| z3coupe | 01-10-2002 03:10 AM |
Is the Anti-Lift kit legal for STX?
After reading through the "Training WRX" book, I see that there is a need for the "Anti-Lift" kit on the WRX. But is it legal for use in STX? I imagine any STS RS drivers would know by now . . . .
| wistful | 01-10-2002 05:00 AM |
illegal in STs. It changes the geometry of ur suspension.
Don
Don
| Orion | 01-10-2002 07:28 AM |
Edited due to Uncertainty!
| KC | 01-10-2002 08:28 AM |
Is the ALK even legal in SM? If it is, how so?
| Steve '02 WRX | 01-10-2002 09:39 AM |
I'm not completely familiar with the ALK, but if it uses the existing stock holes in the frame to mount the bracket, it would be legal for street mod. If it requires new holes to be drilled, it would not be legal.
| Spectre23 | 01-10-2002 10:12 AM |
Just confirming Steve is right. SM rules say "stock attachment points". And the ALK does use the stock mounting points. So it is legal for SM.
| Tangmere | 01-10-2002 10:29 AM |
Yet caster/camber plates which also change the angle of our suspension is legal . Go figure...
| ChrisW | 01-10-2002 11:26 AM |
no it's not legal for SM or SP or STX. While the ALK uses the "stock bolt holes" what they are refering to is the mounting point for the lower control arm which the ALK changes to add caster.
The camber plates are legal, because they use the same mounting points as the original shock/strut.
If you install a ALK kit, your in OSP.
I have to thank other RS owners for clearing this up for me. I thought they would be legal in SM too.
[edit]
now if you can get a lower control arm bushing that does the same thing, [i]that[/i] is legal, I think. It depends on if you fall within the offset bushing rules
The camber plates are legal, because they use the same mounting points as the original shock/strut.
If you install a ALK kit, your in OSP.
I have to thank other RS owners for clearing this up for me. I thought they would be legal in SM too.
[edit]
now if you can get a lower control arm bushing that does the same thing, [i]that[/i] is legal, I think. It depends on if you fall within the offset bushing rules
| ChrisW | 01-10-2002 11:31 AM |
it just occured to me...
another way to get more caster is to use the aluminum lower control arms.
I think they install more caster by design, and use the stock mounting points & bushings
Can anyone confirm that the Aluminum control arms change the caster?
another way to get more caster is to use the aluminum lower control arms.
I think they install more caster by design, and use the stock mounting points & bushings
Can anyone confirm that the Aluminum control arms change the caster?
| ChaosThom | 01-10-2002 12:21 PM |
The ALK is not legal.
I haven't read the book, but I assume you're talking about the loss of grip that occurs when hard on the gas out of a turn. The car squats and takes grip from the front resulting in understeer.
There are alternatives to the ALK to lesson this effect and stay within the rules:
1. You can use a strut top caster/ camber plate to adjust the caster to 3.5 degrees.
2. You can have the car aligned to put the camber at maximum with the stock bolts. The best setting would be +2.5 to +3 for track use, and +3/4 to 1 degree for street use. To get the higher settings, you would have to use adjustable strut tops.
I haven't read the book, but I assume you're talking about the loss of grip that occurs when hard on the gas out of a turn. The car squats and takes grip from the front resulting in understeer.
There are alternatives to the ALK to lesson this effect and stay within the rules:
1. You can use a strut top caster/ camber plate to adjust the caster to 3.5 degrees.
2. You can have the car aligned to put the camber at maximum with the stock bolts. The best setting would be +2.5 to +3 for track use, and +3/4 to 1 degree for street use. To get the higher settings, you would have to use adjustable strut tops.
| Impreza Rider | 01-10-2002 12:43 PM |
I still never understood why the ALK wasn't legal. You can replace suspension bushings, and use offset bushings. Isn't that what the ALK does? Just offset the hole slightly? The hoe through the bushing isn't at a different angle AFAIK.
| Steve '02 WRX | 01-10-2002 01:54 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by ChrisW [/i]
[B]no it's not legal for SM or SP or STX. While the ALK uses the "stock bolt holes" what they are refering to is the mounting point for the lower control arm which the ALK changes to add caster.
[/B][/QUOTE]
I agree about the not legal for SP or STX, but for street mod brackets that change the mounting of control arms are legal as long as they use the existing holes on the frame. I haven't seen the ALK myself, but from what I have seen described this is all it does. A good example of why this is legal is the IRS on the rear of a Mustang, it bolts up to the same holes on the frame as the non IRS rear end. The IRS is in effect relocating the mounting points for the rear suspension. You can swap an IRS rear to a 4 link rear legally because it doesn't require modifying the frame. If the ALK requires modifying the frame to make it work, it would not be legal. If it is simply unbolting the existing mount and bolting this one on it is legal in SM.
[B]no it's not legal for SM or SP or STX. While the ALK uses the "stock bolt holes" what they are refering to is the mounting point for the lower control arm which the ALK changes to add caster.
[/B][/QUOTE]
I agree about the not legal for SP or STX, but for street mod brackets that change the mounting of control arms are legal as long as they use the existing holes on the frame. I haven't seen the ALK myself, but from what I have seen described this is all it does. A good example of why this is legal is the IRS on the rear of a Mustang, it bolts up to the same holes on the frame as the non IRS rear end. The IRS is in effect relocating the mounting points for the rear suspension. You can swap an IRS rear to a 4 link rear legally because it doesn't require modifying the frame. If the ALK requires modifying the frame to make it work, it would not be legal. If it is simply unbolting the existing mount and bolting this one on it is legal in SM.
| ChrisW | 01-10-2002 03:16 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Steve '02 WRX [/i]
[B]
I agree about the not legal for SP or STX, but for street mod brackets that change the mounting of control arms are legal as long as they use the existing holes on the frame. I haven't seen the ALK myself, but from what I have seen described this is all it does. A good example of why this is legal is the IRS on the rear of a Mustang, it bolts up to the same holes on the frame as the non IRS rear end. The IRS is in effect relocating the mounting points for the rear suspension. You can swap an IRS rear to a 4 link rear legally because it doesn't require modifying the frame. If the ALK requires modifying the frame to make it work, it would not be legal. If it is simply unbolting the existing mount and bolting this one on it is legal in SM. [/B][/QUOTE]
OK, even if what you say is true, running an ALK in SM is asking for a protest, IMHO. It's just what I have heard second hand from other RS owners in my region.
[B]
I agree about the not legal for SP or STX, but for street mod brackets that change the mounting of control arms are legal as long as they use the existing holes on the frame. I haven't seen the ALK myself, but from what I have seen described this is all it does. A good example of why this is legal is the IRS on the rear of a Mustang, it bolts up to the same holes on the frame as the non IRS rear end. The IRS is in effect relocating the mounting points for the rear suspension. You can swap an IRS rear to a 4 link rear legally because it doesn't require modifying the frame. If the ALK requires modifying the frame to make it work, it would not be legal. If it is simply unbolting the existing mount and bolting this one on it is legal in SM. [/B][/QUOTE]
OK, even if what you say is true, running an ALK in SM is asking for a protest, IMHO. It's just what I have heard second hand from other RS owners in my region.
| Spectre23 | 01-10-2002 03:30 PM |
People, have you read the SM rules? It says that the suspension is unrestricted as long as factory mounting holes are retained. What part of unrestricted do you not undertsand?
| DLC | 01-10-2002 03:55 PM |
Indeed.
Drilling holes is one thing, but this is just a different design that changes an angle, using the original holes.
Sounds fine to me.
Drilling holes is one thing, but this is just a different design that changes an angle, using the original holes.
Sounds fine to me.
| ChaosThom | 01-10-2002 03:55 PM |
Spectre23 is right. The ALK is legal in SM.
I bought one before I lost the argument about it being legal in STS or not. I never installed it. But I did get to measure it against the stock part. It only moves the control arm 4mm. If you were ambitious, you could pull it out, modify the bushing to fit into the stock mount and you would be legal in STS. Then it would simply be an offset bushing.
However, for the cost and the trouble, the adjustable strut tower tops are a far better option. Nobody will try to challenge you on it.
I bought one before I lost the argument about it being legal in STS or not. I never installed it. But I did get to measure it against the stock part. It only moves the control arm 4mm. If you were ambitious, you could pull it out, modify the bushing to fit into the stock mount and you would be legal in STS. Then it would simply be an offset bushing.
However, for the cost and the trouble, the adjustable strut tower tops are a far better option. Nobody will try to challenge you on it.
| Orion | 01-10-2002 04:04 PM |
Wow! Didn't expect the long debate!
I've researched it quite a bit over the last few months, therefore I kept my original post simple and to the point. Everything I found led me to believe that it is legal to run it in SM.
Only reason I didn't install one is I chose to run a Regional ST class.
Edit: I will be calling SCCA to get an absolute verification on Monday. Howard is out of town until then.
I've researched it quite a bit over the last few months, therefore I kept my original post simple and to the point. Everything I found led me to believe that it is legal to run it in SM.
Only reason I didn't install one is I chose to run a Regional ST class.
Edit: I will be calling SCCA to get an absolute verification on Monday. Howard is out of town until then.
| Steve '02 WRX | 01-10-2002 04:27 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by orionf [/i]
[B]Wow! Didn't expect the long debate!
I've researched it quite a bit over the last few months, therefore I kept my original post simple and to the point. Spectre23 hit it on the head. SM is unrestricted. ALK's bolt right up to the OEM mounting holes. Everything I found led me to believe that it is legal to run it in SM.
Only reason I didn't install one is I chose to run a Regional ST class.
Edit: I will be calling SCCA to get an absolute verification on Monday. Harold is out of town until then. [/B][/QUOTE]
Better call him Howard though, that's his name. :D You can email him at [email][email protected][/email] and specify that it's a question for the SEB. The SEB is responsible for all rule clarifications.
[B]Wow! Didn't expect the long debate!
I've researched it quite a bit over the last few months, therefore I kept my original post simple and to the point. Spectre23 hit it on the head. SM is unrestricted. ALK's bolt right up to the OEM mounting holes. Everything I found led me to believe that it is legal to run it in SM.
Only reason I didn't install one is I chose to run a Regional ST class.
Edit: I will be calling SCCA to get an absolute verification on Monday. Harold is out of town until then. [/B][/QUOTE]
Better call him Howard though, that's his name. :D You can email him at [email][email protected][/email] and specify that it's a question for the SEB. The SEB is responsible for all rule clarifications.
| Spaf | 01-10-2002 07:42 PM |
Rocky, the ALK is just an offset bushing. While I'm not 100% (no way to be 100% sure without clarification from the SEB), I don't see why it isn't legal in ST, SP and SM. STX uses the ST rules as its base right? ST and SP have the same bushing rules:
"Suspension bushings may be replaced with bushings of any materials (except metal) as long as they fit in the original location. [B]Offset bushings may be used[/B]. In a replacement bushing the amount of metal relative to the amount of non-metallic material may not be increased. This does not authorize a change in type of bushing (for example ball and socket replacing a cylindrical bushing), or use of a bushing with an angled hole whose direction differs from that of the original bushing. If the Stock bushing accommodated multi-axis motion via compliance of the component material(s), the replacement bushing may not be changed to accomodate such motion via a change in bushing type, for example to a spherical bearing or similar component involving internal moving parts. Pins or keys may be used to prevent the rotation of alternate bushings, but may serve no other purpose than that of retaining the bushing in the desired position. "
It's not metal, doesn't have any more metal than stock. I don't see how changing the angle would do anything other than cause excessive bind under travel.
Jason Uyeda
"Suspension bushings may be replaced with bushings of any materials (except metal) as long as they fit in the original location. [B]Offset bushings may be used[/B]. In a replacement bushing the amount of metal relative to the amount of non-metallic material may not be increased. This does not authorize a change in type of bushing (for example ball and socket replacing a cylindrical bushing), or use of a bushing with an angled hole whose direction differs from that of the original bushing. If the Stock bushing accommodated multi-axis motion via compliance of the component material(s), the replacement bushing may not be changed to accomodate such motion via a change in bushing type, for example to a spherical bearing or similar component involving internal moving parts. Pins or keys may be used to prevent the rotation of alternate bushings, but may serve no other purpose than that of retaining the bushing in the desired position. "
It's not metal, doesn't have any more metal than stock. I don't see how changing the angle would do anything other than cause excessive bind under travel.
Jason Uyeda
| Spectre23 | 01-10-2002 08:13 PM |
The ALK is not an offset bushing, it is an offset housing. So basically by changing the housing of the bushing it does not "fit in the original location". By adding the ALK, you just threw away the original location and replaced it with a machined aluminum piece.
One of the many times this has come up, someone contacted Howard Duncan and he specifically ruled the ALK illegal for STS.
One of the many times this has come up, someone contacted Howard Duncan and he specifically ruled the ALK illegal for STS.
| Spaf | 01-10-2002 10:14 PM |
DOH! Spectre23 you're right. Talk about massive brain fade... I completely forgot about the different housing... For some reason I kept thinking that it was a busing in the arm. That's what happens when you get it confused with a corvette part....
So assuming the housing is different, it is illegal. I can't say, but I would think that it is then...
It's important to remember though, that Howard is not the final word. The SEB is. Howard merely acts as a go-between, in order to give you a response promptly (the SEB can be slow). He probably has about a 99% correctness rate though...
That's what I get for coming out of my hole and commenting on rules... :)
_J_
So assuming the housing is different, it is illegal. I can't say, but I would think that it is then...
It's important to remember though, that Howard is not the final word. The SEB is. Howard merely acts as a go-between, in order to give you a response promptly (the SEB can be slow). He probably has about a 99% correctness rate though...
That's what I get for coming out of my hole and commenting on rules... :)
_J_
| pio!pio! | 01-11-2002 03:17 AM |
What exactly is caster? I know what camber and toe is, but not caster. How is it visualized?
| z3coupe | 01-11-2002 05:11 AM |
Well Jason, are you going to tun in STX too? If so, will you let me use it if I let YOU use it :eek:
On a more serious note, though . . . . why not just have a stronger bushing made to fit in lieu of the ALK? That might help as it won't give as much as the stock one (which IS allowed), but would not change the mounting point (which is NOT allowed). Just a thought?
On a more serious note, though . . . . why not just have a stronger bushing made to fit in lieu of the ALK? That might help as it won't give as much as the stock one (which IS allowed), but would not change the mounting point (which is NOT allowed). Just a thought?
| KC | 01-11-2002 08:07 AM |
[QUOTE]or use of a bushing with an angled hole whose direction differs from that of the original bushing[/QUOTE] Wouldn't this kill it right there?
So it is illegal for SM too, right?
So it is illegal for SM too, right?
| Steve '02 WRX | 01-11-2002 08:52 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by KC [/i]
[B] Wouldn't this kill it right there?
So it is illegal for SM too, right? [/B][/QUOTE]
Not if the housing bolts up to the original holes in the frame. If it does it is simply a relocation bracket and those are legal in street mod.
[B] Wouldn't this kill it right there?
So it is illegal for SM too, right? [/B][/QUOTE]
Not if the housing bolts up to the original holes in the frame. If it does it is simply a relocation bracket and those are legal in street mod.
| ChrisW | 01-11-2002 09:23 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Steve '02 WRX [/i]
[B]
Not if the housing bolts up to the original holes in the frame. If it does it is simply a relocation bracket and those are legal in street mod. [/B][/QUOTE]
I don't know... you need clarification on weather the modified bushing housing in the ALK kit is considered an attachment point or if the bolts that hold the ALK to the frame are the attachment points.
10 to 1 the ALK bushing housing is considered the attachment point.
[B]
Not if the housing bolts up to the original holes in the frame. If it does it is simply a relocation bracket and those are legal in street mod. [/B][/QUOTE]
I don't know... you need clarification on weather the modified bushing housing in the ALK kit is considered an attachment point or if the bolts that hold the ALK to the frame are the attachment points.
10 to 1 the ALK bushing housing is considered the attachment point.
| Spectre23 | 01-11-2002 10:06 AM |
Sorry, wrong again. KC is right. here is the part of the rule that matters here: "This does not authorize a change in type of bushing (for example ball and socket replacing a cylindrical bushing), .[B]or use of a bushing with an angled hole [/B] whose direction differs from that of the original bushing
| Steve '02 WRX | 01-11-2002 11:00 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Spectre23 [/i]
[B]Sorry, wrong again. KC is right. here is the part of the rule that matters here: "This does not authorize a change in type of bushing (for example ball and socket replacing a cylindrical bushing), .[B]or use of a bushing with an angled hole [/B] whose direction differs from that of the original bushing [/B][/QUOTE]
I'm not sure if your reply was directed at me or not, but that rule doesn't apply to SM.
[B]Sorry, wrong again. KC is right. here is the part of the rule that matters here: "This does not authorize a change in type of bushing (for example ball and socket replacing a cylindrical bushing), .[B]or use of a bushing with an angled hole [/B] whose direction differs from that of the original bushing [/B][/QUOTE]
I'm not sure if your reply was directed at me or not, but that rule doesn't apply to SM.
| Spaf | 01-11-2002 02:20 PM |
Rocky:
I'll be running SM Nationally in the WRX. Locally I'll PAX in LA and SD...
All SP rules do apply to SM, but they are superceded by the SM rules....
OK, I'll bite again :)... What's the confusion regarding SM? Here is the rule:
"Suspension components are unrestricted as long as they use the original attachment points. "
How is the ALK bracket not a suspension component? The attachment point would be the point at which the ALK attaches to the frame.
I guess the bigger problem here is the definition of "attachment point" There is currently a push to more clearly define these terms.... But the intent of the rule is to keep you from modifying the frame, not suspension components. Basically any suspension parts you can bolt into the stock frame attachment points should be legal. See the giant k-member debate on the SM list...
_J_
I'll be running SM Nationally in the WRX. Locally I'll PAX in LA and SD...
All SP rules do apply to SM, but they are superceded by the SM rules....
OK, I'll bite again :)... What's the confusion regarding SM? Here is the rule:
"Suspension components are unrestricted as long as they use the original attachment points. "
How is the ALK bracket not a suspension component? The attachment point would be the point at which the ALK attaches to the frame.
I guess the bigger problem here is the definition of "attachment point" There is currently a push to more clearly define these terms.... But the intent of the rule is to keep you from modifying the frame, not suspension components. Basically any suspension parts you can bolt into the stock frame attachment points should be legal. See the giant k-member debate on the SM list...
_J_
| ChrisW | 01-11-2002 03:08 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Spaf [/i]
[B]Rocky:
I'll be running SM Nationally in the WRX. Locally I'll PAX in LA and SD...
All SP rules do apply to SM, but they are superceded by the SM rules....
OK, I'll bite again :)... What's the confusion regarding SM? Here is the rule:
"Suspension components are unrestricted as long as they use the original attachment points. "
How is the ALK bracket not a suspension component? The attachment point would be the point at which the ALK attaches to the frame.
I guess the bigger problem here is the definition of "attachment point" There is currently a push to more clearly define these terms.... But the intent of the rule is to keep you from modifying the frame, not suspension components. Basically any suspension parts you can bolt into the stock frame attachment points should be legal. See the giant k-member debate on the SM list...
_J_ [/B][/QUOTE]
Playing Devils advocate, the problem is that the ALK modifies the original attachment point of the lower control arm by replacing it with an aftermarket mounting point that is not in alignment with the original equipment.
If that is the case, and a good argument can be made on this point, then the ALK is illegal for SP and SM.
The problem as I see it, is that with the ALK installed you have changed the original mounting point of the lower control arm. As far as the SCCA is concerned, where and how the bushing material that controls the movement of the lower control arm has more of an effect than the silly bolt holes that hold the bushing housing to the frame:rolleyes:
I truely hope that I am wrong in my interpretation of the rules, because this ALK mod would put the WRX on par with the M3 that won SM in the nationals this year. I know that M3 very well, because the car is owned by a fellow autox'er in my region.
[B]Rocky:
I'll be running SM Nationally in the WRX. Locally I'll PAX in LA and SD...
All SP rules do apply to SM, but they are superceded by the SM rules....
OK, I'll bite again :)... What's the confusion regarding SM? Here is the rule:
"Suspension components are unrestricted as long as they use the original attachment points. "
How is the ALK bracket not a suspension component? The attachment point would be the point at which the ALK attaches to the frame.
I guess the bigger problem here is the definition of "attachment point" There is currently a push to more clearly define these terms.... But the intent of the rule is to keep you from modifying the frame, not suspension components. Basically any suspension parts you can bolt into the stock frame attachment points should be legal. See the giant k-member debate on the SM list...
_J_ [/B][/QUOTE]
Playing Devils advocate, the problem is that the ALK modifies the original attachment point of the lower control arm by replacing it with an aftermarket mounting point that is not in alignment with the original equipment.
If that is the case, and a good argument can be made on this point, then the ALK is illegal for SP and SM.
The problem as I see it, is that with the ALK installed you have changed the original mounting point of the lower control arm. As far as the SCCA is concerned, where and how the bushing material that controls the movement of the lower control arm has more of an effect than the silly bolt holes that hold the bushing housing to the frame:rolleyes:
I truely hope that I am wrong in my interpretation of the rules, because this ALK mod would put the WRX on par with the M3 that won SM in the nationals this year. I know that M3 very well, because the car is owned by a fellow autox'er in my region.
| Spectre23 | 01-11-2002 03:40 PM |
Yes, the bushing with a crooked hole would be legal for SM as is the ALK and any other suspension piece that doesn't require re-drilling. I thought someone was suggesting the crooked hole for STX which it is not legal for.
| z3coupe | 01-11-2002 04:48 PM |
But no one has answered my other question - part of the problem is that the stock bushing is mushy, right? So if we do not move the location, but just REPLACE the bushing with a stiffer one, that should be lega, right? But will it help a bit more to combat the lift???
| DLC | 01-11-2002 06:07 PM |
Replacing the liquid-filled bushings with Urethane is legal as long as you use the stock geometry.
Spectre23 replaced his with those purple Powerflex ones, i think, though i don't seem to remember hearing his impressions of them.
Anything to keep the suspension from moving around while also keeping it stiff is beneficial, replacement bushings do this.
Spectre23 replaced his with those purple Powerflex ones, i think, though i don't seem to remember hearing his impressions of them.
Anything to keep the suspension from moving around while also keeping it stiff is beneficial, replacement bushings do this.
| Spaf | 01-11-2002 06:23 PM |
Chris, if you're close to Jim's car that's pretty good. Is that when Rob is driving? I would expect Corey to be even faster this year as well. Should be a pretty good west coast SM battle this year....
Based on the current interpretation of the SM suspension rules (which are ridiculously vague), as long as you are using the original attachment point _in the frame_ then any bracketry would be legal... But just because all (actually not all, just most) of streetmod-dom interprets it this way, that doesn't mean that a protest comittee with no SM participants on it, is going to interpret it this way.... So there lies the problem.
Looking at if from a different angle, you could also probably argue that the ALK is part of the lower arm assembly. If that was the case, the ALK would be legal because then it is clear that the attacment points are where the ALK bracket hits the frame. And the bushing inside, bracket and arm are unlimited because they are all suspension pieces.
Also, the service manual refer's the rear transverse link bushing (ALK) as a, "bushing" (including the bracket) in all places except for one....
Obviously this rule really needs to be clarified. Perhaps we all should write a letter to the SEB. I 'll talk to an SEB member this weekend and see what he says, although I know he is going to interpret it the same way I am.
Rocky I believe the aluminum STi arms have stiffer bushings. I have both, I will check to see if it is noticeable.
_J_
Based on the current interpretation of the SM suspension rules (which are ridiculously vague), as long as you are using the original attachment point _in the frame_ then any bracketry would be legal... But just because all (actually not all, just most) of streetmod-dom interprets it this way, that doesn't mean that a protest comittee with no SM participants on it, is going to interpret it this way.... So there lies the problem.
Looking at if from a different angle, you could also probably argue that the ALK is part of the lower arm assembly. If that was the case, the ALK would be legal because then it is clear that the attacment points are where the ALK bracket hits the frame. And the bushing inside, bracket and arm are unlimited because they are all suspension pieces.
Also, the service manual refer's the rear transverse link bushing (ALK) as a, "bushing" (including the bracket) in all places except for one....
Obviously this rule really needs to be clarified. Perhaps we all should write a letter to the SEB. I 'll talk to an SEB member this weekend and see what he says, although I know he is going to interpret it the same way I am.
Rocky I believe the aluminum STi arms have stiffer bushings. I have both, I will check to see if it is noticeable.
_J_
| z3coupe | 01-11-2002 11:37 PM |
[QUOTE]Rocky I believe the aluminum STi arms have stiffer bushings. I have both, I will check to see if it is noticeable.[/QUOTE]
Thanks Jason. I wonder too, would you ever let me try your car? Mine is still bone stock at the moment - UGH! And doubt I'll have anything done to it before the 26/27th :(
And hey, somebody CREAM Corey this year, huh? Was my old nemisis in my Audi-Doody days :)
Thanks Jason. I wonder too, would you ever let me try your car? Mine is still bone stock at the moment - UGH! And doubt I'll have anything done to it before the 26/27th :(
And hey, somebody CREAM Corey this year, huh? Was my old nemisis in my Audi-Doody days :)
| ChrisW | 01-12-2002 12:42 PM |
Spaf,
if what your saying is true
[QUOTE]Looking at if from a different angle, you could also probably argue that the ALK is part of the lower arm assembly. If that was the case, the ALK would be legal because then it is clear that the attacment points are where the ALK bracket hits the frame. And the bushing inside, bracket and arm are unlimited because they are all suspension pieces. [/QUOTE]
then the ALK would be legal for SP.
if what your saying is true
[QUOTE]Looking at if from a different angle, you could also probably argue that the ALK is part of the lower arm assembly. If that was the case, the ALK would be legal because then it is clear that the attacment points are where the ALK bracket hits the frame. And the bushing inside, bracket and arm are unlimited because they are all suspension pieces. [/QUOTE]
then the ALK would be legal for SP.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét