Draft Car Classification Rules for 2006

[thgear]

Re: Draft Car Classification Rules for 2006

so please post any other concerns to this thread.

so if i replace all my bushings, modify my spindles, and have custom made control arms that are lighter/stronger, all this, in total is gonna only cost me ONE pip

just want to be 100% sure.

[James Mewett]

Re: Draft Car Classification Rules for 2006

so if i replace all my bushings, modify my spindles, and have custom made control arms that are lighter/stronger, all this, in total is gonna only cost me ONE pip

just want to be 100% sure.

This is correct Serge. Obviously if the change also affected OE alignment or ride height you would have to take those PIPs, but for strictly the mods you have listed it is only one sPIP.

[John P]

Re: Draft Car Classification Rules for 2006

James

Good work to you and CCC on the new rules.

There appears to be a typo in the 50% Suspension example just below your chart. Your chart for 50% at 6 sPIPs shows a 7.5 PIP while the note says 7.2 PIP. It appears the chart was changed but the note wasn't.

JohnP

[James Mewett]

Re: Draft Car Classification Rules for 2006

Thanks John, I have noted this.

[Pete@Marcor]

Re: Draft Car Classification Rules for 2006

My bad for assuming you wanted to use drop knuckles.

I'll let the CCC give an official response.

Those knuckles really should be of benefit to you, if you have lowered your car, correct? It changes the angle of the lower control arm, which is only really necessary when you lower your car.

Also, a great job to the CCC for getting this done. However, I have to ask for a comment regarding 5.9.2.15, which allows for any cat-back exhaust, for 0 PIPs. Then, in the point schedule, it says that one must get charged 1 point for any non-OE diameter cat-back. I do not know what the original intent was, but the CCC needs to clean tha tup. If I were reading the rulebook, I would have to say that you could not charge me the 1 point for a larger than OE exhaust.

[G-ForceJunkie]

Re: Draft Car Classification Rules for 2006

Are you refering to 6.1.B.5 which reads

Modification to the cat-back exhaust system on a factory turbocharged vehicle, where the diameter of the
exhaust piping is larger than ‘OE’. 1 PIP

?

5.9.2.15 refers to Naturally aspirated and S/C vehicles, where as the above rule refers to turbocharged vehicles. I hope that helps

[Pete@Marcor]

Re: Draft Car Classification Rules for 2006

Are you refering to 6.1.B.5 which reads ?

5.9.2.15 refers to Naturally aspirated and S/C vehicles, where as the above rule refers to turbocharged vehicles. I hope that helps

Oops. Yes, I did not read it all well enough. Sorry about that. Thanks.

[Slowpoke]

Re: Draft Car Classification Rules for 2006

Are you refering to 6.1.B.5 which reads ?

5.9.2.15 refers to Naturally aspirated and S/C vehicles, where as the above rule refers to turbocharged vehicles. I hope that helps

How to put this...

Ya know, if you're getting blown, you're getting blown. S/C or Turbocharged, an exhaust should be 1 pt. Maybe THAT's the typo...?

If it's not, it must be the Mustang/Honda conspiracy at work.

One could argue the same if there was a significant change in N/A engine volume due to stroke, piston or bore change, too.

P.S.: I'm only seeing rules. Is the calculator somewhere else?

[Pete@Marcor]

Re: Draft Car Classification Rules for 2006

How to put this...

Ya know, if you're getting blown, you're getting blown. S/C or Turbocharged, an exhaust should be 1 pt. Maybe THAT's the typo...?

If it's not, it must be the Mustang/Honda conspiracy at work.

One could argue the same if there was a significant change in N/A engine volume due to stroke, piston or bore change, too.

P.S.: I'm only seeing rules. Is the calculator somewhere else?

I don't agree. I think that a supercharged engine is much more like a normally aspirated engine, when it comes to exhaust. Turbo cars, however, respond much more favourably to a larger pipe diameter. Boost builds faster because of the lack of back pressure. Supercharged and normally aspirated cars simply perform better. (Usually)

[CobraStang]

Re: Draft Car Classification Rules for 2006

On lowered cars modification to an existing Panhard rod is permitted to compensate for the change in ride height.

Does "modification" include replacement of the factory panhard bar with a high quality stiff aftermarket panhard bar?

[James Mewett]

Re: Draft Car Classification Rules for 2006

Does "modification" include replacement of the factory panhard bar with a high quality stiff aftermarket panhard bar?

A strict reading of the rule says that you can only modify (or replace) the bar if you lower the car and thus also take the lowering PIPs. Thus the answer is a qualified "yes".

If the car is not lowered then you must take the 1 sPIP from 6.2.B.10 for "suspension components ... not covered elsewhere in this section", because modifying a Panhard bar is not covered elsewhere for a car that is not lowered.

[Maddog]

Re: Draft Car Classification Rules for 2006

rollbar is required if vehicles that have moved up five (Starting Class +5) or more classes from their 'Starting Class'

Now, will that classification spreadsheet be much different than the 2005 version? Because plugging in dyno numbers and mods on the 2005 sheet, I move up 7 classes from my starting class. That would mean I need a rollbar to compete in Solo 1?

What's bringing me up is the "starting HP" for my car compared to what it is now. But if I use the power rating from an 88 or 89 Camaro, which is the same generation as my 86, then I'd only move up 3 classes from starting.

[h-bomb]

Re: Draft Car Classification Rules for 2006

Hi James, are these rules now final?

[sjagman]

Re: Draft Car Classification Rules for 2006

James and crew, excellent job.

One thing you might want to add is a WAter brake Dyno. My local dyno shop has a water brake dyno.

I can get the particulars if required.

Steve