CMC Mustang guys - inside please!

[Fbody383]

Bushing material is unresticted!

It is; does the MM mount provide an equivalent to OEM attachment location and geometry?

It's fine not to like the rule, but do folks want the mount for just the solid mounting or also a potential suspension improvement?

[jeremiahkellam]

This would only be an issue if we allowed these at one time and then changed the rule. Since these have never been allowed (read as - the rule has been the same for many years.

Those mounts have been on my car for 2 seasons! They are there in plain sight. That means they made it through every one of your regional "inspections" and 2 pre and post race national inspections. And it has never once come up. Now, because someone else has viewed them as outside of the rule set, you've jumped on board with it! Could it be viewed as a geometrical advantage?? Sure!! Some people even think Glenn is a nice person. But we are talking about moving the "bushing" up maybe 1/2" at the most, how much of an advantage could that be on a live axle car and the shock mounts straight up and down??? It couldnt be anymore of an advantage than aloowing the Poor Mans 3 link....

If you wont tell us who told you about it, then I would like to know who else is running these mounts, because I know I'm the only one in Texas (so far...). And given the fact that you decided to spout off here in the Texas forums and not post an official National Tech Bulliten leads me to believe that whoever did tell you about it, knows as little as you do and is as full of excuses as you are!

In response to David's question, the reason I put them on was that if I am running these high dollar "cheater shocks", I wanted the shocks to work as intended, and not be hampered by a piece rubber that could change the dampening performance of the shock.

[jdlingle]

From the MM website:

"MM Racing Rear Upper Shock Mount, Bilstein, 1979-2004, non IRS

Securely mounts your shock top with a spherical bearing. Eliminates the vertical deflection of any rubber, and the spherical bearing’s freedom of movement eliminates side loading on the shock shaft. This helps the shock perform at it’s peak. Our mount performs the same as a rod end on the end of the shock, but does not reduce precious bump travel because of trying to fit a rod end under the shock tower. These can be used with or without a coil-over system. Because there is increased noise transmitted into the passenger compartment, and installation of the shock mount is not easily reversible, this product is recommended only for race cars. Not for use with IRS due to reduction in droop travel."

Would the same product be legal if it was under the shock tower or is the added height what DQ's them?

I had spoken with Jeremiah about these when I was first starting my build after seeing them on his car (which was after he won Nationals). I had also spoken with two other people about them and was never under the impression that there was anything wrong with these. For once being broke worked to my advantage because these would have been on the car if I had the money. The stock rubber mount on the rear shock is very flimsy.

[rpoz27]

...and if you have to get rid of a set, I'll take it.

I, yes this is Matt, was selling mine to Jeremy for $100....if this rule stands, you can buy them. Should be off the car in about 3 weeks when the new shocks arrive. I am also selling the bilsteins and coil over kit too....no springs....no problem for AI.

[GlennCMC70]

There is no "if this rule stands" to it. The rule has been interpreted to me the same way since before I have been trying to do what you guys did (get rid of the rubber).
They have never been legal. Not as long as I have been in CMC.
I asked before I modded my car (2006 or earlier) and you guys added it w/out asking.

[GlennCMC70]

Those mounts have been on my car for 2 seasons! They are there in plain sight. That means they made it through every one of your regional "inspections" and 2 pre and post race national inspections. And it has never once come up.

Not the first time someone has been illegal for a very long time and was caught at some point and penalized for it. I recall subframe connectors being delt w/ in a much more harsh manner. Was the violation invallid due the time that has passed w/ the car illegallay modified? No.

Now, because someone else has viewed them as outside of the rule set, you've jumped on board with it!

I've not jumped on board w/ anything. I have known for a number of years this was not legal. I verified w/ the other Directors to ensure I didn't miss a rule change or interpretation and all agreed that these are not legal and have never been before I made this post. So even if I was good w/ them being on the cars, they would still be illegal.

Could it be viewed as a geometrical advantage?? Sure!! Some people even think Glenn is a nice person. But we are talking about moving the "bushing" up maybe 1/2" at the most, how much of an advantage could that be on a live axle car and the shock mounts straight up and down??? It couldnt be anymore of an advantage than aloowing the Poor Mans 3 link....

How much in violation of a rule does one need to be to order to be illegal? That rule was in place the day you built your car. It reads pretty clear to me. Don't agree? Use this golden opertunity to appeal to the National Office and have me made to look a fool. Do I agree w/ you that we should be allowed to do this? Sure. I want to do it to mine. But I will also enforce the rules no matter my personal feelings of them.

If you wont tell us who told you about it, then I would like to know who else is running these mounts, because I know I'm the only one in Texas (so far...). And given the fact that you decided to spout off here in the Texas forums and not post an official National Tech Bulliten leads me to believe that whoever did tell you about it, knows as little as you do and is as full of excuses as you are!

I'll not tell you who told me and as far as anyone (other than me) knew, nobody really had these on thier car based on my original post. You first post indicated to me the info given to me was correct. All I was told was some guys are running them. It was a result of said person telling me of them on his car and me questioning the legality of them. That resulted in "there are lots of guys w/ them". So as of now, I know of 2. You could have kept your mouth shut and just removed them. Instead of accepting a "leason learned" the easy way (w/out a DQ), your busting my balls cause I'm the one delivering the bad news.
So feel free to think I have spouted off. Wait for the Tech Bulliten - that will never be posted since the rule is very clear and no changes have been made. Appeal to the other Regional Directors, the National Directors, the NASA HQ office only to learn that I am correct. And then learn that you have ZERO facts correct and to not have the sack to come back in here and admit that you were infact the one who is wrong. Have you never been wrong in your whole life? Is it possible this is another one of those times?


I am 100% convinced that there will always be someone (likely more than one) in this group who will only be happy if they are allowed to race in CMC the way they understand the rules. I will never be able to come in here and inform folks that there are rules being violated and folks need to come into compliance w/out getting this treatment. This childish behavior is absurd. I go out of my way to correct folks who are in violation only to have them act as if I DQ'ed them on the spot w/ no appeal available. Perhaps that is the way I'll do it from now on. I get treated like dirt when I'm nice about it, I'll get treated like dirt when I'm unfair about it. Bunch of F'ing dramma queens.

[David Love AI27]

Not the first time someone has been illegal for a very long time and was caught at some point and penalized for it.

Something MUST be wrong with the way cars are being checked... Seems like this happens alot...

[GlennCMC70]

Something MUST be wrong with the way cars are being checked... Seems like this happens alot...

I offer that as much blame can be placed on me for missing non-legal parts as can be placed on folks who fail to read the rules. This rule (and many like it) are pretty clear. Not much to "read into" or "gray area" in this one.

When you guys are ready to present your cars for inspection Friday morning and stay at impound post race right up to grid time for the next race and well into the evening after the track goes cold Sat and Sun, then hold me liable for missing these items. This method would likely result in more folks being unhappy then what we have now w/ those who seem to be unable to handle being told thier car has illegal parts/mod's on it. I don't recall hearing of any other place to race that would post on the local class forum a notice like this one, or a one-on-one conversation requesting the car to be made legal prior to the next event while not issueing a DQ on the spot. We all want 100% legal cars to show up - we have had this conversation just a couple years ago and it was clear that as a group we wanted legal cars. But none of us are willing to do what it takes to ensure this. We don't want to spend hours in impound, we don't want to show up a day earlier, we don't want to "rat out" our friends. We wanted folks DQ'ed for infractions. What we do is bitch about anything a Director does to prevent having to do all that. It is my fault I pointed out the MM rear shock mounts are not legal, and not JK's for installing them? It's my fault I didn't sit down a have "read the rules to my CMC racers hour" at each event. I'm pretty sure we have a much more "legal" group of cars than we have ever had. Much better than those days of CMC Directors w/ illegal parts and the fix was to sign your logbook stating you were OK to run them as well, but only doing so once they were caught.


So yes, there is an issue w/ the way cars are being checked. We are guys who race for fun, w/ folks who run the series for fun. So far this year about 3 folks have done a great job at trying to make this zero fun for me.

At this point, I've said all I plan on saying. You want to talk about this with me, call me or talk w/ me at MSR-H in 2012.

[ShadowBolt]

So yes, there is an issue w/ the way cars are being checked. We are guys who race for fun, w/ folks who run the series for fun. So far this year about 3 folks have done a great job at trying to make this zero fun for me.

At this point, I've said all I plan on saying. You want to talk about this with me, call me or talk w/ me at MSR-H in 2012.

I'm sorry Glenn for being one of the three A-Holes. Just to be clear I don't have a problem with this. Notice any more post from me on the subject? I just wanted to know who told/asked you about them because I was looking into them. I don't have a dog in this fight.


JJ

[Rob Liebbe]

From the Maximum Motorsports Catalog:

Maximum Motorsports 1994-04 Mustang Caster Camber Plates, black powdercoat finish. MM 4-bolt caster/camber plates provide independent adjustment of camber and caster.

Benefits

• Aids proper front alignment, improves performance.
• Lowered Mustangs can be aligned to factory specifications.
• Provides a wider range of camber adjustment than is otherwise possible.
• Negative camber may be increased for competition.
• Provides caster adjustment (otherwise not adjustable).
• Allows greatly increasing caster for improved straight-line stability and cornering ability.
• Suitable for coil-over conversion.
• Allows increasing bump travel.
• Caster and camber are easily adjusted at the top of the strut tower.
• Double-adjustable. Camber is adjustable without affecting caster.
• Spherical bearing mount eliminates deflection and precisely locates the strut shaft, while still allowing the articulation required for steering and suspension movement.
• Improves steering response and dynamic alignment stability, by eliminating deflection allowed by the stock rubber-bushed upper strut mount.
• Bolts on. Drilling of one hole in each strut tower is required.

Are these caster/camber plates going to be illegal now too? These, or other similar units, have been are more cars than you can imagine including my old one and likely the new one. The caster/camber plates allow for an adjustment beyond "stock" for just about every possible strut top geometry including shock/strut travel (increased bump travel from the catalog description). Seems like some thought is in order on the rear shock mount as the front strut mount is suscept to the same interpretation and nobody would make the argument that the front strut caster/camber plates are illegal and should be removed.