I'm impressed you've only winched a broken car on the trailer twice.Originally Posted by Supercharged111
Who in their right mind would cross over to SM in hopes of landing a podium at Nats? Oh wait. . .
Winching a lifeless car onto the trailer twice was more than enough for me, I can't imagine forklifting the damn thing in. Then you have the devil's own chore of getting it out back home. I think I'll stay right here. The beer is cold and the ribs are delicious.
If I had a dollar....
Daniel Records
CMC # 34
That was this season alone. Was the first and second time the car didn't drive itself onto the trailer. DNFs aren't really my thing. Shooting for zero again next season.
RM CMC Director
You're welcome
Does this mod really help or did these guys get screwed?
JJ
I'd lean towards screwed, they were pushing the rules though... They didn't pick up nearly as much power as an aftermarket diff cover would, thats for sure.
If this modification did not give these guys any kind of advantage NASA will be the loser on this one. I'm like BL as far as I wonder what the other SM guys think. Are they glad the guys got caught doing something they knew about but did not do to their own cars because they wanted to make sure they followed the rules or do they think NASA dropped the ball and took a win away from a guy that deserved the win?
JJ
I don’t agree with this sentiment. The rules allow stock or remanufactured axle assemblies that are unmodified.
In this specific instance, they don’t define the specific details of the cage dimensions other than they are supposed to be “stock.” So what is the stock dimension? What is the tolerance in that dimension? How do they wear? In the “typical” (whatever that means) rebuild, how is this part refurbished and how does that affect the dimensions? These questions can make this a tough determination on legality.
In my opinion, based on the pictures shown in Speed News, the cage shown was probably modified intentionally beyond any dimension that would be found in a stock or rebuilt axle assembly. There is a pretty significant difference between the stock picture and the modified picture. If this was a part ordered off of RockAuto.com like this and bolted on, then yes, this would be a big screw job. We know that wasn’t the case in this instance. Was this an intentional modification intended to improve performance? Don’t know. Seems like it probably was. Maybe the modification just makes it easier to assemble? It doesn’t really matter. It’s not a stock dimensioned part so it’s not legal.
So, does this modification affect performance? Maybe, maybe not. I’m going with probably not. I certainly don’t have a belief that the winner was able to win because of these cheater axles and wouldn’t have won without them.
From the NASA side, the performance advantage doesn’t really matter. The car is legal or it isn’t. The effectiveness of illegal parts isn’t NASA’s responsibility to determine. It's like saying I have 10” wide wheels on my CMC car but it’s OK because they are 27 pounds so they aren’t an advantage. That’s not how it works. Or a more direct parallel would be saying I have something that many people might consider ram air on my CMC car but I have data that shows that it’s ineffective. Huh? If it doesn’t help, why are you doing something that could get you disqualified by someone’s opinion? A poorly implemented illegal modification that isn’t an advantage doesn’t make it legal. It just doesn’t.
So why would they do something like this? Competition at the front of the Miata field is brutal. I doubt they thought that this modification was a secret big advantage. It’s probably more that every part on the car has had this level of attention placed on it. For most parts that actually do affect performance, there is a specific number to shoot for. For stuff like this, the limits are much more ambiguous. At this level, driver is still 95% of it, but all of the extremely little details do add up.
Richard P.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks