CM modifications

[Unbalanced Engineering]

Hey guys,

I'm wondering where the "line" is with CM modifications. The CM rules have a listed of named manufacturers that are eligible so that there are no autox specific CM cars. BUT, it appears that the modifications you can make are very open. So where is the line here? Build a completely new car and just transfer the manufacturers ID plate? Just joking obviously, but I don't want to end up in a gray area.

Thanks,
Jason

[chrisw52]

As a CM competitor, the only rules you need to worry about is what is printed in the GCR for formula F.

If you happen to run a formula V in CM trim, then yes you have some flexibility to make the car competitive against the Formula Fords & hondas.

[Unbalanced Engineering]

Hey Chris,

Thanks for the response. That's the way I read the rule book as well. It just seems to defeat the purpose of the named constructors if any competitor can rebuild the car to fit autox instead of RR, ie different A arm lengths etc...

Thanks,
Jason

[chrisw52]

Hey Chris,

Thanks for the response. That's the way I read the rule book as well. It just seems to defeat the purpose of the named constructors if any competitor can rebuild the car to fit autox instead of RR, ie different A arm lengths etc...

Thanks,
Jason

If you want to rebuild the race car to fit autox, then we have a class for that, A Modified...

[Unbalanced Engineering]

So do you see the issue? As far as the GCR is concerned, A arm length is completely free.... Right?

Several cars had "updates" throughout their RR lifespan to change the front and/or rear track width....

So does shortening the A arms put you in AM? Its within the GCR....

Jason

[chrisw52]

as long as those updates fall within the GCR rules, then your OK.

[Jim Garry]

Hey guys,

I'm wondering where the "line" is with CM modifications. The CM rules have a listed of named manufacturers that are eligible so that there are no autox specific CM cars. BUT, it appears that the modifications you can make are very open.

Just some history ...

The CM rules for the class we now know (as opposed to the original C Mod) were written in 1989 for the 1990 season. They were more restrictive than what we now see. However, during the first few years of the class it became evident that it was impossible to prevent car modifications that would help for Solo unless a very large set of dimensional restrictions were added to the Solo rules.

Not only would this have been incredibly cumbersome and make enforcement difficult, it would have caused Formula Fords that were legal for SCCA road racing to be illegal for Solo, something the SEB didn't want to do.

In addition, and very importantly, there were cases of legal road race cars being purchased by autocrossers that were technically illegal as per the original set of rules. Thus some of the more restrictive wording had to be eliminated. However the class philosophy remains.

The Lola 540 is a narrow car but won only one National Championship. The LeGrand Mk27 is a very short wheelbase car but only one husband/wife team competed with this car seriously and did not win.

If size were an overwhelming factor in this class, these cars would have many wins.

Having written this, I'm not saying the opportunity to radically modify a car isn't of concern. But so far, it hasn't been a factor.


Jim Garry
(SEB 1987 thru 1993)

[-pru-]

The Lola 540 is a narrow car but won only one National Championship. The LeGrand Mk27 is a very short wheelbase car but only one husband/wife team competed with this car seriously and did not win.

If size were an overwhelming factor in this class, these cars would have many wins.

Having written this, I'm not saying the opportunity to radically modify a car isn't of concern. But so far, it hasn't been a factor.

Given the above, I have often wondered why CM has not moved away from the series "Inclusion List" to an "Exclusion List" as has been in other areas of Solo. That is, instead of listing out all of the chassis that are eligible (i.e. included), why not just say CM is "open to all GCR compliant FF with the SEB/MAC reserving the right to excluded a given chassis that is not within the spirit of the rules". I feel that this would provide enough deterrent to those who would build a "Solo specific FF" plus it would open up the class to a variety of one-off Club Racing FF.

Which brings me to ask, how would a "Solo specific FF" that was GCR complaint be any different that extensively modifying a chassis that is already on the exclusion list?

[Jim Garry]

It isn't any different. Although under the original wording of the rule, it would have been hard to do a solo only car.

[Unbalanced Engineering]

Hey Jim,

Thanks for the clarification / background. I'm not really looking to radically modify, but when I went looking to see what was permissible, it seemed like things were more wide open than I expected based on the "named list" of acceptable chassis.

BTW, I have the old Puertas / Clements Mondiale

When I purchased the car, Eric mentioned that he had considered shortening the A arms, and I just didn't want to end up in a gray area if I elected to make the car a little narrower.

Thanks again,
Jason

[Barry Ott]

Hey Jim,

Thanks for the clarification / background. I'm not really looking to radically modify, but when I went looking to see what was permissible, it seemed like things were more wide open than I expected based on the "named list" of acceptable chassis.

BTW, I have the old Puertas / Clements Mondiale

When I purchased the car, Eric mentioned that he had considered shortening the A arms, and I just didn't want to end up in a gray area if I elected to make the car a little narrower.

Thanks again,
Jason

Nice to hear about that car again :-)

From my perspective, shortening A arms is fine, no gray at all!

[Jim Garry]

Perfectly legal. You'll get a narrower car but there will be trade offs you may want to explore.

[Unbalanced Engineering]

Hey Barry, thanks. Its been fun learning to drive a formula car....

Yeah, the there certainly will be. Its a question of looking at everything to see if its worth while. I didn't want to embark on that journey if it wasn't legal.

Thanks again guys,
Jason

[CM/FFdriver]

Hey Jason,

Unless you can make 6" narrower car I don't think is going to make that much of a difference, a couple of events ago I drove an 89 euro swift that is 4 inch's wider then my car and even though mentally I drove what I knew was a wider car, I really didn't noticed it.

I will say that my first autocross car was a 74 Capri a very narrow car at the time and right up to the 2003 National's, which I finished 3rd behind the likes of IS300 and the E36 BMW, I was winning National tour events because at the point where they had to lift, I didn't. Ahh.. those were the days.

Ben

That 74 Capri was a great car.

[mwizard]

It seems like Ben's car, an 84 Van Diemen, should be the go cart of FF's, but when I drove it, it just seemed to be a bit twitchy compared to my 90 VD. Maybe I could learn to be faster with it, but I'm not giving up my 90. Each car was designed as a whole, some more successfully, so changes may or may not be an improvement.
Mark