Landracing Forum
Bonneville Salt Flats Discussion => SCTA Rule Questions => Topic started by: dw230 on June 15, 2018, 01:31:47 PM
-
Discussion abounds concerning the addition of a new body class in the GT/MS area.
How about a Improved GT(I/GT). Same rules, kinda as Altered and Gas Coupe. Engine swaps allowed, OEM or fabricated spoilers, air dams, splitters. Pretty simple. Bad news - require GT cars to run the engine the car came with, no more swaps, i.e. Chevy for Chevy, Ford for Ford as now allowed. GT will go back to Production Category, I/GT will be come a stepping stone to Mod Sports in Modified Category.
Happy Fathers Day
DW
-
Wouldn't it be A, B, C, etc./IGT (not I/GT)?
How many years would it take to institute that?
Stan
-
Dan endorsing a new class.... I haven't looked outside is Hell getting colder?
-
We gotta catch up with the motorcycles.
-
I think makes sense. Agree with Stan, /IGT not I/GT which is confusing.
-
Who' opinion says this is improved? What does IGT stand for? Leave GT the way it is.
-
Who' opinion says this is improved? What does IGT stand for? Leave GT the way it is.
I think what Dan was trying to say was */IGT "Improved" GT.
2019 is a year where new classes are allowed to be considered. Currently GT is in the Production Category. Any modification (say non stock spoiler) takes you to Modified Sports. An in between class is being talked about. Call it what you want IGT, GTX, GT2, but a intermediate class is what is being asked here for discussion.
-
Yea, I think I know what they are saying. "Improved" is not the word to use but I like your suggestion of GT2. What I am saying is to leave GT the way it is and if you want to add a spoiler or ground effects, that is not allowed in GT, then go into the new catagory of GT2. This is not a class change it is a new catagory, which will probably have 20 new classes (blown and unblown) with open or minimum records. That's what we need is more classes. When we were running in Production classes all we had to do add illegal spoiler or block of headlights and we went to Altered catagory. This is exactly the same. But don't mess with the GT classes, it has been this way for 40 years, If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it. If you change GT then we are talking 40 new classes with open or minimum records.
-
If you want to do something for GT let them have power adders on the engs
-
Well, in my case, this could turn 10 years of work into a pile of garbage.
I'm curious as to why, in a world where Ford is discontinuing all of its sedans, where SUVs and Crossover vehicles litter the landscape, where the best selling Maseratis seat 5, and genuine 2 seat sports cars are virtually non-existent, that a new class for one of the least contested divisions in LSR is even on the table?
-
Dan endorsing a new class.... I haven't looked outside is Hell getting colder?
I didn't read an "endorsement" into Dan's post - more of a "heads up".
What I would like to know is who IS endorsing this proposal, why, and who I could contact to weigh in on the topic.
Of course, as a simple BNI member and not an SCTA member, I suspect my voice would be diminished.
-
...Of course, as a simple BNI member and not an SCTA member, I suspect my voice would be diminished.
Maybe it is time to consider joining a club. More yearly expense but for me well worth it in knowing more of what is going on. Also dues and occasional help at El Mirage is my effort to support the clubs that make the whole thing possible.
Sumner
-
Dan endorsing a new class.... I haven't looked outside is Hell getting colder?
Just set reasonable minimums. 8^))
-
SCTA board just passed a motion last night to "revisit/re-evaluate" the motorcycle "M" class minimums after this season. So, grab that low hanging fruit while you can . . .
Willi
-
this class not needed, we already have plenty of classes.
-
If you want to do something for GT let them have power adders on the engs
A Blower or turbocharger is a "power adder" and is perfectly legal...
-
Hi, Gang -
Any word on this rule proposal for 2019? The SCTA was supposed to have met Saturday, and while the FB post indicated race dates for 2019 at Elmo, I'm seeing no announcement on any rule changes on the website or on FB.
Thanks.
Chris
-
Chris,
Rules change committee votes are recommendations to the board, rule changes are voted on at the next board meeting (Jan.) so you won't see anything till after that.
Jim
-
Chris, remember all rule changes not involving safety are there to give someone (or someone's buddy) an advantage or put them at a disadvantage... :wink:
It is not about the I class motor size.... my guess it involves one of the other motor sizes... anyone know who proposed the change and what they are running :?
-
Chris, the rules committee did indeed meet this past Saturday. The clubs did vote to add the new class.
The process now goes to the SCTA board in January. The board takes the recommendations of the committee and either accepts or denies the change.
That's how the process works. :-)
-
Thanks, Mike.
No, I get it, and truth be told, I have no issue with an in-between class. My concern is that they're cautious about executing the change in a way that fundamentally changes GT from what it's been for years.
If GT goes back to original engines, you've eliminated half of the LS powered 'vettes, Donney's SAAB, my car, bob Siorna's Gullwing Benz becomes ineligible - and with the possible exception of Ferraris and Lamborghinis, nothing will be fast enough or have few enough seats to take a record against the current record holders under the current rules. The whole class gets neutered and becomes frozen in amber.
I really don't think that's the direction the SCTA wants to go.
-
They could move all the non-stock motor cars to /IGT and leave the stocks in /GT...
Are there any?
-
They could move all the non-stock motor cars to /IGT and leave the stocks in /GT...
Are there any?
Likely so, but think about it - The records stay with the class.
If you're running an iron block C motor '68 vette c/gt against a record holding '68 vette c/gt with an LS engine and the class allows no aero mods, how are you ever going to get that record?
The records in the class are already built out PAST what factory engines in the class can achieve.
-
Chris,he new
Records will follow the car. A car that is a current GT record holder but now does not qualify due to an engine swap will become the new IGT record holder.
DW
-
So Dan - how does the rule committee propose to investigate who ran what motor in any given year a record was set?
Think about this -
Tom Donney took the I-GT record at WOS this year. He did it with a swapped engine.
I had the record before with a destroked stock engine.
What you're proposing would imply that Tom would now have the record in a class he didn't run in or build for, lose a record he legally won, and I would get my record back?
Is there a precedent for this?
Dan, I really think this sounds like a worm can.
-
When they split up the X and XX classes into Xf and X0 they did the same thing, Again when they went to Blown classes instead of being in XX. As far as I know it worked out fine. I guess some people may have felt left out.I don't know who. SCTA managed it just fine.
-
So Dan - how does the rule committee propose to investigate who ran what motor in any given year a record was set?
Think about this -
Tom Donney took the I-GT record at WOS this year. He did it with a swapped engine.
I had the record before with a destroked stock engine.
What you're proposing would imply that Tom would now have the record in a class he didn't run in or build for, lose a record he legally won, and I would get my record back?
Is there a precedent for this?
Dan, I really think this sounds like a worm can.
Nothing to do with the actual post but IM confused as to why a record can be set at the WOS event against a record set at Speedweek during the month of August. Seems to me theres no similarity's to the weather conditions between the two events due to the time of year each event is held. We all know how difficult it is to run in August but thats the holy grail event setting a record in August is a huge accomplishment doing the same latter in the season all things considered seems easier to a point. Looking at the speeds run at the WOS event by identical vehicles running at Speedwek the speeds are much greater at the WOS event. Seems like apples and oranges to me just saying.
Ronnieroadster
-
The USFRA and BNI share records and certifications.
When BNI runs in October, those times are also included.
Personally, if you don't like crowds, the smaller USFRA event is the way to go.
-
How about sticking all the gas/fuel roadster's that are a 1/16" off the ground in the Improved G/F roadster class. That makes more sense for us traditional guys???? :dhorse:
-
Comments . . .
Bonneville Records are Bonneville Records. El Mirage Records are El Mirage Records – set at any of the six meets they (try) to run every year. There are climate and other condition changes at El Mirage from meet to meet.
Setting a Bonneville Record at the USFRA meets can (and has) lead to less scrutiny of intricate class requirements. This has happened.
And then there's Muroc Records. Maybe someone can tell me why they ran 1.5 miles instead of the El Mirage's 1.3 miles. Well, some now have a "lifetime" record. Seems they could have had a Dry Lake Record category that would have covered both and added legitimacy to both venues. (The NHRA allows you to break their national records at any course, right?)
-
Comments . . .
(The NHRA allows you to break their national records at any course, right?)
Yes but adjusted for altitude
-
Chris,
The class you refer to didn't exist at the time the WoS was run, still doesn't. It is a simple matter of calling upon the collective memory of the LSR community to determine the status of the current GT record holders.
We are here to help you, trust us.
DW
-
How about sticking all the gas/fuel roadster's that are a 1/16" off the ground in the Improved G/F roadster class. That makes more sense for us traditional guys???? :dhorse:
I'm listening,I like where this is going :cheers:
-
How about sticking all the gas/fuel roadster's that are a 1/16" off the ground in the Improved G/F roadster class. That makes more sense for us traditional guys???? :dhorse:
I'm listening,I like where this is going :cheers:
On deaf ears, and blind readers, and that is why the beating of a dead horse. And for clarification JD is correct IMO.
Tom G.
-
Chris, remember all rule changes not involving safety are there to give someone (or someone's buddy) an advantage or put them at a disadvantage... :wink:
It is not about the I class motor size.... my guess it involves one of the other motor sizes... anyone know who proposed the change and what they are running :?
The draft of the proposal I saw was made by Keith Copeland. His argument was to pull GT more tightly under the overarching production rules, and then open a 2nd category for engine swaps/body mods, etc.
There IS rationale to it, and while I trust Dan and the folks do everything possible to get it right, the record reallocation scheme does leave a lot open to interpertation and tribal knowledge.
Hell, when I took the record in 2014, it had stood for 22 years. I know some of you were probably there when the Highlander took the record in '92, but who would be able to swear out as to whether he was running a factory installed engine option?
There are certainly enough variations on the SBC that only experts can distinguish - whose was the last 'vette to run a correct factory 350 block?
And while "The Grenade" is really well documented here and in the press - I'd say to the point where pedigree is beyond question - and Mark and I are proud of what we did with the old tractor motor, is it fair to Tom Donney, who built an I-motor as permitted by the rules of the class at the time, to have to exchange his award because the rules became regressive ex post facto?
This might all be for naught if the rule change isn't adopted, but for now, I'm in a holding pattern waiting for a new rule which may or may not be coming.
So yes, I'm frustrated and becoming vocal.
-
Chris- remember that the definition of a swap goes to "engine family" which for a SBC is pretty much everything from the "55 265 up to the introduction of the LS series. Also, port layout is a factor so if by some magic you put the K head on the tractor motor that could no longer run production rules as the port layout is different even though the block is stock. I had same issue running a legal block but with a head that had different port layout than the standard SBC head, therefore not production rules. But, this really is not the point you are trying to make. I understand your confusion and concern.
Displacement of course doesn't enter into it at all.
-
Well Chris I can tell you when we held the record, it was not with the stock engine or engine type... it was with an Abarth OTR (semi hemi head) motor, the car came with a 750cc motor, pushrod but the engine parts would not swap.... but as you know it just had to be an Abarth motor.
I think the Hilander had a twin cam motor.... but can't tell you it was the one it came with or even the same configuration, but it was an Abarth motor and not a Fiat.
Luckily no one has to sort that far back... at least not in I...
-
Chris- remember that the definition of a swap goes to "engine family" which for a SBC is pretty much everything from the "55 265 up to the introduction of the LS series. Also, port layout is a factor so if by some magic you put the K head on the tractor motor that could no longer run production rules as the port layout is different even though the block is stock. I had same issue running a legal block but with a head that had different port layout than the standard SBC head, therefore not production rules. But, this really is not the point you are trying to make. I understand your confusion and concern.
Displacement of course doesn't enter into it at all.
Not that I have a dog in this fight . . . . .
It seems to me that much of the differences here stem from the definition of what is "production" or perhaps "production parts". Most sanctioning bodies, (not all, I agree), define production parts as those that came "on the car, direct from the manufacturer, including factory options. I'm most familiar with the rules from NASCAR and SCCA which seem arbitrary and restrictive, but: they make their rules.
Some random thoughts from a "wannabe deep thinker" . . . . .
A/ Production parts, those produced by the manufacturer, or under license from the manufacturer. So, if you want to race a '28 Dodge, you gotta use a '28 Dodge block and head?
2/ In the aforementioned sanctioning bodies, random "unapproved" blocks, heads, and etc, are not "legal". They get used at the peril of disqualification "if caught". This can really limit what is available.
d/ Freedom of "parts use" has historically and typically been used to "equalize competition", "encourage creativity", or encourage competition entries from less "represented" manufacturers.
1/ Having said all this, I would further add that Gen I SBC are not the same as SB II, although much interchanges. And of course, although SB II stuff has "trickled down" from "professional only use", none of those pieces ever
came in production line autos. What would be the rationale for use in "Production"?
2/ I can only agree that:
a/ An Abarth is not a Fiat
b/ A Gordini is not a Renault
c/ A Cosworth is not a Ford
Although ALL of the above examples are designed using the parent companies dimensions and "packaging", SIGNIFICANT performance differences result from the "aftermarket design".
3/ BMC being the poor, orphan cousin of "real" auto manufacturers, had various "sub-categories" in their engine "family". And the parts DO NOT interchange. Does this open the door to modifications for their use
simply because they are production parts?
I post this simply to foster dialog about what might be a sensible path forward, whether the rules are changed, or remain the same. Changes of this nature need to be well thought out, and discussed, so that they have the "intended result".
:cheers:
Justwonderingboy
-
Well the deal is done.
The new rules for the new category:
This is a completely new section behind 5.D.4 All in Bold
5.D.4.a Modified Grand Touring Sport (Gas Only)
This class is intended for series production sports cars which have been modified to such an
extent to make them illegal for the production (GT) class and limited production sports car type
bodies such as Kellison, Devin, Victress, Bradley and Sterling which may be placed on a
production or specially constructed frame. This class is limited to production and limited
production (a minimum of 50 produced) of the same model for sale to the general public. No
“One of a Kind” type bodies will be permitted.
One of the following modifications shall be done to be considered in this class:
1. The addition of a belly pan
2. A quick change rear end
3. An engine swap
4. A front-wheel drive vehicle converted to rear-wheel drive or a rear wheel drive vehicle
converted to a front wheel drive
Production sports cars with an engine swap (4.N) will be legal for the class. Blowers may be
used.
A GT Sports body may not be altered in height, width, length or contour. The wheel base shall
not be altered. All body panels shall be mounted in the original relationship to each other.
Factory soft top or open convertible windshields may be lowered or removed. Tonneau covers
(2.O) are allowed.
Any frame may be used as long as the bottom line of the frame is not higher than the outer
bottom line of the body between the firewall and the rear wheels. An exception will be made if a
stock frame and the same year/make of body are being used. If the ORIGINAL frame/body
relationship is such that the lower bottom line of the frame is above the outer bottom line of the
body, that frame/body combination may be used. The burden of proof of the ORIGINAL
frame/body relationship lies with the entrant. The frame may not be exposed from the bottom of
the body.
Any type rear-end differential may be used.
No change can be made to the driver's location as originally designed and the driver is seated
behind the engine except in the case of production sports car type bodies which were designed
and intended for rear engine usage. The driver must not be restricted from entrance or exit from
the vehicle by moving the cockpit covering.
Bumpers, grilles and front lights may be removed and the opening created may be filled or
covered. The filled or covered area may be flush with the adjacent body; the basic shape and
contour of the vehicle cannot be changed. Aftermarket front ends are allowed as long as they
conform to the class guidelines.
Blocking the airflow thru the radiator in front or behind is not allowed.
No streamlining, as described in Section 4.CC, is allowed, unless specified. Wheel wells may not
be filled or covered. Wheel well openings may be radiused for tire clearance. No taped or filled
body, door or window seams are allowed from the firewall back. Windows shall be mounted in
the stock fashion or fastened to the inside of the window openings. Minor chrome trim and
emblems may be removed.
The following items are permitted: Air dams and Splitters (4.CC.1). Skirts (4.CC.7) A non-stock
Spoiler (4.CC.8 ).
Any type of exhaust may be used, except no individual stacks are allowed, and can exit
anywhere from the body but the roof, top of front fenders or hood.
Roof-mounted spoilers, other than original for the body used, are prohibited.
The driver shall sit completely ahead of the rear axle, inside the body, and behind the engine,
except in rear-engine cars using the original engine LOCATION. Drip rails may be removed or
filled.
The following items are required: a starter capable of actually starting the engine, tail/stop lights,
a full transmission, either manual or automatic utilizing the full shift pattern and gears, a radiator
of the same dimensions or larger as originally equipped.
The following items are not permitted: air vents, headlight air scoops, blocked off radiator,
taping of body or window seams, non-stock head rest fairings, trip fences, or vortex generators.
Cars in this class are considered in the Modified Category and should comply with the General
Rules of the category.
Engine classes allowed are: AA, A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J
-
I guess it will be interesting to see how they sort out the current records :cheers:
-
...and differentiate between Modified Grand Touring Sport and Modified Sports.
Regards, Neil Tucson, AZ
-
It is a new class not a CATEGORY. Records are sorted as well as the combined memory of the collective can recall.
Think of Modified GT as a gas coupe, engine swap, OEM frame, some aero.
DW
-
Actually Dan I think we should think of Modified GT as the old GT but you must do one of the allowables and GT as Production GT.... or at least that is the was it looks... :-D
:cheers:
-
I was trying to dumb it down.
DW
-
It is a new class not a CATEGORY. Records are sorted as well as the combined memory of the collective can recall.
Think of Modified GT as a gas coupe, engine swap, OEM frame, some aero.
DW
Hi Dan,
OK, kinda stupid questions on my part, since I don't know the rule book as well as I should, so I need a clarification.
The rules read:
One of the following modifications shall be done to be considered in this class:
1. The addition of a belly pan
2. A quick change rear end
3. An engine swap
4. A front-wheel drive vehicle converted to rear-wheel drive or a rear wheel drive vehicle
converted to a front wheel drive
My questions:
A/ Does performing one of these modifications give you the option of running in Improved GT?
2/ OR, Does an "engine swap" ala the Milwaukee Midget, place the car by default into IGT?
d/ Is only one modification allowed? OR, Could all 4 be performed, and the car be still eligible for IGT?
Obviously, the other modifications, lower in the rules listing, are all permitted as well, permitting quite a difference from regular GT.
The core issue for the Milwaukee Midget, (and other cars), is of course, if engine swaps are still allowed in regular GT, if that was the only "modification" from a car that was legal in its' GT class.
Thanks in advance Dan, for your thoughts on this matter. If you are unable to provide a clarification on this issue, might you be willing to bring it to the attention of an official who might be able to provide some guidance?
:cheers:
Mark
-
Seems like the new class is more a mix of Altered (can cover headlights, grill etc) and Comp Coupe (belly pan) than Gas Coupe. As far as I know, Mark, when going from production to one of the modified classes, you can do ALL of the requirements though doing only one is sufficient to get you into the new class.
-
Mark, what this tells me is that Chris should be working on a belly pan to streamline the underside of the midget as well as maybe lowering to limit the air going under.
Since you've been taken out of GT.... you guys need to take advantage of what's available...
...was the grenade a swap motor or was it available in the Midget.
:cheers:
-
Seems like the new class is more a mix of Altered (can cover headlights, grill etc) and Comp Coupe (belly pan) than Gas Coupe. As far as I know, Mark, when going from production to one of the modified classes, you can do ALL of the requirements though doing only one is sufficient to get you into the new class.
That is what I thought, but I was asking to be certain.
:cheers:
-
Mark, what this tells me is that Chris should be working on a belly pan to streamline the underside of the midget as well as maybe lowering to limit the air going under.
Since you've been taken out of GT.... you guys need to take advantage of what's available...
...was the grenade a swap motor or was it available in the Midget.
:cheers:
The "Grenade" was an original engine, destroked to comply with class displacement regulations.
Engines of that type were built by the factory for Formula Junior racing in the early 1960's. Not many made, therefore very rare and valuable for Vintage road racing in Europe. VERY EXPENSIVE because of that. But they are "reproduced" using the same methods the factory used to originally build them.
Although the MM might be competitive initially in the I/IGT class, (like if nobody else shows up . . . ), Chris would need to go "all in" at some point to remain "competitive". I, of course, leave that decision to him, but an aerodynamically better body choice would win out over the Midget, eventually. What that might be? Who knows?
If this IGT engine swap decision had presented itself earlier, perhaps a different engine might have been chosen for the "transplant" . . . . .
Thanks for all your input guys. It is appreciated.
:cheers:
M
-
I am not sure how the new class affects you and sincerely hope I see the Midget on the salt. SW2019 would be ideal as I will be coming over this year. My second car was a MkI MG Midget so I have a soft spot.
Anyway - not sure what the class rules 'allow' but this seems like a good body change and it was a commercially available conversion. In fact I just searched for Sebring and Silverstone (other Spridget mods) and found that some are back in production so should be easy to get proof for production numbers and looks like better aero :? http://www.ashleygt.co.uk/ :cheers:
-
Pretty slick!
(Probably need a sunroof for Chris to see out of.)
-
The "Grenade" was an original engine, destroked to comply with class displacement regulations.
Engines of that type were built by the factory for Formula Junior racing in the early 1960's. Not many made, therefore very rare and valuable for Vintage road racing in Europe. VERY EXPENSIVE because of that. But they are "reproduced" using the same methods the factory used to originally build them.
Although the MM might be competitive initially in the I/IGT class, (like if nobody else shows up . . . ), Chris would need to go "all in" at some point to remain "competitive". I, of course, leave that decision to him, but an aerodynamically better body choice would win out over the Midget, eventually. What that might be? Who knows?
If this IGT engine swap decision had presented itself earlier, perhaps a different engine might have been chosen for the "transplant" . . . . .
Thanks for all your input guys. It is appreciated.
:cheers:
M
Well Chris may be the I/GT record holder now... Since his was an original engine.... stroke change is not a swap, and the new guy may be in I/IGT I guess we will see how Dan and the guys sorted that out.
Dan, got any insight? 8-)
For sure the new engine puts him in I/IGT but a lot can be done to be competitive... :cheers:
-
First of all, lets get on the same page. The class is called Modified GT, /MGT. My suggestion for a name, Improved GT, /IGT did not pass the
sniff test.
A displacement change for Chris with an OEM engine still keeps him in the GT class. The belly pan was not my idea. I championed for a step pan but was out voted.
Apologies to Jim Dincau.
DW
-
I believe Chris' new engine is a swap – from the same company, but not an option for the car in GT. This used to be legal in GT, but it now appears to change the vehicle to MGT (where his combo would not have a lot going for it).
I could be wrong – you guys know that.
Stan
-
Stan, my point, whether presented correctly or not was the original Midget was class legal for the new GT description so maybe it should be listed as the record holder in I... and the new Midget is class legal in MGT, but he could do more to go faster.
Better :| :cheers:
-
Here is a link to Gary Gray's FaceBook page, which has some more information about what has happened in I/GT and the new I/MGT.
https://www.facebook.com/gary.gray.9828/posts/2419449534795287?comment_id=2562906990449540&reply_comment_id=2568123116594594¬if_id=1551124685318346¬if_t=feed_comment_reply
You might need a FB account to view the thread, and you will certainly have to expand some of the replies to see all the comments.
-
Link is broken 🤨
-
Link is broken 🤨
The link only works if you have a FaceBook account, and you must sign in to FB as well.
Sorry, not my deal, more F/book f***ery courtesy of Mark Zuckerberg . . . .
:cheers:
-
Apparently Gary only shares this content with his friends so even if you are a Facebook user you cant view it.
-
Apparently Gary only shares this content with his friends so even if you are a Facebook user you cant view it.
Jim,
Of course you are right! My bad.
My apologies to everyone who tried to use the link.
:dhorse:
Stupidyboy
-
I know this topic is getting old but thought it would be better to chime in here instead of starting a new thread. I have sent my questions to the SCTA rep but while I wait for a response I thought it might be worthwhile to see if anyone on here has any insights on this.
I have regained my garage space and can (hopefully ) get back on track with a build. I am considering trying to build for one of the smaller Modified GT classes. Looking at the rules left some doubt about a few things . . .
1. For front engined cars in /MGT - Is there an engine setback allowance? 2%?, 25%? 50%? The rules say (at least for front engined cars in Modified GT) - ". . . The driver shall sit completely ahead of the rear axle, inside the body, and behind the engine . . . " and " . . No change can be made to the driver's location as originally designed and the driver is seated behind the engine . . ." The only restriction I can find in the rule book concerning engine setback is in Section 3.E Driver's Compartment page 44 " . . . Cars with front engines shall have the rear of the flywheel housing forward of the drivers knees. . . ." So I guess the question is - For a front engined /MGT car may the engine be setback as long as the rear of the flywheel housing is ahead of the drivers knees with the driver in the original position?
2. Removing the windshield is permitted in /MGT for open convertibles. I can't find a definition for "an open convertible." I guess for something like an MG Midget which comes with a fixed windshield and a soft top you can remove the windshield along with the top. But, what about a different body? Something like a Porsche 914 or a Pontiac Fiero or a Honda Del Sol that had a removable panel over the driver compartment? Targa Top? On those cars can the windshields be removed?
3. Must the drive axle have a ring and pinion? The rule book says . . "Any type rear-end differential may be used." It doesn?t say it "must be used", or it "shall be used". If a differential is not used is it allowable to drive the axle with a chain and sprocket? Or, if I replace the ring gear with a sprocket and drive the differential with a chain is that allowed?
4. If the grille is removed can the opening be filled or not? The rules say two things about the grille opening. - ". . . Bumpers, grilles and front lights may be removed and the opening created may be filled or covered. . . " and ". . . Blocking the airflow thru the radiator in front or behind is not allowed." . . So which is it?