SCCA Auto-X Rules: Read This First, Then Ask Questions

[Inspector 24]

Welll...if you can find an old dealer options sheet, or some way of proving that you could theoretically order an S/R without the wing, make the mod, save some weight...and the explanations

BTW, I commend you for sticking within the rules, relatively insignificant as it may be well done

Ryan

 

[apexlater]

Erik -- that first pic looks like you are about to loose the bead on the tire!!!

Did Ford call it a "Spoiler" or a "wing"? If in the brochure Ford call's it a spoiler, then you could probably legally run something alot less.....intrusive.

The ST rules don't define what a spoiler or wing is, just that a spoiler is a spoiler and a wing is a wing. I would think that a spoiler only allows air over and not under. But if a manufacture calls it a spoiler, even if air can pass under it....

 

[Auto-Xer]

Did Ford call it a "Spoiler" or a "wing"? If in the brochure Ford call's it a spoiler, then you could probably legally run something alot less.....intrusive.

The ST rules don't define what a spoiler or wing is, just that a spoiler is a spoiler and a wing is a wing. I would think that a spoiler only allows air over and not under. But if a manufacture calls it a spoiler, even if air can pass under it....

I don't know that I'd want to challenege that--my 'definition' is that a wing allows air under--and the OE device on the trunk did just that. It's still lighter than the OE piece...and was (only) all of $40. It's a little F&F...but we like it. The wing looks a little overwhelming in the photo...but if seen in a profile shot (don't have one to share), it's actually scaled pretty well to the car. It's a lot like a WC Touring car look.

We still have weight to lose in the exhaust system and header...it's all about making the car more lighter

As for the tires we're running about 40/30 hot F/R (+/- about 2psi)...that has given us the best 'feel' with the rest of the setup. This was our first weekend with the new 550# front springs (was 455)...and finally the car does not feel too loose; it's still 'free', but not like driving on ice. We are certainly using the whole contact patch on the fronts (215/40-17 Z1s)--but they do have very stiff sidewalls.


I have about 25 total runs now in the car...6 of those with the car feeling about like it should (this past weekend). Next event is our NT in a few weeks.

 

[moxnix]

Erik -- that first pic looks like you are about to loose the bead on the tire!!!

Did Ford call it a "Spoiler" or a "wing"? If in the brochure Ford call's it a spoiler, then you could probably legally run something alot less.....intrusive.

The ST rules don't define what a spoiler or wing is, just that a spoiler is a spoiler and a wing is a wing. I would think that a spoiler only allows air over and not under. But if a manufacture calls it a spoiler, even if air can pass under it....

It may not be defined in the ST rules but I would argue that they mean the same thing as the SP rules where it is defined.

For purposes of rulemaking and interpretation, a wing has been generally understood to mean an aerodynamic device making use of air passing both over and under a solid element to create aerodynamic force. A rear spoiler is generally understood to be an aerodynamic device fixed to the rear bodywork of the vehicle where air passes over, but not under, the solid element to create aerodynamic force. The base of a spoiler is contiguously attached to the bodywork (e.g., deck lid) of the vehicle to prevent airflow underneath the spoiler element.

As for ford calling it a spoiler...

Again from the SP rules.

Some cars are equipped by the OEM with standard or optional bodywork elements that meet the definition of wing stated above, although they may be identified in marketing material, owners manuals, shop manuals, and/or parts lists as spoilers. These bodywork elements may not be modified per 15.2.H.2.b, except to be replaced with either a standard or optional OE element, or exact replica of a standard or optional OE element in an alternate
material, as per 15.2.H.2.a. Plugging the underside opening of an OE wing by any means, including but not limited to tape, cardboard, foam, etc. to turn it into a spoiler and allow additional spoiler additions is not a legal modifications.

 

[apexlater]

moxnix -- That makes sense, except that it is not spelled out in ST. Do they expect competitors to look at a "higher" classes (prep-wise) for defining something? All the Stock rules carry to ST, with additional allowances, and nothing should be left to interpretation....right?

Probably not the right place for this discussion, and I agree with you and the SP wording, but why didn't they just "cut-and-paste" the rule from SP to ST if that is the definition they wanted to be upheld?

 

[Auto-Xer]

moxnix -- That makes sense, except that it is not spelled out in ST. Do they expect competitors to look at a "higher" classes (prep-wise) for defining something? All the Stock rules carry to ST, with additional allowances, and nothing should be left to interpretation....right?

Probably not the right place for this discussion, and I agree with you and the SP wording, but why didn't they just "cut-and-paste" the rule from SP to ST if that is the definition they wanted to be upheld?

ST* allows body kits etc. via 41.2.F : "Standard parts may not be removed except for the substitution of spoilers, rear wings, bumper covers and valances". It also states "addition of spoilers, splitters, body kits, rear wings and non-functional scoops/vents is allowed...body kits are limited to bumper covers, valences, side skirts and fender flares."

...this is where the wing/spoiler wording falls--*SP does not allow body kits.

So...in ST you can substitute a spoiler for a spoiler or a wing for a wing...but you cannot remove either if they are 'standard parts'. The only question is what is a spoiler and what is a wing--and I cannot see how anyone could argue against the air over/under 'definition'. If it's really that big of a deal to someone, an email to the SEB or STAC should clarify.

The only rules that apply to ST* are the stock and the ST rules (which specifically tell you what can be done above-and-beyond stock). The SP-specific rules have no bearing on ST.

 

[aMaff]

ST* allows body kits etc. via 41.2.F : "Standard parts may not be removed except for the substitution of spoilers, rear wings, bumper covers and valances"
....
So...in ST you can substitute a spoiler for a spoiler or a wing for a wing...

I think you're reading too much in to the line you highlighted. It says it allows for the substitution of spoilers and rear wings. it doesn't specify that it must be substituted with the same type.

 

[livelyjay]

I think you're reading too much in to the line you highlighted. It says it allows for the substitution of spoilers and rear wings. it doesn't specify that it must be substituted with the same type.

Yeah, but it leaves you wide open to having someone file a complaint about it if you replace a wing with a spoiler.

 

[aMaff]

I think that to protest that would require a pretty tortured interpretation of the rules. It says you can substitute wings and spoilers. So you substitute a spoiler for a wing or vice versa... I'd call that legal. I really think you guys are reading a little too far between the lines. Sure, it doesn't say you can delete anything, that part I agree with, but I wouldn't see putting a spoiler in place of a wing as illegal.

 

[TinmanMS6]

I believe replacing a wing with a wing and spoiler with a spoiler is the generally accepted interpretation of that rule.

 

[moxnix]

14.2.F

Addition of spoilers, splitters, body kits, rear wings and nonfunctional scoops/vents is allowed. The intent of this allowance
is to accommodate commonly available appearance kits, and replicas thereof, which have no significant aerodynamic function at Solo speeds. Body kits are limited to bumper covers, valances, side skirts, and fender flares. Standard parts may not be removed except for the substitution of spoilers, rear wings, bumper covers and valances. Rear wings must attach only aft of the rear wheel centerline.

The allowances regarding wings and spoilers only allow swapping like for like if the original device was not an OE option as configured by the factory, i.e. a spoiler for a spoiler or a wing for a wing. If a vehicle is available without a wing or spoiler from the manufacturer then either can be installed.

Right in the rules it is spelled out that you can only swap like for like.

The only reason I was quoting the SP clarifications are that they actually spell out the general definition of a wing vs a spoiler and I would expect ST to use those same general definitions since I have always been told that when it is not defined in the rules (section 12) you would use the standard definition.

The other part of SP clarifications I quoted was to show that it does not matter what the OEM calls it but what the actual design is.

While both are SP clarifications I believe both would be found the same for ST if a protest was filed.

 

[aMaff]

well, I stand corrected

 

[Auto-Xer]

well, I stand corrected

...and I stand lighter and "legal" (I think (dunno)).

 

[Inspector 24]

Man oh man am I glad the spoiler wing ugly thingy was an option on the MX6

Ryan

 

[gottacatchup]

So I need some advice on filing a protest. Theres a guy who's been running a completely gutted integra in STS at one of the regions I participate at. Naturally he's been faster than me the past couple events and kept me out of 1st place. Now I'm not an official member of this region and I don't know most of the people there but I still think its dumb he's getting away with it.

So basically I'm asking how big of a dick move would it be to protest him at the next event and get him bumped into some prepared class?

 

[aMaff]

So basically I'm asking how big of a dick move would it be to protest him at the next event and get him bumped into some prepared class?

Step 1: approach him about it. No need to BE a dick about it, it may be that he simply doesn't know, or his buddy runs in STS so he wants to as well, whatev.

If he gets all uppity, or you guys don't reach an agreement, then talk to the event chair and they'll work with you.

Also ask yourself: is his car missing some carpeting REALLY what's keeping you out of first?

 

[dmitrik4]

^^agreed on the above course of action. speak to the guy first.

depends on what "gutted" means. when we gutted my FX16 for the Lemons race, the interior was a few hundred pounds. would a few hundred pounds make your miata faster?

 

[aMaff]

would a few hundred pounds make your miata faster?

Yes. Very yes. If that's the case, sure. But as you said, it depends on what you mean by gutted. Carpet in older cars isn't terribly heavy, or if he just took the back seats out it's probably not a lot of weight. Then again, if he's totally stripped the thing, then sure, go for it. But always talk to the person first.

 

[gottacatchup]

Step 1: approach him about it. No need to BE a dick about it, it may be that he simply doesn't know, or his buddy runs in STS so he wants to as well, whatev.

If he gets all uppity, or you guys don't reach an agreement, then talk to the event chair and they'll work with you.

Also ask yourself: is his car missing some carpeting REALLY what's keeping you out of first?

Yeah that's kinda my other issue, I'm not really super competitive either way. If there was a real prepped car at the event both of us would probably get spanked. It just really bugs me when people run in the wrong class. Plus it seems to happen in STS more than other classes because of the nature of the allowed modifications.

 

[Inspector 24]

Not being a member may hurt your case. In certain regions as in ours in order to earn a trophy at the end of the year you must be an SCCA Member. Thus if you're not, even if you beat him it may not matter

Ryan