension & steering on Production Cars in speed events, and intends to introduce a rule from 01 Jan 2010 which says:-
"The suspension type and mountings must remain the same as that fitted by the manufacturer. The shock absorbers may be of any make and may be uprated from standard. Adjustable spring platform struts are permitted. The mounting method and position must remain as specified by the manufacturer. Springs are free but must retain their original location. Bushes may be changed for similar polymer materials, but rose-joints or similar metal joints are prohibited."
We understand that this will apply to all cars in our classes 1A to 1E. The proposed rule has been referred to the Motor Sports Council and is expected to be ratified at their next meeting. Confirmation will appear in the next edition of Motorsport Now. It is possible that the rule may be ratified too late to appear in the 2010 Blue Book. However if ratified, it will be obligatory from the start of the 2010 season.
Clearly we have no option but to adopt it for our 2010 Classes.
I must emphasise that this change has not come about as a result of any of our discussions or proposals, but was already in the pipeline at the MSA. I hope this helps make things a bit clearer, but it will no doubt prompt further discussion!
|
|
|
Post by royodeboyo on Nov 6, 2009 9:30:55 GMT
Good work Ron, that is a clear and unambiguous definition! Seems we'll all have to read our new Blue Books carefully - as usual of course!
|
|
|
Post by ian on Nov 6, 2009 10:15:43 GMT
So for clarification as i understand it: forgive me if i'm a bit slow lol
If my car doesn’t come with Adjustable Coil overs i can use them in Class 1?
If my car doesn’t come with adjustable Top Mounts i can use them in Class 1 as long as they bolt/fix to original mounting points?
|
|